Discussion about and publication of hyperlocal public journalism for the citizens of Wards 5 and 6 in the Makana Municipality, Eastern Cape, South Africa.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
The 'collaborative role' exists only in textbooks...
Rod Amner validated the JDD-CMP course to us by saying that there have been criticisms of undergraduate journalism at Rhodes' failure to link theory to practise. However, I am afraid to say that this course only highlighted this notion. It is one thing for Christians et Al to theorise about the 'collaborative role' of journalists but another entirely to bring it to life when you are dealing with "unwilling government and a demoralised populace" in Nick Mulgrew's words. The community has cultivated feelings of anger and animosity towards government officials and rightly so, and now we are stationed in the firing line of false promises, abandoned elderly and desperate circumstances with nothing to protect us but a notepad/camera/recorder? Sure, we can take our carefully collated folders to the municipality but why should they take any notice? They ignore desperate pleas to remove waste and sewerage but they are going to respond to a soundslide? Wishful thinking is an understatement. This course has left me despondent and heartbroken about the state of affairs in South Africa and the adversity which confronts journalists. I am not sure what would have equipped me for coping better with this course, but 3 years of learning about the Utopian ideals of journalism certainly did not.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Ward 5 and 6 gathering
Photos from the gathering held in the extension 9 community centre to show wards 5 and 6 the work that we have produced.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
The Price of Public Journalism
When the JDD-CMP course began in July I was overwhelmed by what we had to try to achieve in this short space of time. I thought the course aims of bringing together “the Media Studies and Media Production components of the third year curriculum into a praxis-based melting pot” was easier said then done. The objectives of this course also seemed impractical and unrealistic considering we had to learn the theory and then apply it almost simultaneously.
It is so easy to put pen to paper and declare that the course was going allow us to engage critically with journalism and the definition of what it is to be a journalist but up until the start of the course, we had only been practicing mainstream journalism… the methods and skills which had been drilled into us for two years. I think it’s safe to say that I was apprehensive.
As the course continued and my knowledge of public journalism grew, I thought what our lecturers wanted us to achieve was admirable. We held our first public meeting which was a huge success… We had banners, a sound system, photographers snapping away, camera crews filming from every possible angle and radio journalists making sure that every word was recorded. The meeting was attended by a lot of people who were willing to tell us their problems and share their views… the only difficulty I faced was actually understanding a word that had been said!
The theory around public journalism and creating “deliberating public spaces” within communities seemed a little unfeasible for someone who couldn’t even communicate effectively with the communities of wards 5 and 6. Also producing audio regarding the “citizens agenda” and the problems which these individuals faced seemed impossible.
Never before had I had to rely so much on the assistance of my peers in compiling news but I realised and hoped that it would be to the benefit of the community to produce audio which they understood in order to create awareness and understanding amongst members in the community about the problems regarding the RDP houses in the Transit Camp. The journalistic work I conducted alongside Stephane Meintjes in producing our final soundslide was nothing like I had ever done before. We literally went door to door and interacted with the community at the “grassroots level” despite the language barriers we faced. We also had the assistance and involvement of a citizen journalist who was hopefully able to learn something from us along the way. The families living in the community became familiar faces to me and we became familiar faces to them.
My growth and understanding of journalism over the months of this course made all the hard work seem all worth it… until we held our second public meeting and critically evaluated our role in our focus group discussion. Although I had grown as a journalist and I had benefited from this course I think I was naïve about the ways in which I thought the communities of wards 5 and 6 had benefited. Did their living conditions change? Did the municipality listen to the grievances of the communities they serve? Unfortunately, I cannot answer yes to these questions. So what was the price the community had to pay for the public journalism we conducted and, at the end of the day, was it worth it?
The painful stories told by the community weren’t resolved and the one-on-one interaction with these individuals not only took a toll on them but also on the journalists telling these stories. The failure of the decision-makers in taking part in this process, however, is not due to our role as journalists… if anything it, once again, calls into question the governance of our country.
It is necessary to consider one of the main objectives of public journalism in “creating spaces for pubic debate”. By distributing our work to prominent people in the community as well as to the formal establishments of wards 5 and 6, hopefully our group will be successful in this objective. However, if our second community meeting, held on 19 October, is anything to go by this might not be the case. Due to the acoustics of the community hall in extension 9, the sound quality was exceptionally poor. Although the meeting was attended by a ward councillor, members of the police and an official from the housing section of the municipality, these individuals did not have anything to contribute. Furthermore, the youth of the community, which we always like to term the “future generation”, were more involved in their own conversations than in the work that was being displayed which, in turn, made it even more difficult to hear.
I would like to think that the work we did as public journalists was not done in vain and I hope that the information which has been made available to the community will be used to create spaces in which the community are active participants in public debate. The information and contact details on the DVDs being distributed as well as the wall papers will hopefully encourage community members to be active in bringing about change in their own lives and provide some solutions to the overwhelming problems these individuals face.
It is so easy to put pen to paper and declare that the course was going allow us to engage critically with journalism and the definition of what it is to be a journalist but up until the start of the course, we had only been practicing mainstream journalism… the methods and skills which had been drilled into us for two years. I think it’s safe to say that I was apprehensive.
