By a way of summary

By way of summary

The above-described changes in the field of communication for development could be summarized as follows.

1. The growth of a deeper understanding of the nature of communication

The perspective on communication has changed. Early models in the ‘50s and ‘60s saw the communication process simply as a message going from a sender to a receiver (that is, Laswell’s classicS-M-R model). The emphasis was mainly sender- and media-centric; the stress laid on the freedom of the press, the absence of censorship, and so on. Since the ‘70s, communication has become more receiver- and message-centric.
The emphasis now is more on the process of communication (that is, the exchange of meaning) and on the significance of this process (that is, the social relationships created bycommunication and the social institutions and con-Jan Servaes & Patchanee Malikhao
text which result from such relationships). As a result, the focus has moved from a ‘communicator‘ to a more ‘receiver-centric’ orientation, with the resultant emphasis on meaning sought and ascribed rather than information transmitted.

2. A new understanding of communication as a two-way process

With thisshift in focus, one is no longer attempting to create a need for the infor- mation one is disseminating, but one is rather disseminating information for which there is a need. The emphasis is on information exchange rather than on the persuasion in the diffusion model.
The ‘oligarchic’ view of communication implied that freedom of infor- mation was a one-way right from a higher to a lower level,from the centre to the periphery, from an institution to an individual, from a communication-rich nation to a communication-poor one, and so on. Today, the interactive nature of com- munication is increasingly recognized. It is seen as fundamentally two-way rather than one-way, interactive and participatory rather than linear.

3. A new understanding of culture

The cultural perspective hasbecome central to the debate on communication for development. Culture is not only the visible, non-natural environment of a person, but primarily his/her normative context. Consequently, one has moved away from a more traditional mechanistic approach that emphasized economic and material- istic criteria to a more multiple appreciation of holistic and complex perspectives.

4. The trend towardsparticipatory democracy

The end of the colonial era has seen the rise of many independent states and the spread of democratic principles, even if only at the level of lip service. Though often ignored in practice, democracy is honoured in theory. Governments and/or powerful private interests still largely control the world’s communication media, but they are more attuned to and aware of thedemocratic ideals than previously. At the same time, literacy levels have increased, and there has been a remarkable improvement in people’s ability to handle and use communication technology. As a consequence, more and more people can use communication media and can no longer be denied access to and participation in communication processes for the lack of communication and technical skills.

5.Recognition of the imbalance in communication resources or the digital divide

The disparity in communication resources between different parts of the world is increasingly recognized as a cause of concern. As the centre nations develop their resources, the gap between centre and periphery becomes greater. The plea for a more balanced and equal distribution of communication resources can only bediscussed in terms of power at local, national and international levels. The attempt by local power-elites to totally control the modern communication chan- nels –press, broadcasting, education, and bureaucracy– does no longer ensure control of all the communication networks in a given society. Nor does control of the mass media ensure support for the controlling forces, nor for any mobilization...