MEDIA, DEMOCRACY AND PARTICIPATION

The very survival of democracy depends on information and communication.

By Dr. Wilberforce Sefakor Dzisah
Ghana Institute of Journalism
On the occasion of GIJ's 50TH Anniversary public lecture

Mr. Chairman, The Rector, Colleague Members of Staff, Invited Guests, Students, Our Colleagues in the Media, Ladies and Gentlemen. I greet you. It is a privilege to stand before you as an alumnus of the Ghana Institute of Journalism to deliver one of the Golden Jubilee Anniversary lectures.

The topic for the lecture has been clearly stated by the Chairman for the occasion. This topic: Media, Democracy and Participation, l believe has been dealt with by others at different fora. Nonetheless, l considered it a very unique topic at this historical period in the life of GIJ. Its uniqueness is borne out of the developments in our part of the world. Ghana and a substantial number of African countries have embarked on the firm road of multiparty constitutional democracy. Besides, the topic is appropriate because as the first African country, south of the Sahara to establish a Journalism School, media and democracy discourses would help deepen an understanding of the theme for GIJ's 50th Golden Jubilee Celebration: “Defining Africa's Communication Agenda”.

In this paper, l intend to discuss how media and democracy are intertwined concepts and almost complementary. I would sketch the contours of the vital roles of the two and how participation and engagement are facilitated by other factors within the media and democratic public sphere.

If ever there is a term which has been abused and has undergone oversimplification, then it is the concept: Democracy. Beyond the Greek postulation, let us assume that 'Democracy' as a common feature of our daily life is arguably the system whereby the majority in a given population through their voting rights exercise power and invariably dominate minorities. However, whether these rights of the majority are hinged on a value system in that democracy is an on-going struggle while the media are part of the agency in constructing this democratic architecture.

As noted by the American scholar Francis Fukuyama “for a very large part of the world, there is now no ideology with pretensions to challenge liberal democracy” (1992: 45). Offering a definition of liberal democracy, he argues that it is a form of rule in which the citizens are free to “choose their own governments through periodic, free and fair, secret-ballot, multiparty elections, on the basis of universal and equal adult suffrage” (Ibid). While liberal democracy has become the fulcrum on which international politics is played, it is essential to stress that liberal democracy alone does not guarantee equal participation and rights even though its focus is on democratic pluralism and the organisation of the free market. From my standpoint, liberal democracy or better still pluralism or representation has been reduced to holding periodic elections, emphasising rights and freedoms. A real democratic culture must be seen beyond the electorate just exercising their franchise (Nyamnjoh, 2005). Instead, l would suggest, it should embrace the tenets of democracy including free speech, economic empowerment and improved quality of education and shelter for the people.

The concept of democracy is normative. It is expected to follow a clear set of rules and must have elemental implications. These normative implications and procedural processes are premised on the question as to “who is authorised to make collective decisions and through which procedures such decisions are to be made, regardless of the areas of life in which democracy is practised” (Keane, 1994). Particularly in Ghana where the democratic culture is still fledgling, this should resonate with all and sundry and often the media, which is key in communicating the democratic ideals.

Despite the plausible arguments and claims to the pricelessness of liberal democratic thought and practice, the Western world ideal cannot be said to be the panacea to the search for an alternative democratic model. As noted by Western scholars such as Keane, the loud claims in the western world to democratic idealism are a semblance of “a homeless drunk staggering uncertainly in search of a lamp-post for support if not illumination” (Ibid).

The dialectical positions on the most suitable form of democracy also have a philosophical basis in the substantive grounding principle of Tom Paine, John Stuart Mill and Locke's natural rights maxim. It is an affirmation of the Marxist ideology of the triumph of authentic democracy as derived from the class struggle. Of note is the resurgence of leftist politics and socialist leaders in the midst of the attempt by the West to globalise liberal democracy. The case of Latin America is a classic example. The lessons to be learnt from the phenomenon are challenging as they are daunting, but it presents us with the task of fashioning our democracy in a way as to be sensitive to the cultural and traditional exigencies which confronts us.

