Democratization of communication

The decade of 1990s has ushered in democracy all over the world. Communication and information revolution has resulted in the fall of socialist regimes and even communist nations have opened to new market economic force. With the ending of the cold war, bipolar power structure has given way to a unipolar capitalist power system.

"There is no democracy without democratizing communication," It was a simple idea, but impressive because it was universally accepted that democracys vitality depends on citizen participation, and that, for this reason, it is fundamental that the different social groups are properly informed and able to express their particular points of view to all of society. And that is something that can be guaranteed only when the democratization of communication is brought about.

As people need food, shelter and health care for their physical survival, they need communication for their social welfare. Moreover, for their human dignity people need factors that are intrinsic to genuine democracy; reason, responsibility, mutual respect, freedom of expression, and freedom of conscience, all of which are mediated by communication. A prerequisite of democracy, therefore, is the democratization of communication, which in turn requires the empowerment of individual.

The media facilitate this process by providing an arena for public debate and by reconstituting private citizens as a public body in the form of public opinion. It is also necessary to make a public communication an integral part of democracy. People should have free access to the knowledge and information they require, they should be able to discuss matters of public interest with their equals in order to influence actions taken. Otherwise there can be no genuine participation.

The endeavour for equality and justice for all is based on the democratization of communication. The principle of human dignity : Human beings have an intrinsic and unique value, which has to be recognized socially. From this stems not just the right to live, but the right to live a life worthy of human beings (which is the ultimate rationale of all human rights).

The principle of freedom : Deprivation of freedom makes genuine communication impossible, and the first sign of repression in all societies is usually the curtailment of freedom of speech. The silencing of people as a form of punishment, or still worse, solitary confinement, are utterly subhuman. But freedom for what? Freedom to participate. Freedom to be part of a nation and of the human family. Freedom to shape a collective destiny.

The principle of truth telling : Communication is about human relationships. All relationships presuppose mutual trust, and the basis of such trust is the assumption that we are telling the truth. Communication inevitably breaks down when we suspect the other of lying.

The principle of justice : Human dignity, freedom and equality are values which, when translated into social relationships, produce justice, or living-in-justice with all other people. The mass media as we know them stand in almost total contradiction to this view. They portray the powerful in politics and business, and the stars of entertainment and sports. But the poor, the marginalized, the refugees, the old, those with disabilities, people of colour, children, and even today, women, are non-people to the media, or are typecast. Justice in communication is also an international issue. The present global information and communication systems reflect the worlds dominant political and economic structures, which maintain and reinforce the dependence of the poorer countries on the richer.

The principle of peace : Violence and war mark the ultimate breakdown of communication, both interpersonal and public. The word is replaced by the gun or the knife. Most wars between nations have started with a series of lies - by governments and the media about the threat of the enemy. If war is the ultimate failure of public communication, peace is its ultimate glory. Peace means people in communication. Peaceful co-existence of peoples with different national, racial and cultural identities, and of different ideological persuasions can, in todays world, only be achieved through communication aimed at conflict resolution. The mass media carry a heavy responsibility in this process.

The principle of participation : Human dignity, freedom, justice and peace: how do we apply these principles to the mass media of today, and make them operational in the decisions leading to the construction of an information superhighway of tomorrow? The answer presupposes a change in direction. Mass and interactive media cannot primarily be considered business enterprises, but are part of the cultural environment in which we live and move. Media, old and new, should contribute to the quality of life of everyone by celebrating all that is genuinely human.

But in reality mass media have moved away from positive expectations of civil society. By the end of 19th century and early 20th century the media instead of being a vehicle for advancing freedom and democracy started becoming more and more a means of making money and propaganda for the new and powerful classes. Globalization and economic liberalization have further contributed to deteriorating negative attitude of the media towards the society.

Global competition, profit motive made the media forget about its social responsibility. Money ruled over morals. Media is no more interested in creating citizenship, providing public sphere for dialogue and interaction among the citizens. Instead it is busy transforming citizens into spectators by offering them entertainment to education, knowledge and information.

Other distortions of the democratic process include: The promotion of practices that drug, hurt, poison, and kill thousands every day. Portrayals that dehumanize and stigmatize; cults of media violence that desensitize, terrorize, and brutalize. The growing siege mentality of our cities. The drift towards ecological suicide. The silent crumbling of our infrastructure. Widening resource gaps in the richest country that already has the most glaring inequalities in the industrial world. The costly neglect of vital institutions such as public education and the arts.

The concept is important because a democratic society depends on an informed populace making political choices. In large and complex societies public participation in political processes is already limited largely to occasional expressions of opinion and protests and the periodic selection of representatives. For this weak participation to be minimally effective the public has to know what is going on and the options that they should weight, debate, and act upon.

with the processes of media globalization since 1989, the public sphere is fast shrinking. The central feature of the media globalization is larger cross border flows of media outputs, growth of media trans-national conglomerates, centralization of media control, spread and intensification of commercialization. The commercial model has its own serious limitations. It has its on own internal logic and being privately owned and heavily dependent on advertisers support, tends to erode the public sphere and to create a culture of entertainment that is incompatible with democratic order.

Media outputs are commodified and are designed to serve market needs, not citizenship needs In developed nations there are media literacy groups, which create awareness among the consumers of media on the functions and responsibilities of media. These non-partisan groups have succeeded in bringing moral pressure on media organizations through their constant vigil and constructive criticism.

Creating alternative media systems is not easy. It needs sustained effort, funding and interest. But, once it is achieved we could create a public sphere in real sense, where people-centric, decentralized and democratized media will become true voices of people, community and the nation. These kinds of experiments are taking place in other parts of the world and some of the Latin American attempts should serve as models to us. According to Democratization of Communication, a social movement process model offered by Robert A.White (1994),

"contemporary theory of social movements not only

explains the conditions under which democratization of communication is likely to occur and develop, but will provide a much more complete and internally consistent understanding of the dimensions of the democratization of communication. the democratization of communication, most social movements insist, is that members - ordinary citizens - should participate in the administration, policy-making and government of public communication.