Coinciding with International Women’s Day (March 8), women leaders from around the world will convene for the International Colloquium for Women’s Empowerment, Leadership Development, International Peace and Security (the Colloquium) at the SKD Stadium in Monrovia, Liberia, West Africa. The Colloquium, conceptualized in 2006 during the inauguration of Africa’s first female President, Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, will bring together 400 international participants and 400 Liberian national participants, including female leaders; heads of state and government; ministers; CEOs, presidents and executive directors; and NGO and community leaders. The Conference, co-convened by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia and President Tarja Halonen of Finland, seeks to create an environment for women and their champions around the world to discuss, learn, demonstrate and act on the benefits and lessons learned from women in leadership.

The Colloquium seeks to realize the aims of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security to ensure that women are protected from the worst abuses in times of conflict and to empower them to play their rightful and vital role in helping their countries prevent, end and recover from conflict. The Colloquium will bring together an international group of women leaders to identify the successes and failures of measures adopted for 1325; to serve as a resource base and catalyst for activity worldwide; and to develop and support meaningful strategies and activities for increasing global security.

The Angie Brooks International Centre on Women’s Empowerment, Leadership Development, Peace and Security, which will be based in Monrovia, will be launched in March 2009. The Centre will support the implementation of actions emerging from the International Colloquium, through, inter alia: a) training to empower current and future women leaders; and b) research, analysis and advocacy on women’s leadership. It is being established in honor of the late Angie Brooks, Liberia’s former Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Africa’s first woman President of the United Nations 24th General Assembly (1969).

Furthermore, the establishment of the Centre is symbolic in that through it, women in leadership worldwide are being honored. The Colloquium will initiate other capacity-building projects such as the Young Professional Emerging Leaders Dialogue Series, one of which will establish a 5-region dialogue series entitled Uncovering Barriers to Women’s Political Leadership: Today’s Leaders Reach Out to Tomorrow’s Leaders. This series, which precedes the conference from December to January 2009, will feature live interviews of and participation from current and former women heads of state interacting with a global audience of future world leaders. Each dialogue will produce recommendations and solutions on how to break down gender barriers to leadership.

For more information visit the Colloquium website.

Global human rights and progressive communication policies

By Rosemary Okello-Orlale

“We invented drums and the ‘bush telegraph’, so why is it so difficult and expensive for African Communities to communicate long distances?” Zane Ibrahim- Bush Radio- Cape Town.

Every community needs to speak to itself and in its own language, tell its own stories and celebrate its own culture and identity.

Access to information for social change is critical to all communities irrespective of their status. As the cutting edge technology is slowly making it easier for many to access information, the media is becoming a powerful tool not only in influencing the government’s and private sector agenda, but more importantly, changing attitudes and opinions of people all over the world.

In other parts of the world, convergence between radio and the internet has boosted the capacity of community radio and increased networking opportunities for community based organisations and individuals.

Similarly, in other parts of the world, community radio is both an outlet for information generated locally and an avenue for re-casting information downloaded from internet.

As the debate on information and the role of the media in social change takes a new dimension, participation of the communities which cannot access mass media is extremely critical.

All over the world, small initiatives by various organisations geared towards enabling marginalised groups access information have been happening for quite sometime.
The word public interest has been used over the years to justify the role of the media in our society. And perhaps, even as we question the human rights aspect of the media, the reason we have failed to hold the media accountable lies in the fact that we use the criteria designed for one purpose, commercial entertainment, to make the media become an instrument for progressive communication where human rights issues can be questioned or upheld.

We have failed to ask if the modes of address, formal strategies, viewing habits and media environments developed by a given socio-economic system might be ineffective and even counter-productive for trying to alter that system, especially in Africa where such system existed in the traditional nature and we have to use the parameters of the mainstream media of 5 Ws and I (H) to answer the social issues from a human rights point of view.

Cultural diversity constitutes a force that can get journalists to open up their minds. The pride and status of nationals across borders is another force that this paper recognizes for achieving the same. Out of the box, sovereignty becomes relative in a way that prevails on media houses not to stereotype and take things for granted. Yet, the media environment is nor favourable for such exploration of various ideas, in terms of access, reach ability as well as policies.

On the other hand, there is comprehensive media policy or laws that is broadened enough to acknowledge the linkages between the traditional media and the new media, the role of citizen journalism and the role of each and every community in terms of communication and content.