These developments should remind us of the simplistic reductionist views of implanting western liberal ideology, without cognisance of the time-tested in-built Ghanaian and African traditions and cultures that have served our people over the centuries. We must reject the often held liberal argument which insists that all African countries need to do is to pick democratic seeds from the capitalist gardens of Washington, Paris and London, plant and water them in order that they will blossom. The problematic of the democratic ideal and its promotion of ethnic and tribal cleavages in Africa can be attributed specifically to the lack of organic connections between the liberal democratic idea of the West and the history and culture of the African reality. My assertion is that liberal democracy was nurtured in a different historical and cultural soil and cannot endure transplantation except when it goes through genetic engineering of sorts. The communitarian principle of consultation, shared values and participation in the polity must inform our brand of democracy (Awoonor, 1990).

Participation, Engagement and Devolution
In a way, the principle of participation and representation in liberal democracy is also held up as one of the underlying synergies of pluralism. Political participation is more than simply a feeling one has, it involves in some sense “activity”. While participation can be said to be anchored in the individual as a free citizen to exercise his rights under a given code or constitution it could also serve as an elixir for mobilising grassroots support and involvement in matters of the State or in a given community. In other words, participation within the democratic realm must have the perspective that emphasises collectivities; the participation of the citizens being predicated on their being connected to others by civic bonds such as taking part and voting in organised elections. Alternatively, the student task force of the early 1980s which engaged in the evacuation of locked-up cocoa from the hinterland is a clear example of how political engagement could induce participation.

In Ghana, the decentralisation policy which necessitated the devolution of political, and to some extent, economic power to the Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies has become part of our democratic participatory ideal of involving and engaging more citizens in the process. In effect, it has helped in ensuring social coherence at the community level – a useful corollary for democratic engagement and participation by the people.

I wish to add that any absence of engagement and participation can therefore be formulated as creating a sense of indifference. It implies a disinterest in politics and the political – an alienation. Indifference seems to be the psychological condition that best describes most of those who are disengaged and manifest a sense of the irrelevance of democratic activities. We should however, keep in mind that indifference is not an ontological state: It can be transformed into engagement via experience. And engagement keeps the door open for participation.

While political participation could be at both formal and informal levels, increasing interest in Ghana's democratic processes, particularly by those in Civil Society has to be commended. In as much as they are ensuring civic engagement, and other forms of democratic participation, - demonstrations and signing petitions, are some of the pressures brought to bear on those wielding power to be sensitive to the concerns and needs of interest groups. Such political actions through civic participation in the democratic process are a positive engine which directly and indirectly fuel democratic politics. The 'active' engagement of political parties and other pressure groups such as the Committee for Joint Action (CJA) and recently Alliance for Accountable Governance (AFAG) are but a few of the groups which have demonstrably shown their commitment to use laid down constitutional means to provide a countervailing force to curtail what could have been the entrammeled power of the State.

However, it must be noted that while these groups within civil society pontificate on democratic ideals and the need for political authority to listen to all shades of opinion and conform to democratic practices, they themselves are mostly citadels of intolerance and undemocratic practices. The endemic absence of a democratic culture in some of these political and civil society groups indicates a fundamental tendency toward autocracy and this could be found in the elitist institutional leaderships across the country.

A democratic culture, in the context of Africa, can only be developed when all the organisms of the state, and civil society, are seen to be operating in a democratic manner. This applies not only to the institutions of state power but also the Trades Unions, Churches, and traditional institutions of chieftaincy. If they remain in the dictatorial and anti-democratic grip of neo-feudalist and oligarchic leaderships, our democracy will continue to suffer what Maxwell describes as “trotting on the spot stasis” (1986).

The violence and conflicts which have characterised our democratic evolution could not be said to be the preserve of Africans or Ghanaians. But if we evaluate the difficulties our political parties and potential contestants for positions in their various parties are going through as evidenced in both the NDC and NPP primaries at the polling stations, branches, wards and constituency levels, there is the tendency to state that democratic engagement is on the rise with its attendant increase in political participation. On the other hand, this participation could be artificial or motivated by sectarian interests and not for the sake of any civic imperative. If we juxtapose this with the arguments of liberalism being a feature of civilization then we can safely state that even the most educated in our midst are struggling to have a firm grasp on the Western ideal.