As the course continued and my knowledge of public journalism grew, I thought what our lecturers wanted us to achieve was admirable. We held our first public meeting which was a huge success… We had banners, a sound system, photographers snapping away, camera crews filming from every possible angle and radio journalists making sure that every word was recorded. The meeting was attended by a lot of people who were willing to tell us their problems and share their views… the only difficulty I faced was actually understanding a word that had been said!
The theory around public journalism and creating “deliberating public spaces” within communities seemed a little unfeasible for someone who couldn’t even communicate effectively with the communities of wards 5 and 6. Also producing audio regarding the “citizens agenda” and the problems which these individuals faced seemed impossible.
Never before had I had to rely so much on the assistance of my peers in compiling news but I realised and hoped that it would be to the benefit of the community to produce audio which they understood in order to create awareness and understanding amongst members in the community about the problems regarding the RDP houses in the Transit Camp. The journalistic work I conducted alongside Stephane Meintjes in producing our final soundslide was nothing like I had ever done before. We literally went door to door and interacted with the community at the “grassroots level” despite the language barriers we faced. We also had the assistance and involvement of a citizen journalist who was hopefully able to learn something from us along the way. The families living in the community became familiar faces to me and we became familiar faces to them.
My growth and understanding of journalism over the months of this course made all the hard work seem all worth it… until we held our second public meeting and critically evaluated our role in our focus group discussion. Although I had grown as a journalist and I had benefited from this course I think I was naïve about the ways in which I thought the communities of wards 5 and 6 had benefited. Did their living conditions change? Did the municipality listen to the grievances of the communities they serve? Unfortunately, I cannot answer yes to these questions. So what was the price the community had to pay for the public journalism we conducted and, at the end of the day, was it worth it?
The painful stories told by the community weren’t resolved and the one-on-one interaction with these individuals not only took a toll on them but also on the journalists telling these stories. The failure of the decision-makers in taking part in this process, however, is not due to our role as journalists… if anything it, once again, calls into question the governance of our country.
It is necessary to consider one of the main objectives of public journalism in “creating spaces for pubic debate”. By distributing our work to prominent people in the community as well as to the formal establishments of wards 5 and 6, hopefully our group will be successful in this objective. However, if our second community meeting, held on 19 October, is anything to go by this might not be the case. Due to the acoustics of the community hall in extension 9, the sound quality was exceptionally poor. Although the meeting was attended by a ward councillor, members of the police and an official from the housing section of the municipality, these individuals did not have anything to contribute. Furthermore, the youth of the community, which we always like to term the “future generation”, were more involved in their own conversations than in the work that was being displayed which, in turn, made it even more difficult to hear.
I would like to think that the work we did as public journalists was not done in vain and I hope that the information which has been made available to the community will be used to create spaces in which the community are active participants in public debate. The information and contact details on the DVDs being distributed as well as the wall papers will hopefully encourage community members to be active in bringing about change in their own lives and provide some solutions to the overwhelming problems these individuals face.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Final reflection - Terri
We wanted to forge a “community strengthening” project, building bridges between the residents of Makana’s Wards 5 and 6 and the people with enough money or power to help them improve their lives. Launching into this project with my usual Nihilistic cynicism, I was quick to notice the painfully idealistic, naïve and cutesy ambitions of the course. I knew then, as I know now, that no amount of goodwill by twenty journalism students is going to build even one house. What is going to build a house is money and sound governance – something that twenty journalists cannot be expected to produce on the scale needed. I understand, naturally, that it’s “the thought that counts” and that “voices must be heard” , but the results of our second community meeting proved to me that when you get a really lame Christmas present, you don’t necessarily care about “the thought that counts”. The thought doesn’t matter, and I would be fine with the niggling sense of failure that I am now left with, if I was not led to believe by the idealistic pussyfooting of the course outline, that we were going to do some real, noticeable good in the communities we were allocated.
The communities we were introduced to have problems that no individual should have to face, and our efforts within these spaces were hopelessly idealistic. How were twenty third year kids expected to make any noticeable difference to these people? Had I been a resident of Wards 5 or 6, I would have been highly annoyed at varsity kids with fancy cars offering me shrill little platitudes about how they wanted to help.
I believe in goodwill and charity. However, I do not believe in it being forced upon people. The goodwill we were doing in these communities was never altruistic – it was for a grade. I have a problem with that. The solution for these residents is a good government with an intrinsic system of accountability. Not having their “voices heard”. Their voices are heard in the shared woes of the thousands of South Africans in similar situations – and still their lives don’t change. This project only created false hopes which were noticeably dashed at the second community meeting we held in Extension 9.
First and foremost, I don’t think a course like this should be forced upon the unwilling. I didn’t come to study journalism for civic journalism work. Selfish as it may sound, it is honest. I have a very low tolerance for (frankly) quasi-retarded state officials kicking people out of meetings, ward councilors who can’t take criticism even when the basis of which is glaringly apparent, and I don’t like producing media that, when exhibited to the subjects, is scoffed at and largely ignored in favour of a Mxit conversation.
The exhibition was a huge disappointment. The sound quality was abhorrent due to the fascinatingly bad acoustics of the hall we used, and the residents who came to view the works could not have been any less bothered by it, by and large. A group of adolescents say before me, chattering away, giggling and chatting on their cell phones. People left before the half-way mark was reached. I understand that the sound quality was not great, but these were pieces about the place they live.