Technology is also another factor, just like the media was treated as the preserve of the political elite, so is the technology and when it comes to mediums of communication, more often than not the states seems to license them making it hard for ordinary people to access the information.

Yet in the words of the former Prime Minister of Malaysia; there is no country that is rich which is information poor and there is no country that is information poor which is rich. The accessibility of information through affordable technology e empowers people’s ability to be economically viable.

Freedom of expression means communicating in a free environment through any means and also being able to access fundamental information which is your human right, yet over the years, the media have operated under a certain box, within the 4th estate spectrum.

The other issue is the commercialization of the media, where they operate on the media reach and the target audience.

The fact that the media and communication channels within our context is patriarchal in nature, makes the media at times loose sight of the vital voice—the woman’s perspective to any issue.

And unless they start thinking outside the box of the fourth estate and start interrogating the factor of the 5th estate where ordinary voices are found, what makes the community tick and their views of how things are, start going beyond the real story and asking relevant questions, then the media will have failed in achieving the fundamental rights of everyone—the freedom of expression.

The human rights factor outside the box becomes a vital yardstick for covering diverse realities. All these factors can prevail on media to shed stereotyping; to get beyond the narrow confines of national interests; and to open up to emerging regional and global concerns regarding human rights.

There has to be another way of engaging media in meaningful gender related discourse. The concept of a “fifth estate”. Phenomenon is outward looking because outside the box, one sees alternatives to the narrow, although necessary, adversarial relationships between institutions that govern states. Outside the box there are diverse regional and global realities that can force private media houses to build relevance. It is in this scenario that opportunities emerge for promoting a more meaningful gender related discourse and giving women a voice through channels of communication.

Having said that, this paper acknowledges the Western media blew the “fifth” estate notion when it went global and proceeded to see diverse realities through only one narrow lens – theirs. With one global power, pressure is being brought to bear in the rest of the world to think Western. Structural adjustment, liberalization, good governance, transparency and accountability have become code words under this new global configuration.

Without a home grown media policy, they seem to dance to the tune of the western media on how they communicate their news. So one finds, the term gender does not feature in that new and improved dictionary. The term human right does but only to the extent that it complements the ideals of free enterprise as they see it. They have prevailed upon Third world countries to liberalize their airwaves. They have then proceeded to inundate public space with that same version of reality through image and sound twenty four hours a day. Historically, those ideals have militated against Third world interests. More specifically, they have militated against the interests of women who have never had equal access to opportunity and resources.

Despite such anomalies, this paper argues that outside the box, a “fifth estate” reality can work. It is one that offers opportunities for “kick starting” the discourse on the public interest from a human rights point of view. If one exploits it well, it could even become instrumental in forging global opinion. To engage, media shift from low choice to high choice environments which carry not only cultural, but political implications.

High-tech governments face a future in which multiple, conflicting, custom tailored commercial, cultural and political messages are bombarding their people, rather than a single message repeated in unison by a few giant media outlets. The old politics of “mass mobilization” and the “engineering of consent” both become far more difficult in the new media environment.

Expanded media choice, itself inherently democratic, is in the offering. It is making life difficult for politicians who created for their followers a choiceless environment. New media lords are building the ideology of globalism. Globalism or at least supranational, is a natural expression of the new economy which must operate across national boundaries. It is in the self interest of new media moguls to spread this ideology.

This self interest, however, is colliding with another. Indeed if their television and radio stations, their newspaper and magazines are to succeed financially, they will have to demassify – which means they will have to search for niches, carry specialized material, and appeal to very local audience interests. The familiar slogan “Think global, act local” perfectly describes this “fifth estate” imperative.

Just as in the past century national leaders were compelled to justify their actions before the court of national “public opinion,” tomorrow’s national leaders will confront a much enhanced “global opinion”. The activities of today’s media lords bring new millions into the global decision making process.

As the “fifth estate” picture grows, one has to assume that Governments will no doubt invent more sophisticated lies in which to rationalize their self serving actions. They will manipulate the increasingly systemic media. They will also step up propaganda efforts to improve their global image. But if such efforts fail, they could suffer significant economic penalties for behavior frowned on by the rest of the world.

There is a spin off to this emerging reality that cannot be ignored. Indeed, it must be contended with. The underground empire today has more power, wealth and status than many nations. It flies no flag on the terrace of the United Nations, but it has larger armies, more capable intelligence agencies, more influential diplomatic services than many countries do. The power of ordinary citizen through the progressive communication.