In this case, therefore, the brand of multiparty democracy being projected as the solution to Africa's woes is rather a re-ordering of chairs on the deck of a ship which confines “competition among political elites to the exclusion of the disaffected masses” (Cited Nyamnjoh 2005). Clearly, the electorate, who represent the lifeblood of democracy, are then reduced to 'voter-banks' and occasionally called upon to defend the ambitions of those in political authority.

Democracy must be embodied in concrete, recurring practices – individual, group, and collective – relevant for diverse situations. Such practices help generate personal and social meaning to the ideals of democracy, and they must have an element of the routine, if they are to be a part of a civic culture. The interaction among citizens is a cornerstone of the public sphere, and the kinds of established rules and etiquette that shape such interaction either promote the practices of public discussion or contribute to their evaporation. Across time, practices become traditions, and experience becomes collective memory; today's democracy needs to be able to refer to a past, without being locked in it.

However, democracy will not function if such virtues as tolerance and willingness to follow democratic principles and procedures do not have grounding in everyday life. Even support for the legal system (assuming it is legitimate) is an expression of such virtue. Just what are the best or real democratic values, and how they are applied can be the grounds for serious disputes. It is precisely in such situations that the procedural mechanisms take on extra importance. The media can reinforce the commitment to democratic values (even by invoking them in sensationalist scandals).

The Role of the Media in a Democracy
According to democratic theory, the very survival of democracy depends on information and communication (Barber, 1999). The informed “consent of the governed” is a cherished principle of representative democracy (Ibid). Perhaps this is even more crucial in societies undergoing democratic transitions. Without sufficient information, citizens may not adequately evaluate the alternatives before them and the consequences of their actions.

The central role of the media in nurturing democracy has been subjected to various interpretations. An independent media is a sine qua non in a democratic society since it helps keep the governors of the governed in check. Our governments must be seen as the trustees of the collective will of the people. Their actions should, therefore, be regulated by the force of public opinion. And it is for this reason that the media remains the most potent organ to mobilise, shape, assess and represent public opinion. What then is public opinion? In my view it is simply the behaviour, attitudes and views and actions of the individual and groups which are measurable through both scientific and unscientific methods.

Public opinion and truth must be seen to be conflated. However, there is so much bifurcation in our media; for example, you are either for us or you are against us to the extent the truth has become the preserve of the loud mouthed and vociferous few. There is also the misguided notion that those who appear on radio talk-shows, the editors who publish stories against the opponents of their political patrons, and 'God's own anointed' apostles of political sagacity and human rights activists for free expression are those regarded as the guardians of the democratic order and our 4th Republican Constitution. This cannot be wholly true.

We must be quick to add that public debate including talk-shows and editorializing are part of the journalistic profession. However, one should not expect them to be always real or even desirable, because political dialogue has always involved passion and spectacle; just like 'reason,' they have been used sometimes to manipulate and pacify, and sometimes to push consciousness to a higher level (Hallin,1994). The contention here is that adulterated debate easily pushes political debate to the point that economists call “diminishing returns”. At that point, public debate ceases to inform, to engage, and to stimulate the power of thought and seek the truth.

The media has the power to demand democratic and political accountability by exposing corruption and other abuses in the system. This development is essential for the entrenchment of a democratic culture and to enable citizens to openly demand accountability from their leaders. This ultimately will help inject some sanity into democratic governance. What this entails is the deepening of the liberal pluralist theory which empowers the media to perform a watchdog function. Its main thrust has been to mount surveillance on the state and its agents as to guard the public purse and the resources of the people. It is one critical aspect of democratic underpinnings of the media (Curran, 2004).

The media no doubt have been in the forefront of our democratic elections of 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 and the dramatic 2008 general elections. While it has been providing coverage as part of its fundamental role in the building and sustenance of democracy, more needs to be done if it is to possess the moral high ground as informational conduits for enriching the democratic process.