These people jumped onto us like lifeboats when we first arrived, so keen were they to have their voices heard. Now, they were leaving the product or ignoring their voices they so wanted heard. I didn’t understand. I was hurt. If they don’t care about their problems enough to even watch a half hour exhibition, why was I made to believe it was so important and that my work was meant to save the destitute? Let me clarify: Obviously not every member of the audience was a giant mass of apathy. But from my angle, a lot of people were. One resident, at the end of the meeting, said they were largely unimpressed because they figured this exhibition would give them answers as to why RDP houses were not arriving, why health and sanitation was so neglected, why crime and inefficient policing are rife. I wanted to bang my head against the wall. People WERE in fact blaming us for what we feared in the beginning – prancing around a township and getting nothing of any real value done. It is impossible to get things done, as I have previously mentioned, without a wad of cash and a sound local government. And, being naïve enough to believe that these people simply wanted their “voices heard” is stupid.
These people, judging by their reaction to our media, did not get the point of our presence, and probably think us quite useless. Because, even when these pages go out into the plush lounges of the Grocott’s Mail readership, nothing substantial is going to get done. A good government is needed. Lots and lots of money is needed. A sustainable method of accountability on decision makers is needed.
We hear the voices of the impoverished, the sick, the abused, the downtrodden… We hear them every day in this country. Not much gets done, either. And I can’t wait to stop this course if only for the reason that, if one more person has to tell me that “every little bit counts” and “even the tiniest difference is a miracle”, I am sure to vomit from the saccharine, butterscotchy torment of their naivety. It’s attitudes like that which serve selfish purposes – you want to make a difference because it would make you feel better. Honestly, the only way anything is really going to change is if people start voting for another government, stop having children they cannot support and start looking for an infrastructure of accountability.
I don’t have all the answers. I appreciate good intentions. I’m just tired of feeling like a failure – especially when some kid is texting through a viewing of a family’s problems. A family that lives within walking distance from him. And the worst part of it all is, that if I was that kid, I probably would have done the same. Because, what does it matter?
The communities we were introduced to have problems that no individual should have to face, and our efforts within these spaces were hopelessly idealistic. How were twenty third year kids expected to make any noticeable difference to these people? Had I been a resident of Wards 5 or 6, I would have been highly annoyed at varsity kids with fancy cars offering me shrill little platitudes about how they wanted to help.
I believe in goodwill and charity. However, I do not believe in it being forced upon people. The goodwill we were doing in these communities was never altruistic – it was for a grade. I have a problem with that. The solution for these residents is a good government with an intrinsic system of accountability. Not having their “voices heard”. Their voices are heard in the shared woes of the thousands of South Africans in similar situations – and still their lives don’t change. This project only created false hopes which were noticeably dashed at the second community meeting we held in Extension 9.
First and foremost, I don’t think a course like this should be forced upon the unwilling. I didn’t come to study journalism for civic journalism work. Selfish as it may sound, it is honest. I have a very low tolerance for (frankly) quasi-retarded state officials kicking people out of meetings, ward councilors who can’t take criticism even when the basis of which is glaringly apparent, and I don’t like producing media that, when exhibited to the subjects, is scoffed at and largely ignored in favour of a Mxit conversation.
The exhibition was a huge disappointment. The sound quality was abhorrent due to the fascinatingly bad acoustics of the hall we used, and the residents who came to view the works could not have been any less bothered by it, by and large. A group of adolescents say before me, chattering away, giggling and chatting on their cell phones. People left before the half-way mark was reached. I understand that the sound quality was not great, but these were pieces about the place they live.
These people jumped onto us like lifeboats when we first arrived, so keen were they to have their voices heard. Now, they were leaving the product or ignoring their voices they so wanted heard. I didn’t understand. I was hurt. If they don’t care about their problems enough to even watch a half hour exhibition, why was I made to believe it was so important and that my work was meant to save the destitute? Let me clarify: Obviously not every member of the audience was a giant mass of apathy. But from my angle, a lot of people were. One resident, at the end of the meeting, said they were largely unimpressed because they figured this exhibition would give them answers as to why RDP houses were not arriving, why health and sanitation was so neglected, why crime and inefficient policing are rife. I wanted to bang my head against the wall. People WERE in fact blaming us for what we feared in the beginning – prancing around a township and getting nothing of any real value done. It is impossible to get things done, as I have previously mentioned, without a wad of cash and a sound local government. And, being naïve enough to believe that these people simply wanted their “voices heard” is stupid.
These people, judging by their reaction to our media, did not get the point of our presence, and probably think us quite useless. Because, even when these pages go out into the plush lounges of the Grocott’s Mail readership, nothing substantial is going to get done. A good government is needed. Lots and lots of money is needed. A sustainable method of accountability on decision makers is needed.
We hear the voices of the impoverished, the sick, the abused, the downtrodden… We hear them every day in this country. Not much gets done, either. And I can’t wait to stop this course if only for the reason that, if one more person has to tell me that “every little bit counts” and “even the tiniest difference is a miracle”, I am sure to vomit from the saccharine, butterscotchy torment of their naivety. It’s attitudes like that which serve selfish purposes – you want to make a difference because it would make you feel better. Honestly, the only way anything is really going to change is if people start voting for another government, stop having children they cannot support and start looking for an infrastructure of accountability.
