Communication is a key component of many overseas aid programs. Efforts to improve living conditions in the world’s poorer areas through social service and infrastructure development are often accompanied by communication campaigns aimed at the general public.
Development communication has been defined as:
Quebral, 2012
The science of human communication linked to the transitioning of communities from poverty and all its forms to a dynamic and overall growth that fosters equity and the unfolding of individual potential.
According to John Lent (1977), a Western media observer and journalism professor, development communication has been used as a major government tool in numerous developing countries. Third world governments realized that if media should be used in planning and implementing national development strategies then they had tocontrol media. Lent contends that dev com can both be a watchdog or a lapdog of the government. From the cybernetics perspective, however, development communication is essential to society because it negates societal entropy.
Before we proceed to the whole discussion of Development Communication, here is a video of an overview of Development Communication made by yours truly.
How did development communication begin?
Inspite of the wars and the poverty — to believe that, ultimately, the world will not abandon, marginalize or depreciate children. The attention today accorded to children is not just because they are society’s ‘most vulnerable citizens’ or humanity’s ‘most precious but because of their own right. Partly this is a reflection of long-term changes in societies all over the world.
The idea of communication as a support to development came from Erskine Childers, the then director of the UNDP Development Support Service in Bangkok, back in the 1960s. He espoused the methodology of communication appraisal, planning, production, and evaluation for selected developing country projects supported by the United Nation’s Development Program and the UNICEF.
Childer’s idea of development support communication was pursued in the 1970s by Nora C. Quebral who was then Chair of the Department of Agricultural Communications, University of the Philippines College of Agriculture. Basically, we can infer the dev com in the Philippines grew out of agricultural communication. The political environment in which dev com was born was the Martial Law years, where agricultural development was considered a priority thrust to stem ruralunrest.
The history of development communication can also be discussed in terms of its institutional history – how the College of Development Communication began in Los Baños. The University of the Philippines Los Baños pioneered in the field of development communication by offering the first graduate and undergraduate curricular programs in dev com in the entire world. It was here where the term development communication was coined.
The Foundation of Development Communication
Should development communication be afforded the status of an academic discipline? Critics of development communication do not think so. However, many of those who are engaged in the teaching and practice of this craft know better.
Development Communication’s claim to legitimacy begins with the assumption that previously developed models ofcommunication are not exactly appropriate to Third World Conditions and social realities. The following discusses not just the legitimacy of development communication but also for its potential of becoming a unique and separate paradigm in the social sciences. For purposes of expediency and contrast, we will take off from Siebert’s Four Theories Typology.
The Four Theories of the Press
The primary thesis of the“Four Theories” model is that the press “always takes the form and coloration of the social and political structures within which it operates.”
The earliest press system follows the Authoritarian Model. The press belonged to the office of the king or the emperor or the Pope, and, in some cases, to private individuals who favored and were favored by royalty and authority. The press was the servant of the state. Of this, Rivers and Schramm (1969) write:
Modern communication was born in 1450 into an authoritarian society. The essential characteristic of an authoritarian society is that the state ranks higher than the individual in the scale of social values. Only through subordinating himself to the state can the individual achieve his goals and develop his attributes as a civilized man. As an individual, he can do little; as a member of an organized society, his potential is enormously increased. This means not only that the state ranks higher than the individual, but also that the state has a caretaker function and the individual a dependent status.
The Libertarian Theory, on the other hand, is the exact anti-thesis of the Authoritarian Theory. The press is no longer seen as an instrument of the government but as a watchdog, a mechanism through which people may check on government. The theory espouses the total freedom of the press from government control and influence. All ideas are to be given a fair hearing. The press becomes a “free market place” of ideas and information.
The Social Responsibility Theory is a modification of the Libertarian Theory, taken in the context of the impact of the communication revolution. In this theory the power and near monopoly position of the media impose on them an obligation to be socially responsible, to see that all sides are fairly presented and that the public has enough information to decide; and that if the media do not take on themselves such responsibility, it may be necessary for some other agency of the public to enforce it.