Permit me to bore you with some statistics on the media coverage of the 2008 elections submitted by the European Union Election Observation Mission. In their monitoring of the selected media between November 11, 2008 and December 27, 2008, they came out with the following results: GTV devoted 33 per cent of its political coverage to the New Patriotic Party (NPP). The National Democratic Congress (NDC) received 19 per cent and the other parties such as the Convention People's Party (CPP) 15 and the People's National Convention (PNC) 10 respectively. Also of importance is the 20 percent political coverage given to the immediate former President. In the case of the President, let me state that it becomes difficult to determine whether he was performing a partisan political function or a state function. This is more problematic due to the blurring space in differentiating between political party propaganda from governmental propaganda, more so when the political party constitutes the government in power. The EU report in respect of radio cited Uniiq FM as having allocated 32 per cent of its air time to the NPP, 19 per cent to the NDC, 15 per cent to the CPP and 10 per cent to the PNC (February 2009).

The EU Mission based its results on a selected sample of the Ghanaian media. While this cannot be said to be truly representative because of the sample size, it is, however, significant if one is interested in trends, particularly from the standpoint of the 2000, 2004 and 2008 elections with the NDC receiving a more than proportionate positive coverage in the state-owned media in the 2000 elections and the NPP having the lion's share in the 2004 elections and the recent in the 2008 event.. What this tells us is the flagrant violation of Article 163 of the 1992 Constitution which enjoins the State-owned media to afford equal opportunities and coverage to all the political parties to present their programmes.

Whatever the enormous importance and vital role of the watchdog function, let us not reduce governance to the level whereby it is dictated by media policy. It is the same way that the agenda-setting paradigm by the media should not be seen as an Alpha and Omega of all forms in moulding and shaping public opinion. It could be deceptive because the media is deeply rooted in political ideology of the left-of-centre and the right-of-centre and are therefore part of the democratic agenda of perpetuating dominant groups in power. What is more, the media or the journalists working in the media have adopted the strategy of using their outlets to try and direct and influence the outcome of elections. We can therefore see how the media have shifted from being the custodians of conscience to perpetuating a political malaise necessitated by the greedy machine of wealth, sycophancy and opportunism.

Let me state that Ghana's Fourth Estate is in dire need of surgery to cut out the gangrenous parts. This is quintessential to the future development of a more vibrant media landscape. A cursory analysis of the commentaries and debates in the media tend to portray our colleagues in the media as hostages to self-righteousness. We lack introspection and a high sense of reflection. Let the media and our journalists be imbued with the same level of selflessness which propelled the likes of Casely Hayford, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Wallace Johnson and Kwame Nkrumah to leap from the journalistic trenches of the nationalist tradition of yesteryears to light the flames of our nationhood and our African personality.

What is critical here is for the media to adopt self-regulatory mechanisms in reducing tension among the political combatants. In our democracy, the alignment of most of the media houses and journalists to politicians and political parties has resulted in very inflammatory publications. The purpose is to destroy an opponent. What this alignment to political actors is doing to our democracy is that the media has virtually ceased to be independent so as to reflect the wishes of the people. We must not forget the threat posed to our democracy by the new media such as the internet. With our media being accessed on through cyber space, any damaging story against prominent people in our society has a multiplier effect. The danger is that it becomes difficult for such reputations once damaged to be redeemed.

Let not the media affirm the position of Oscar Wilde, a British poet and dramatist, who claimed “Bad manners make a good Journalist”. The media should work hard to disprove this spurious claim. We must move away from this aberration. We must begin to reweave the strands which will help reconnect Edmund Burke's Fourth Estate as a true policeman for our society and the mirror through which other reflections could be guided. Perhaps, we may reform and assist in making our democracy meaningful to our traditions, cultures and in conformity with globalised systems and cultures but not a carbon copy of a foreign ideal.

The media seems to be focusing too much on political journalism and communication discourses to the detriment of other discourses within the social and economic realm. While these could be said to be fuelled by the long years of political inertia, Ghana's successive elections and its historical experiences make it unique to revise the democratic and media agenda which almost always is viewed through the political prism.