I don’t have all the answers. I appreciate good intentions. I’m just tired of feeling like a failure – especially when some kid is texting through a viewing of a family’s problems. A family that lives within walking distance from him. And the worst part of it all is, that if I was that kid, I probably would have done the same. Because, what does it matter?
"...and all we got was a dvd"
Whilst some people try, whenever possible, to involve themselves in socially conscious, development-type journalism, I actively try and stay as far away from it as possible. Earlier this year, as my course dictated it, I was required to do a developmental piece of journalism - so when the JDD CMP course was announced, to say that I was less than happy would be understating my emotions.
I like soft-journalism ok. Sue me. However, that was not the reason for my concern at the commencement of this course. Having gone into the township in the past to document people’s lives I knew how emotionally taxing it was for me. Some people are cut out to do that type of work and burden themselves with other people’s issues. I, on the other hand, can barely deal with my own.
So, it was with apprehension that I approached this course.
Pinpointed at the community meeting held in 3rd term was the issue of insufficient recreational activities for children staying in our area (wards 5 & 6). Along with my partner, this issue was chosen as the one we would try an address. Allow me first to explicate the sense in which I use “address” as we did little more than highlight the issue at hand, although some, not me, would have thought they could do more before undertaking the project. My pessimism here is obvious, and my scepticism at the course’s commencement more so. I am glad that upon starting this project I knew the limitations as I get the sense that a number of people felt let down with how little they were able to do.
My soundslide detailed the plight of the indoor sports centre in Ward 6. Apart from drawing attention to the shortcomings of the centre it also celebrated it as one of the beacons of hope within the area and an example of a place that is having a positive impact on the lives of the youth. During this production process I did encounter a number of problems. In the past I have encountered instances where my title of student-journalist or even just ‘journalist’ has been a hindrance. However, this was not a concern whilst putting together this particular project. Rather, the problem involved the overwhelming sense of helplessness which accompanied my realisation that regardless of how good the piece was, it, ultimately, would have no impact on whether a new sports centre was built as those in a position to initiate change were unmotivated to do so.
To reiterate what I brought up in the prac, I began to realise that when I left the township it carried on existing. The township was not games of basketball. The township was not kickarounds in the parking lot. The township was not boxing practices. These things are what the township was to me. Why I became most disenchanted with the course is because we were the ones who initiated this interaction. We went to the township. We promised change. And ultimately it was us who created, in most instances, a degree of false hope.
At the end of the day we got our marks, and the people whose stories we told got apologies that “the municipality didn’t want to listen to us”. That’s a pretty poor exchange. I got something extra though- the sense that I let a lot of people down.
At the second community meeting we held the turnout was great, but the response did not match the turnout. People who attended seemed to not care and to be honest I don’t blame them.
I like soft-journalism ok. Sue me. However, that was not the reason for my concern at the commencement of this course. Having gone into the township in the past to document people’s lives I knew how emotionally taxing it was for me. Some people are cut out to do that type of work and burden themselves with other people’s issues. I, on the other hand, can barely deal with my own.
So, it was with apprehension that I approached this course.
Pinpointed at the community meeting held in 3rd term was the issue of insufficient recreational activities for children staying in our area (wards 5 & 6). Along with my partner, this issue was chosen as the one we would try an address. Allow me first to explicate the sense in which I use “address” as we did little more than highlight the issue at hand, although some, not me, would have thought they could do more before undertaking the project. My pessimism here is obvious, and my scepticism at the course’s commencement more so. I am glad that upon starting this project I knew the limitations as I get the sense that a number of people felt let down with how little they were able to do.
My soundslide detailed the plight of the indoor sports centre in Ward 6. Apart from drawing attention to the shortcomings of the centre it also celebrated it as one of the beacons of hope within the area and an example of a place that is having a positive impact on the lives of the youth. During this production process I did encounter a number of problems. In the past I have encountered instances where my title of student-journalist or even just ‘journalist’ has been a hindrance. However, this was not a concern whilst putting together this particular project. Rather, the problem involved the overwhelming sense of helplessness which accompanied my realisation that regardless of how good the piece was, it, ultimately, would have no impact on whether a new sports centre was built as those in a position to initiate change were unmotivated to do so.
To reiterate what I brought up in the prac, I began to realise that when I left the township it carried on existing. The township was not games of basketball. The township was not kickarounds in the parking lot. The township was not boxing practices. These things are what the township was to me. Why I became most disenchanted with the course is because we were the ones who initiated this interaction. We went to the township. We promised change. And ultimately it was us who created, in most instances, a degree of false hope.
At the end of the day we got our marks, and the people whose stories we told got apologies that “the municipality didn’t want to listen to us”. That’s a pretty poor exchange. I got something extra though- the sense that I let a lot of people down.
At the second community meeting we held the turnout was great, but the response did not match the turnout. People who attended seemed to not care and to be honest I don’t blame them.
