The Drum Beat 230 - 20 Wishes for 2004

***

This issue of The Drum Beat is part of a series of short strategic thinking essays on the most effective approach for development communication by Warren Feek, Director of The Communication Initiative. What follows is Warren Feek's perspective - NOT that of the Partners collectively or individually.

***

COMMUNICATION WISHES FOR 2004
[A PERSONAL VIEW!]

1. Given the nature of recent world events, that we do not use the term "target" group in 2004.

2. Given the apparent lack of progress [in some cases regression] on many development issues that the following responses to strategic and programming ideas proposed for communication action will not be accepted in 2004: "we have tried that"; "it will never work"; "it does not fit our plan/structure"; and, "not possible" - given the scale and complexity of the development challenge we need all the ideas we can muster and can not afford to so hastily dismiss any ideas/suggestions.

3. Given how much communication time, energy and attention is taken up by the "public relations" and "organisational positioning" communication functions associated with major [500plus people] international conferences, that we hold no such conferences in 2004 - let's use that time for the communication roles that can support people making a real difference in their lives.

4. For the same reasons...let's cancel all International Days in 2004.

5. Given that they mean different and often conflicting things to different people, thus reducing their conceptual and strategic value to almost zero, that we do not accept the use of the words/phrases "capacity building", "empowerment" and "participation" for one year - might help us to develop a clearer and less jargon-y language for the people side of development.

6. Given the high level of communication funds they consume, that all organisations with budgets over USD 100,000 do not print/produce/publish any organisational brochures, pamphlets, films, videos and leaflets in 2004 - they seem to divert attention from the real communication work.

7. Given the importance of impact data, that 10 people [or more] in the development communication field are freed up by their organisations to turn some of the voluminous "grey literature" on the impact of communication interventions on development issues into peer reviewed articles for prestigious journals - we need more and better highly credible sources for our claims and interests.

8. That the primary person that speaks at any press event, the main speaker at any conference and the primary voices in any campaign are people directly experiencing the development issues being highlighted - us development hacks have had our turn, often with very little effect.

9. Given the threats facing the internet, particularly the increasing privatisation and commercialisation of significant 'chunks' of the internet space, that we as a development community do all we can to protect it's open and public character - the qualities of the internet are vital for more effective development action [recognising that this wish for 2004 has more than a whiff of self-interest!].

10. That all of us communicators have permission to "bop" on the head [metaphorically of course!] anyone who questions whether communication works and after "bopping" them and picking them up we take them to 50 leading company Chief Executives and 50 leading politicians and have them ask those people to either disband their communication departments and/or provide proof that they work! Some of the arguments we get questioning whether communication works are plainly ludicrous and seem to be motivated more by defensive protection of other disciplines than genuine assessment of the value of communication to effective development action [which does not mean that we do not need to learn more - see 7 above].

11. Given that dialogue, debate and engagement are central to any change process we will not use the term "audience" related to any development communication effort in 2004.

12. That the term "scale" reverts to its relationship to fish, maps and weight. Why when something works so well in one cultural, social and leadership context do we immediately suggest that we "scale it up", a process that both assumes it will work in an often different context with different leadership and puts real pressure on often overstretched resources in small organisations to work at wider scale in stranger circumstances? Surely it is better to spot and support emerging initiatives in each context.

13. That 10 [maybe more] people who are from and remain working in some of the economically poorest countries and have demonstrated an ability to plan and implement development communication initiatives that have resonance and influence are supported to write their stories - not so that everyone can copy what they did [see 12 above] but so that we can all learn from the parts of their stories that make sense in each of our contexts [for each of us those parts will be different].

14. Given the complex and embedded nature of the development issues that we are all confronting that development funding organisations change their grant time frames from 3 and 5 years to 7 and 10 years.

15. That no organisation appoint any more film or rock stars to be ambassadors - with very few exceptions and they are exceptional [Hepburn and Bono come to mind] their value to development is extremely limited and certainly is outweighed by the communication resources needed to 'keep' them - let's focus instead on providing the equivalent communication support for the voice and perspective of those directly experiencing development issues [see 8 above]. [This one could have me in tremendous trouble with my ex-colleagues in UNICEF! Sorry.]

16. In spite of the difficulty of describing and quantifying what we do as development communicators that we refuse for the whole of 2004 to fall back to a position of letting people know [a] how busy we are and [b] how many emails we receive in a day when all that family, friends and colleagues have asked is - what do you do?

17. No development meetings [a big mea culpa here] in 2004 of any nature that are either [a] in New York, Washington, Geneva, London, Paris or any other big OECD capital and/or [b] have chairs and a table in the middle of the room - maybe changing the decision making context and environment will help us to develop the better strategies and "investment" decisions that development so desperately needs.

18. For all the reasons above that we all resist rolling our eyes throughout 2004 when someone asks the question - "Why?" - sure we all prefer to be doing something rather than thinking about it but the thinking and analysis bit is critical.

19. Given the overwhelming challenge and scale of development issues that can become all-encompassing, all-consuming and dominant in our lives, that we all get lots of rest - tired we are no use to anyone.

20. That we all get all the money we need to do all the work we want to do! [Could not resist - we can always hope!!!!]

Have a great 2004. Please send your wishes to wfeek@comminit.com We will compile and distribute.

Warren Feek
wfeek@comminit.com
December 31, 2003
***

Pulse Poll

The use of the term "target group" is inappropriate in the context of economic and social development.

Do you agree or disagree?

***

This issue of The Drum Beat is meant to inspire dialogue and conversation among the Drum Beat network.

***

This issue of The Drum Beat is an opinion piece and has been written and signed by the individual writer. The views expressed herein are the perspective of the writer and are not necessarily reflective of the views or opinions of The Communication Initiative or any of The Communication Initiative Partners.

***

The Drum Beat seeks to cover the full range of communication for development activities. Inclusion of an item does not imply endorsement or support by The Partners.

Please send material for The Drum Beat to the Editor - Deborah Heimann dheimann@comminit.com

To reproduce any portion of The Drum Beat, see our policy.

To subscribe, click here.