Using the social change media, it can direct its audiences back to their own world; it addresses them not as passive viewers but potentially active participants in civic society. It accordingly recognizes that its true subject is always the audience itself, specifically, how that audience is constructing social reality in their minds and daily lives. It locates itself not in the narrative space of the television or movie screen but as an intervention in society’s continuing self-narrating around and beyond those screens. Like a skilled conversationalist, social change media can integrate itself into this discourse, raising questions, reframing arguments, suggesting new directions or additional resources, in short, providing a structuring frame for these larger civic sector conversations where human rights issues can be questioned and answers sought.

The implications of such a lack are damaging and manifest themselves in many ways. In a recent conversation with Mary Moss Greenebaum, the Founder of the Kentucky Author Forum, which brings noted authors to Louisville, Kentucky, I asked her why only 26 of the 96 guests in the program have been women. She said that while she was aware that was problematic, her main concern was diversity of topics, that she focused on having authors that could speak to a broad range of topics, which is really just a variation on the ‘we’d love to invite women on our show but we just don’t know any/there aren’t any qualified ones available, etc. Jennifer Pozner, Director of Women in Media and News elaborates on this tactic in much more detail and offers this nuanced list of the usual excuses:

A. We’d love to have a woman expert for this story, but there aren’t enough women in [insert whatever field is the subject of the news story or the op-ed] so we can’t find any good female sources or guests on [insert almost any topic other than child care, abortion, rape, fashion or celebrity/lifestyle];

B. We’d love to have more women as commentators but our shows “are not having long discussions about issues that are not at the forefront of the agenda” and “the object here is to deliver the news, not to get women on the air.” (Because media have no role in determining what’s at “the forefront of the agenda” and, alternately, women’s concerns are necessarily marginal? So, there are “newsmakers,” and then there are women? Who knew they were mutually exclusive?);

C. We’d love to have more women on our op-ed pages, but op-eds are combative and women are more hesitant about expressing their opinions (ie, “Women don’t shout. Women don’t like politics. Women shrink from intellectual debate. Women don’t try,” as Katha Pollitt astutely summed up — the handily debunked — here);

D. We’d love to have more women sources/writers/guests but we just don’t have time to find them.

Be sure to see Pozner’s full post where she debunks the validity of all of the above.

In another recent conversation, the host of a progressive community radio program in the Midwest proudly listed some of his many illustrious and mostly male guests. When I pointed out this imbalance, he said he hoped I wasn’t from the bean-counting school of feminism, chastising me for simplistically counting guests rather than complimenting him for addressing important issues and ideas. It obviously did not occur to him that indeed I am focusing on the issue and the issue is gender imbalance.

In Conspicuous By Their Absence, Miren Gutierrez addresses why women are systematically invisibilized by the media and the implications that has:

“Observe any summit picture – you won’t find many women. The mystery of female underrepresentation in the echelons of power persists: after so many decades of the feminist movement, why are women at the helm scarce? A look at the media sector may provide some answers.

“The media is a mirror on society so it needs to be a reflection of that society. If our newsrooms are male-dominated spaces, they will reflect a male-dominated world. That, for me, is not living true to our mission of creating non-racial (in the case of South Africa), non-biased, non-sexist societies,” says Ferial Haffajee, the first woman editor of the South African Mail & Guardian.

Media organisations are the gatekeepers of much of what is known in the public sphere, while journalistic stories contribute to perpetuating stereotypes, or changing them. It is quite revealing, then, to find out who is in the kitchen cooking the news.”

Miren goes on to present numerous examples from around the world documenting the problem.

So what is to be done? In the aftermath of the National Conference for Media Reform NCMR, I asked a number of feminist media activists for their thoughts on why gender justice needs to be a part of the media agenda, not just a topic of discussion. I present them here as a starting point for formulating an action plan to make it so.

“Without Women their is no such thing as Media Justice. If you care about
our mothers, daughters, and sisters then you must care about Media Justice. If
you care about violence against women, a person’s self image, and equality
for all women then you must care about Media Justice.”

–Deanne Cuellar, San Antonio Project Director, Texas Media Empowerment Project (Texas MEP); leadership team member of MAG-Net, the Media Action Grassroots Network

“Media has always been one of the chief conduits by which young people understand, identify with, and form their opinions about the world around them. A media that both reflects and prioritizes the lives and voices of women—all women—is crucial not only to the development of a well-informed populace, but to the development of a new generation of thinkers and leaders inspired to make media that’s open-minded, democratic, and challenging.”