Impotence in CMP
While the JDD-CMP course was a worthy introduction to the theory behind - and the practice of - public journalism, I cannot help but think that I would have rather not gone through with the charade of implementing it on the level that the JMS3 class has done over the past four months.
Although the course began with a burst of optimism, I believe that the gravity of the situations in which many local citizens are forced to live soon hit home and greatly demoralised those of us who weren't completely overtaken by the fallacious ideas of a readily-developing public sphere, which we could use to foster deliberation between those who need help and those who can give them help. The fact of the matter is that many people are living in appalling conditions to which no human being should be subjected. One could qualify the way things are by invoking South Africa's history, or any number of ghosts from eras past, but doing so only offers excuses for the mediocrity and incompetence of this country's governance. I believe we try to offer excuses in the form of platitudes like, "every country has its problems" or "there is also poverty and crime in America", or many other easily-quotable (and glaringly obvious) truisms. I do not believe there are many places in the world in which schoolchildren sodomise each other, as has been the case in one of the wards that a JDD-CMP group had to practice public journalism.
I know, as South Africans, we may have a lowered sensitivity towards really horrible things, but I believe this bears repeating:
In one of Makana's wards, there are schoolchildren that sodomise other schoolchildren.
In what ways are student journalists, who have been plied with vague direction in their vocation by three years of below-par university instruction and (on average) two weeks of work experience, supposed to deal with this?
In whose mind, littered with idealistic thoughts, are we prepared to successfully deal with reporting on, and helping members in that community deal with, issues of that magnitude? Let's be frank here: there are no "soft issues" here. In Wards 5 and 6, people lock themselves into their houses at 9pm for fear of being assaulted. In Wards 5 and 6, the municipality does not believe it is their responsibility to dispose of people's rubbish and make sure ablution facilities are clean. In Wards 5 and 6, there are scores of amazing people who look after society's most vulnerable - the orphaned and the abandoned elderly - who are let down by bad government, and a general malaise in their community. A lack of investment in infrastructure leads to obscene levels of unemployment, which in turn leads to desperate men and women turning to alcohol and drugs for catharsis and escape.
Again I ask, how is a group of outsider student journalists equipped to deal with this?
South Africa has a habit of becoming a drunkenly optimistic nation, fuelled by gestures and catchphrases. We'll wear national colours and football jerseys; white people will unironically and awkwardly introduce shaap and heita into their vocabulary; we'll make up awful dances in a ham-fisted attempt to foster national unity. These are empty gestures.
I came to the conclusion that much of the JDD-CMP course was also an empty gesture on Tuesday night, the night on which we decided to lug a whole bunch of equipment up to the (still-yet-unnamed) Extension 9 for a second community meeting at which we would showcase all of the hyperlocal journalism we had produced for Wards 5 and 6. It was attended by about 80-90 people, which wasn't a particularly bad turnout, but much of the audiovisual aspects of the meeting were nullified by the constant chattering of children in the hall. Coupled with bad acoustics, I don't think many of the adults or other interested parties could really hear what was going on. (I wouldn't have been able to if I hadn't seen the work prior to the screening.)
It was disappointing, yes, that a few months of work would come down to this rather impotent spectacle. Sure, there are many positive things we have done, including helping out a few very worthy establishments, and giving an audience to Ward 5's community policing forum, and these are things to be satisfied about.
But, frankly, to think that the aggregate of this entire experience is a positive would be stupid. Sure, all of us have probably learned a lot in terms of skills and, hopefully, their outlook on the very real issues that South Africa faces. Was this process necessary to do that? No. Were these the intended outcomes of the course? Hopefully not.
A throwing around of buzzwords like "hyperlocal" and "deliberative public space" does not equate to tangible process, in the journalistic realm, or the social realm, or otherwise. While I believe that public journalism does serve a purpose, a group of students aren't going to change anything with an unwilling government and a demoralised populace in tow. Maybe the Daily Dispatch, a newspaper of considerable weight and influence, can do this, but even their efforts were halted by the incompetence and in-fighting of the Buffalo City Municipality.
It's romantic to suggest that we could have ever affected any sort of far-reaching change given our working context: a group of 20 students to cover 10 000 people who we know very little about in the space of 4 months, punctuated by holidays and other work to do? Fat chance.
And if you think that's pessimistic, I suggest you start to get your hands dirty, you know, like the rest of the few remarkable men and women on the ground that we have met over the past few months.
Although the course began with a burst of optimism, I believe that the gravity of the situations in which many local citizens are forced to live soon hit home and greatly demoralised those of us who weren't completely overtaken by the fallacious ideas of a readily-developing public sphere, which we could use to foster deliberation between those who need help and those who can give them help. The fact of the matter is that many people are living in appalling conditions to which no human being should be subjected. One could qualify the way things are by invoking South Africa's history, or any number of ghosts from eras past, but doing so only offers excuses for the mediocrity and incompetence of this country's governance. I believe we try to offer excuses in the form of platitudes like, "every country has its problems" or "there is also poverty and crime in America", or many other easily-quotable (and glaringly obvious) truisms. I do not believe there are many places in the world in which schoolchildren sodomise each other, as has been the case in one of the wards that a JDD-CMP group had to practice public journalism.