The Soviet Totalitarian Theory is a development of the Authoritarian Theory with some peculiar features of its own. Siebert e al. describe it as a tool of the ruling power just as clearly as did the older authoritarianism. Unlike the older pattern, it is state rather than privately-owned. The profit motive has been removed, and a concept of positive has been substituted for a concept of negative liberty.
According to Ogan (1982), these four theories of the press correctly identifies as the basic assumption for a “fifth theory.”
The Fifth Theory of the Press
Another type of social structure began to emerge, one that would hardly escape notice if only for its pervasiveness. This was the developing society, the predominant social genre in post-colonial Asia, Latin America, and Africa. It is in the context of this particular society and its global environment that a “fifth theory” finds its application.
Development Communication is the fifth theory of the press. It is the appropriate system given “the social and political structures” of the developing world and its current global environment. Compared with the other four, we argue that it has its own unique premises, philosophy, and perspective.
The standard “Four Theories” model addresses the relationship of Man to the State. Development communication addresses the relationship of Man to his entire Environment – physical, biological, socio-cultural, and, perhaps, even spiritual – in the pursuit of the realization of his full potential.
Cybernetics – Dev Com Related Concept
There are lots of concepts that are related to development communication but in this item we will argue about its connection to Cybernetics and how come these two are related to each other. Believe it or not, there is a sight of science behind this.
According to the General Systems Theory (GST), living systems are made up of living things as elements, thus encompassing organisms, ecosystems, and social systems. We human beings are living in a social system which makes social system considered as a living system. One of the basic views of GST is that living systems perform three critical functions with respect to its environment and other living systems: the exchange of materials; the exchange of energy; and the exchange of information. The theory emphasized that if any of these critical functions were hampered, then it would spell the doom of that organism. But how specifically do this links to development communication? Well the third and last critical function – the exchange of information – is nothing else but a communication.
General Systems Theory has this branch that deals with communication called Cybernetics, the science of control. The take-off point of this branch is the Second Law of Thermodynamics which deals with the diffusion of heat in a closed system. Norbert Wiener maintained that the diffusion of heat is a function of entropy, the tendency of any system towards greater uniformity and lesser differentiation or organization. We can say that if a system is innately made up of hot elements and cold elements then these differentiations in temperature should be maintained for the integrity of the system. When these differentiations are lost, then the system dies. What is the connection of this to the development communication? Wiener maintains that the third critical function of every living system – the exchange of information – the one that we defined as communication – is the function that counters entropy. Entropy is a universal tendency for these differentiations to diminish and ultimately disappear. And it is bad for a living system because it brings forth disorganization and decay. In fact, Wiener believes that information negates entropy; he has since termed information as “negentropy”.
The science behind cybernetics, which deals with communication, thus makes us believe that all living systems are purposive. The goal or purpose of a living system is to achieve this desired or ideal state. Another hold of cybernetics is that a social system is a living system as it is made up of human beings. So with the existence of entropy, social systems will never achieve its societal goals. But as long as there is an actual exchange of materials, exchange of energy, and of course exchange of information, the possibility of entropy will decrease. Thus information, or more appropriately, communication, allows a social system to achieve its goal.
The Values of Development Communication
There are three major values that guide the practice of development communication: it is purposive, it is pragmatic, and it is value-laiden.
A dev com material is purposive when it is not only inform the public but if it also influence the behavior of the receiver of information. Similarly, being purposive desired of its outcome, specific goals, and objectives.
To be pragmatic means being results-oriented. Assessment is a must to distinguish the impact of a dev com material, if the purpose was accomplished. Being pragmatic also means that you check out the factors that contributed to the success or failure of a communication program.
Dev com is value-laiden. Consciously or unconsciously, there where values assign to every message a dev com material communicates. However, values attached to messages change over time. Basically, in development communication, we assume that there is an attached value in every message that one communicates. Development is in itself a value-laden word. It is not a neutral word (Quebral,1988).
At the present time, dev com is promoting four requisite values to make Philippine development a reality. These values are termed as the 4 Esof dev com. These are: empowerment, environmentalism, entrepreneurship, and equity.
Tea Time 