–Andi Zeisler, Cofounder and Editorial Director, Bitch: Feminist Response to Pop Culture

“Feminist participation is essential for any movement to be truly progressive; when women’s viewpoints are excluded, the resulting gaps in analysis inevitably result in works that falls short of its social justice goals. Because of its profound influence on our culture, nowhere is this more true than in the field of media.”

–Lisa Jervis, Founding Editor and Publisher, Bitch: Feminist Response to Pop Culture

“The fact that the conservative forces in this country have been able to reframe almost every feminist issue through the media (feminism itself, late-term abortion, and welfare) was all the proof I needed to work for media justice. Without more feminist voices in the media, the feminist movement will continue to lose wars before the battles even begin, especially when the issues disproportionately affect communities of color. Media is a woman’s issue.”

–Veronica I. Arreola,
Women In Media & News (Board Member)
Chicago Abortion Fund (Board Co-Chair)

“Until all forms of media and our communication rights reflect the diversity of women’s voices and solutions to critical issues facing our country and the world, media will contribute heavily to the manufacturing of misogyny, militarism, and violence we all face and organize to resist.”

–Jan Strout,
Co-director, Reclaim the Media
National Field Director, National Organization for Women

“As long as men are the most powerful and visible
voices in media, then we can’t heal this world fast
enough. Women don’t start wars, they care about
children, about mothers and the deepest love in all
its shapes and sizes and colors: between men and
women, women and women, men and men…women’s
perspectives are vital to changing the hateful
discourse that men have created and that so many women
are obeying. Without women at all levels of media,
there is no true media reform.”

–Barbara Renaud Gonzalez
Las True Stories From San Antonio

“One of the points I make in my presentations is this: Since the beginning of mass communications, so many aspects of shaping the discourse have excluded women: from outright ownership to meager participation opportunities, women just haven’t had a chance. With the advent of the new tools that drastically democratize media — wikis, blogs, social tools, etc — it’s absolutely critical that we participate and shape the conversation. It’s easier than ever, and the more the merrier.”

–Deanna Zandt, media technologist for Hightower Lowdown, AlterNet and GritTV with Laura Flanders

“Although I know attempts have been made to diversify the panels at NCMR, some of the topics were not as diverse. In addition our panel “There is no media justice without women” appeared at one of the most contested spots in the conference going against Amy Goodman. Diversity isn’t just about numbers and it doesn’t mean that if you get a woman and a man of color that you have included the women-of-color perspective. The conference can only only improve with the richness of multiple perspectives on any issue and not mirror big media.”

–Shireen Mitchell
Founder, Digital Sisters/Sistas Inc.
Vice Chair, National Council of Women’s Organizations (NCWO)
Chair, Media and Technology Task Force (NCWO)

“Media consolidation means more and more media outlets are run exclusively for profit, and more and more these outlets are therefore emulating or downright embracing the aims and modes of advertising. Advertising we know was set up by “The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit” to appeal to “Your Wife”—the ideal consumer. (As quaint as we may believe this language to be, “the housewife in Pawtucket / Davenport / wherever” remains the trope to which advertisers answer, as can be read daily in the industry press.) It’s critical, right now, to reposition women not as consumers of the products and services media touts, but as critics, watchdogs, owners, and producers of media—maybe even of media free of consumerist aims.”

–Anne Elizabeth Moore
The Anti-Advertising Agency Foundation for Freedom
Author of Unmarketable

“There is no “media democracy,” no media justice, without women. Too often, the “universal” issues of structural and economic media reform are not understood as interconnected with (though not more important than) institutional biases around gender, race, class and sexuality in media content and in the media industry. Institutional biases including corporate media consolidation, the lack of gender and racial diversity within the industry itself, discriminatory media production, and access and distribution issues are of crucial importance for women (and people of color, poor people, LGBTQ people, immigrants and other marginalized communities), who find our identities and our concerns misrepresented, maligned or just plain missing from public debate. The good news is that women are leading the grassroots battle for fairer, more authentic, more democratic media, from producing independent journalism in print, radio, cable access and the feminist blogosphere, to waging policy battles around the digital divide, net neutrality, municipal broadband and ownership regulations.”

–Jennifer L. Pozner,
Founder and Executive Director, Women In Media & News, and Editor, WIMN’s Voices