I know, as South Africans, we may have a lowered sensitivity towards really horrible things, but I believe this bears repeating:
In one of Makana's wards, there are schoolchildren that sodomise other schoolchildren.
In what ways are student journalists, who have been plied with vague direction in their vocation by three years of below-par university instruction and (on average) two weeks of work experience, supposed to deal with this?
In whose mind, littered with idealistic thoughts, are we prepared to successfully deal with reporting on, and helping members in that community deal with, issues of that magnitude? Let's be frank here: there are no "soft issues" here. In Wards 5 and 6, people lock themselves into their houses at 9pm for fear of being assaulted. In Wards 5 and 6, the municipality does not believe it is their responsibility to dispose of people's rubbish and make sure ablution facilities are clean. In Wards 5 and 6, there are scores of amazing people who look after society's most vulnerable - the orphaned and the abandoned elderly - who are let down by bad government, and a general malaise in their community. A lack of investment in infrastructure leads to obscene levels of unemployment, which in turn leads to desperate men and women turning to alcohol and drugs for catharsis and escape.
Again I ask, how is a group of outsider student journalists equipped to deal with this?
South Africa has a habit of becoming a drunkenly optimistic nation, fuelled by gestures and catchphrases. We'll wear national colours and football jerseys; white people will unironically and awkwardly introduce shaap and heita into their vocabulary; we'll make up awful dances in a ham-fisted attempt to foster national unity. These are empty gestures.
I came to the conclusion that much of the JDD-CMP course was also an empty gesture on Tuesday night, the night on which we decided to lug a whole bunch of equipment up to the (still-yet-unnamed) Extension 9 for a second community meeting at which we would showcase all of the hyperlocal journalism we had produced for Wards 5 and 6. It was attended by about 80-90 people, which wasn't a particularly bad turnout, but much of the audiovisual aspects of the meeting were nullified by the constant chattering of children in the hall. Coupled with bad acoustics, I don't think many of the adults or other interested parties could really hear what was going on. (I wouldn't have been able to if I hadn't seen the work prior to the screening.)
It was disappointing, yes, that a few months of work would come down to this rather impotent spectacle. Sure, there are many positive things we have done, including helping out a few very worthy establishments, and giving an audience to Ward 5's community policing forum, and these are things to be satisfied about.
But, frankly, to think that the aggregate of this entire experience is a positive would be stupid. Sure, all of us have probably learned a lot in terms of skills and, hopefully, their outlook on the very real issues that South Africa faces. Was this process necessary to do that? No. Were these the intended outcomes of the course? Hopefully not.
A throwing around of buzzwords like "hyperlocal" and "deliberative public space" does not equate to tangible process, in the journalistic realm, or the social realm, or otherwise. While I believe that public journalism does serve a purpose, a group of students aren't going to change anything with an unwilling government and a demoralised populace in tow. Maybe the Daily Dispatch, a newspaper of considerable weight and influence, can do this, but even their efforts were halted by the incompetence and in-fighting of the Buffalo City Municipality.
It's romantic to suggest that we could have ever affected any sort of far-reaching change given our working context: a group of 20 students to cover 10 000 people who we know very little about in the space of 4 months, punctuated by holidays and other work to do? Fat chance.
And if you think that's pessimistic, I suggest you start to get your hands dirty, you know, like the rest of the few remarkable men and women on the ground that we have met over the past few months.
Maybe we did it, maybe we didn't?
Second semester of JMS 3 was set out to be the JDD-CMP course. So we’d first dive into the theories of Public Journalism and Journalism Democracy and Development and then use these theories as the basis of our projects for Critical Media Production. Initially it sounded like a solid plan – learn some theories and then get a real chance to put them into practise. But this was quickly disillusioned when we realised that we were being sent out to specific areas in and around Grahamstown to arrange community meetings from which we could source stories for our projects. When the plan was summarised it was apparent that we’d have to rile people up and get their support at a community meeting, encourage them to discuss their problems and then use these stories for our benefit.
Looking back on the past few months, I can see that I was being judgemental and silly to think that was what our lecturers were sending us out to do. Don’t get me wrong, I still completely disagree with the course, how it’s run and what the overall outcomes are, but all the parts in between were really great and a lot more worthwhile than I could have ever foreseen.
As a Photojournalism student, I worked in partnership with Marcelle (a radio student) and we created a Soundslide combining my photographs with her audio clips. A major issue at our community meeting was the bad health condition of the area, most specifically in Extension 9, Transit Camp. More specifically, we dealt with bad water conditions, severe litter problems and the overall results of this squalor. We created profiles on three women from the area who spoke to us about their personal experiences, how they are trying to help their community themselves, as well as what they would like the government to do for them. We then took this piece to the Makana municipality and spoke to Media and Communications Officer, Thandy Mathibesi in order to hear the government’s side of the story. It was really great actually managing to get comment from a municipal officer, but in the end Mathebesi was doing little more than blaming the citizens for their lack of ‘responsibility’ and doing his best to cover his own tracks. In the end though, I feel like we managed to create a well-balanced story that illustrates the municipality’s lack of contribution, reflecting on the dire consequences this all has on the people of the community.
