Communications and development in democracy

No doubt, there is a growing perception among developing countries that the rapid growth and spread of telecommunications is vital for economic development and democracy. As a result, many of them have commenced the modernization of their telecommunication systems either through government initiatives, or through the inception of private domestic or international competition. Consequently, this drive towards expansion and restructuring is also being encouraged and supported by multinational agencies operating in the development and communication arena, such as the World Bank, ITU and UNCTAD.

However, the growth in the telecommunications industry is being fuelled, at least in part, by growing evidence of its benefits for economic development. While the empirical evidence is mounting, not much has been done to examine the relationship between telecommunications and development from a theoretical standpoint. If telecommunications is to be placed at the core of the development process in the Third World countries, then the challenge is to development, and to specify the principles that should guide the formation and evaluation of telecommunication policies.

Like the initial formulation of mainstream development economists, early communication scholars also tried to locate the roots of underdevelopment within developing countries. These endogenous causes included traditional value system, lack of innovations, lack of entrepreneurial ability, agility and lack of national consciousness. The problem was one of old ideas hindering the process of social change and modernization. As Rogers and Svenning asserted, quoted by Banik, 2005:69, “Development is a type of social change in which new ideas are introduced into a social system.”

To this end therefore, it is manifestly clear that the role of communication in development was to provide an inlet for the flow of ideas. In order to achieve the desired communication objective, it is better to utilize the relatively modern technology of mass communication. The role of the mass media was perceived at two levels. At the individual or community level, they served, firstly, to introduce new ideas so as to overcome traditional normative and psychological barriers. Secondly, they serve to promote the diffusion of innovations which could change traditional models of economic activity.

At the societal level, the mass media was thought to aid the process of national integration. The mass media was also considered an important instrument of social change. As Wilbur Schramn argued: “without adequate and effective communication, economic and social development will be retarded, and may be counterproductive. With adequate and effective communication, the pathways to change can be made easier and shorter.”

For effective communications and development to take place in democratic structure, free discussion is necessary. If people discuss freely, they speak the truth for the benefit of themselves and the entire community and nation. However, if people are not allowed to speak freely, they cannot contribute honestly and positively to their society. Also, by speaking freely, people know what others think and want. In that way, people who think alike and want the same things for their nation can come together to form their groups, associations or political parties.

For democracy to survive, people have to be free to come together and form groups for associations, People should be free to know themselves through discussions, disagree with others, come and work together for the progress of the nation as they see it . If freedom of association is not allowed, people tend to organize themselves secretly or along religious and ethnic lines which are not good for the country. It is when people can freely discuss and come together that they can form a truly democratic political party or popular organizations to defend their interests, rights and privileges.

Furthermore, let there be no doubt, this is the age of communication and development in democracy. Unarguably, information is power. Central to our age of communication are the institutions known as the mass communication media. The mass media are the powerful, high-speed information systems that bring about change within societies, subcultures, families, and individuals all over our political process; changed the way we learn and socialize the young; they are an economic force with information power; they open windows into every corner of the world and put the most private human endeavor under the media microscope; they have changed how we think about ourselves and others. It is clear that we, the people do not always use the mass media to our best advantage. It remains a lingering suspicion that it is the mass media that are doing the using.

in addition, with emphasis being placed on overcoming behavioral and attitudinal obstacles to development through the injection of new ideas, it was inevitable that the early proponents of development communication promoted the growth of mass media rather than telecommunications, and emphasis was laid on the campaigns through mass media channels.

The failure of these early approaches (commonly called the dominant or modernization paradigm) to foster development through communication has been fairly well documented.

The reformation of the main tenets and goals of development communication, within the mainstream of the sub-discipline, was put forward by Rogers and Schramn, who led the way by admitting that “The Western model did not work as its proponents had expected.” In 1976, Rogers announced the passing of the ‘dominant paradigm,’ and attempted to redefine development as a widely participatory process of social change in society, intended to bring about social and material advancement, including greater equality, freedom and other valued qualities, for the majority of the people through their gaining greater control over their own environment.

In its shift in focus to the distributional effects of development, this reformation was not unlike the growth-with-redistribution approach in development economics and, its extension, the basic needs strategy. Similarly, it was quickly elevated to the position of the new orthodoxy in development communication literature. Thus, Hudson identifies the two fundamental aspects of development as “provision of services to meet basic human needs, and shifting responsibility for such functions for trained outsiders to the people themselves.” While Parker speaks of the reduction of economic disparities through the provision of increased opportunities through communications.

However, the conceptualization of the role of telecommunication in development and the relationship between economic growth and development was hampered at the outset by lack of past theorizing in the area. Though this shortfall in theory was never quite remedied, there emerged, soon enough, a proliferation of literature on the advantages of promoting the growth of telecommunications in the development process. These studies showed that telecommunications is vital to the  ability to provide the “basic needs” that development economists are focusing upon and is, therefore, a vital infrastructure for development.

While these scholars like an ‘activist’ stance towards the development of telecommunications, another set of scholars, influenced by the resurgence of neoclassical economics, call for the development of telecommunications in line with the operation of market forces. In contrast to the ‘activist’ school, which implicitly or explicitly recognizes the role of the state in the accelerated development of telecommunication facilities, this ‘market-oriented’ group argues that the introduction of privatization and competition are the most optimal ways to develop telecommunications and the growth of telecommunication services should take place in response to market demand.

The concept of capability enhancement makes argument for locating telecommunications at the core development plans and programmes, not just for externally determined economic or commercial objectives, but for providing the people of developing countries with the means to realize their own potential and participate fully in the growth and development of their societies.

Finally, the rapid and extensive provision of telecommunication services should be a high priority for developing countries, not just for externally determined commercial or economic reasons, but because they are the essential means for the people of developing countries to fully participate in the development process and significantly realize their own potential.

Charles Ikedikwa Soeze, fhnr, fcida, fcai, fswca, chnr, cpae, son, ghnr, emba, ksq is a mass communication scholar from first degree to doctoral level. Retired Assistant Director (Administration)/Head, Academic & Physical Planning (A&PP) of the Petroleum Training Institute, PTI, Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria. (08036724193) charlessoeze@yahoo.ca

×