There are various levels through which the media in a democracy could enrich the process. As a vital cog in the wheel, they must report important concerns and problems that need the attention of the rulers from the ground to policy-making elites, governments and the elected representatives. In other words, our media must act as the tribunes of the people who can convey through the mass communication process the distilled consensus of the multitude to those who wield power (Barnett and Gaber, 2001).

Public dialogue and debate are not only crucial for political competition and civic participation; they are also important mechanisms for managing political and social conflict; they are essential aspects of democracy. Two crucial aspects of the dialogic function of the public sphere are popular participation and rational-critical discussion. The question of who takes part in public debate is as important as that of the quality of the discourse (Schudson, 1995). Habermas, who popularized this concept of the public sphere, pays special attention to the centrality of rational-critical discussion. And, it is not enough to participate in public affairs; political discussions should be rational. Thus, special attention must be paid to the presentation of claims, evidence, arguments and counterarguments.

The professional competence of the media aside, they have a responsibility to reform, do away with hate journalism, mindless exaggeration and politicisation of ethnic tensions and refocus their energies on accurate and responsible journalism. Deliberate misinformation and distortion are a concern because they have the potential of shortchanging the democratic process. Political information is a central resource for democratic participation. Citizens cannot make meaningful political decisions without accurate information about the choices before them and the likely consequences of those choices.

Conclusion
Mr Chairman, Ghana's democracy if put on the optimum point of the scale holds a lot of promise. This promise is located in the various Western and African models of media and democratic practice. The strong case for diversity, pluralism and participation and the urge for the media to chart the course of multiparty democracy for development and opinion formation is a positive sign of progress. However, lingering doubts and suspicions of extreme partisanship in the media and attempts by journalists to align themselves to politicians are not healthy for sustainable democratic culture of providing citizens with quality alternative policy choices.

This development, which has gained so much currency in the media, is eroding the watchdog function of the 'Fourth Power'. My view is that the media is sliding back into the era of unrestrained sycophancy and adulation of politicians to the extent that their patrons do no wrong. I also urge caution in implementing liberal democracy in Africa and Ghana. And the most important organ which needs to exercise utmost restraint is the media. They represent the final sentinels at the door of liberty and freedom outside the judiciary and being the voice of the voiceless, their conscience instead of their stomach should drive their mission.

Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, in three days' time, the Ghana Institute of Journalism will be celebrating its 50th Anniversary under the theme: Defining Africa's Communication Agenda. The Institute has come a long way. It has played its part very well in pushing the African journalism paradigm onto the global stage.

It is my hope that the flame lit by our first President, Kwame Nkrumah, 50 years ago in establishing GIJ is not quenched. Like Osagyefo 's Black Star, let the Ghana Institute of Journalism join forces with other African stars to form a galaxy of stars in the bright firmament so that together they can help maintain our dignity as a people and chart a new path for our Africa's communication agenda..

I Thank You All For Your Attention!
References
Awoonor, K.N. (1990) Ghana: A Political History. Accra: Woeli Publishers.

Barber, B. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Twentieth Anniversary Edition. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.

Barnett, S. and Gaber, I. (2001) Westminster Tales: The Twenty-First Century Crisis in British Political Journalism. London: Continuum.

Curran, J. (2002) Media and Power. London: Routledge.

European Union Election Observation Mission, Ghana Final Report: Presidential and Parliamentary Elections 2008, February 2009.

Fukuyama, F. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man. London: Penguin Books.

Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Hallin, D. C. (1994). We keep American on top of the world: television journalism and the public sphere. London & New York: Routledge.

Keane, J. (1991). Media and Democracy. London: Polity Press.

Owusu, M. (1986) Custom and coups: a juridical interpretation civil order and disorder in Ghana. Journal of Modern African Studies.

Nyamnjoh, F.B. (2005) Africa's Media, Democracy and the Politics of Belonging. London: Zed Books.

Lasch, C. (1990) “Journalism, publicity and the lost art of argument.” Gannett Centre Journal, 4(2): 1-11.

The Fourth Republican Constitution of Ghana. Accra: Ghana Publishing.