Overall, the JDD-CMP course was very antagonising. There were many obstacles: government’s unwillingness to participate, having to co-ordinate a group of 20 students with very busy timetables and the language barrier between most of us and the people of Joza. But we were a really great combination of people and our group settled into this project with ease, managing to achieve success at the end of every section. Our community meeting was well attended. We worked on very serious issues and hopefully managed to help give the people of the township a voice in Grahamstown. I don’t really know if we can believe that our little pieces of work are going to make any sort of difference. But maybe they will in smaller ways. And if we don’t manage to make a difference now, perhaps the third year students of years to come will have enough to learn from and make more of a success out of this somewhat dishevelled course.
Looking back on the past few months, I can see that I was being judgemental and silly to think that was what our lecturers were sending us out to do. Don’t get me wrong, I still completely disagree with the course, how it’s run and what the overall outcomes are, but all the parts in between were really great and a lot more worthwhile than I could have ever foreseen.
As a Photojournalism student, I worked in partnership with Marcelle (a radio student) and we created a Soundslide combining my photographs with her audio clips. A major issue at our community meeting was the bad health condition of the area, most specifically in Extension 9, Transit Camp. More specifically, we dealt with bad water conditions, severe litter problems and the overall results of this squalor. We created profiles on three women from the area who spoke to us about their personal experiences, how they are trying to help their community themselves, as well as what they would like the government to do for them. We then took this piece to the Makana municipality and spoke to Media and Communications Officer, Thandy Mathibesi in order to hear the government’s side of the story. It was really great actually managing to get comment from a municipal officer, but in the end Mathebesi was doing little more than blaming the citizens for their lack of ‘responsibility’ and doing his best to cover his own tracks. In the end though, I feel like we managed to create a well-balanced story that illustrates the municipality’s lack of contribution, reflecting on the dire consequences this all has on the people of the community.
Overall, the JDD-CMP course was very antagonising. There were many obstacles: government’s unwillingness to participate, having to co-ordinate a group of 20 students with very busy timetables and the language barrier between most of us and the people of Joza. But we were a really great combination of people and our group settled into this project with ease, managing to achieve success at the end of every section. Our community meeting was well attended. We worked on very serious issues and hopefully managed to help give the people of the township a voice in Grahamstown. I don’t really know if we can believe that our little pieces of work are going to make any sort of difference. But maybe they will in smaller ways. And if we don’t manage to make a difference now, perhaps the third year students of years to come will have enough to learn from and make more of a success out of this somewhat dishevelled course.
And thats a wrap!
So when we were told that we had to get into groups to do these CMP JDD assignments, I was quite shocked at the size of the groups that we had to be in. as well as the expectations that were thus place on us to go out there and make a difference.
So students no matter what we make think I personally felt that we were invaders… who were we to go into other peoples life and assume they had problems, assume that they needed our help…
More maybe the other side of that coin was that yes we do go into these communities… “All bright eyed and bushy tailed” but what capacity did we have to make a difference.
Yes we did have the power to generate an awareness, be had the skills to produce the content that we wanted successfully. But what real change would we be able to generate.
We have people the voices but also I feel we built up a lot of false hope within these communities, yes we may have had the best of intentions, but it is with that we were yet again another group of students, outsiders, invaders who took what we needed and left.
In extension 4 Joza, my photojourn partner Megan Hollis and I set out wanting to make a difference, just like the rest of the group. We found Makanshop, age in action and aged residential facility which we found did in fact needed a helping hand in order to stay running.
We were able to gain some help, but I fear that this would not be something sustainable. What is the point of rending help if we can’t ensure anything at all? Thus we felt with a feeling of guilty fulfilment and also a sense of hopelessness.
On the 19th of October we held our final community meeting and were also well attended. But I do feel that the relevant parties who needed to be there weren’t.
I’m glad I was given the opportunity to work the field, and put this whole concept of public journalism into practice, though I do believe with more time we would have been more we could have been more effective. Maybe public journalism is for me… maybe mot, but it is an aspect that I would like to experiment with further.
In the same breath although in the beginning I have to say that the size of the group we were to work in concerned me, but at the end of this I believe that like a well oiled machine (one with a lot of heart) our group did well, and great work. The efforts and contributions that they have made with individuals in these communities can safely be said that it was enriching for all involved.
So students no matter what we make think I personally felt that we were invaders… who were we to go into other peoples life and assume they had problems, assume that they needed our help…
More maybe the other side of that coin was that yes we do go into these communities… “All bright eyed and bushy tailed” but what capacity did we have to make a difference.
Yes we did have the power to generate an awareness, be had the skills to produce the content that we wanted successfully. But what real change would we be able to generate.
We have people the voices but also I feel we built up a lot of false hope within these communities, yes we may have had the best of intentions, but it is with that we were yet again another group of students, outsiders, invaders who took what we needed and left.
In extension 4 Joza, my photojourn partner Megan Hollis and I set out wanting to make a difference, just like the rest of the group. We found Makanshop, age in action and aged residential facility which we found did in fact needed a helping hand in order to stay running.
We were able to gain some help, but I fear that this would not be something sustainable. What is the point of rending help if we can’t ensure anything at all? Thus we felt with a feeling of guilty fulfilment and also a sense of hopelessness.
On the 19th of October we held our final community meeting and were also well attended. But I do feel that the relevant parties who needed to be there weren’t.
I’m glad I was given the opportunity to work the field, and put this whole concept of public journalism into practice, though I do believe with more time we would have been more we could have been more effective. Maybe public journalism is for me… maybe mot, but it is an aspect that I would like to experiment with further.
In the same breath although in the beginning I have to say that the size of the group we were to work in concerned me, but at the end of this I believe that like a well oiled machine (one with a lot of heart) our group did well, and great work. The efforts and contributions that they have made with individuals in these communities can safely be said that it was enriching for all involved.
Talking and Listening. Changing?
To be quite honest, after our second community meeting on the 19th of October, I felt like a pretentious powerless twat. There we were, in the Extension 9 community hall, showing heartbreaking videos, radio clips and soundslides to the heartbroken people we had produced them for. Being confronted by their circumstances, and having them broadcast and magnified on a big screen, could only have made those people feel worse about their life situations.
After the lights turned on, people shuffled out of the hall – in silence. I think people were expecting answers, which we did not give them.
This is one of my fundamental problems with this course. We raise people’s expectations, people’s hope, only to disappoint them in the end. Building “real” connections with people who don’t know that after 3 or 4 visits we will more than likely return to our safe little bubbles and not spare them another thought. Unfortunately, I fear, that will be the outcome for most.
Excuse my negativity. I know that in the idealistic sense this course is supposed to get you to really connect and make a difference in real people’s lives – to pop out of your bubble and into the real world. It did, and I am thankful to be given this opportunity. I just feel like it should be chosen, and not made mandatory, because public journalism is not for everyone, and it is superficial to force people to try and make a difference – rather 3 people with their hearts really in the right place, then 10 grudgingly trekking through the township, that’s how I feel anyway.
Onto the positives!
On the whole, I feel like the foundations for real change to potentially occur in Wards 5 and 6 were laid. If we did one good thing, it was to create connections and awareness between people. For example, the Community Policing Forum was a largely unknown entity, and the Ward Councillors phone numbers were probably not revealed to many . When we were gathering feedback from our wall newspapers, the spaza shops we went to said that people had been taking down phone numbers. I thought that was a great success. In the end, I really hope some accountability comes out of our journalism. Accountability and agency. I hope people feel like they really can do something positive for themselves, without having to rely on the municipality, who have proven to be by and large ineffectual.
I think this course is extremely important, I just wish that there was a way to ensure positive social change - to make the municipality act immediately!
I think the foundations for this course should be laid from the beginning of first year. The gap between theory and practice is far too large in this department – we don’t get out and do enough journalism. What I found most beneficial was the transformation of our views toward working in the township. Once thought of as totally different worlds, this course made me realise that people are people, wherever they are. Everyone wants the same thing: to be respected and live a decent life. We got people to talk. Let’s hope the right people listen.
After the lights turned on, people shuffled out of the hall – in silence. I think people were expecting answers, which we did not give them.
This is one of my fundamental problems with this course. We raise people’s expectations, people’s hope, only to disappoint them in the end. Building “real” connections with people who don’t know that after 3 or 4 visits we will more than likely return to our safe little bubbles and not spare them another thought. Unfortunately, I fear, that will be the outcome for most.
Excuse my negativity. I know that in the idealistic sense this course is supposed to get you to really connect and make a difference in real people’s lives – to pop out of your bubble and into the real world. It did, and I am thankful to be given this opportunity. I just feel like it should be chosen, and not made mandatory, because public journalism is not for everyone, and it is superficial to force people to try and make a difference – rather 3 people with their hearts really in the right place, then 10 grudgingly trekking through the township, that’s how I feel anyway.
Onto the positives!
On the whole, I feel like the foundations for real change to potentially occur in Wards 5 and 6 were laid. If we did one good thing, it was to create connections and awareness between people. For example, the Community Policing Forum was a largely unknown entity, and the Ward Councillors phone numbers were probably not revealed to many . When we were gathering feedback from our wall newspapers, the spaza shops we went to said that people had been taking down phone numbers. I thought that was a great success. In the end, I really hope some accountability comes out of our journalism. Accountability and agency. I hope people feel like they really can do something positive for themselves, without having to rely on the municipality, who have proven to be by and large ineffectual.
I think this course is extremely important, I just wish that there was a way to ensure positive social change - to make the municipality act immediately!
I think the foundations for this course should be laid from the beginning of first year. The gap between theory and practice is far too large in this department – we don’t get out and do enough journalism. What I found most beneficial was the transformation of our views toward working in the township. Once thought of as totally different worlds, this course made me realise that people are people, wherever they are. Everyone wants the same thing: to be respected and live a decent life. We got people to talk. Let’s hope the right people listen.
Closing thoughts
By Kyle Robinson
This course provided us, as journalism students, to really engage with the community we're covering and experiment with different forms of journalism. This was really exciting, because for over two years we had been streamlined through mainstream, conventional journalism, and now was our chance to do things differently in a way that might better serve the community. That, after all, was the ultimate aim of public journalism - to serve the community in whichever way possible using whatever avenues we have as journalists. The first public meeting we held in the community hall in extension nine was a huge success. The number of people who attended far succeeded our expectations. On top of that, they were not afraid to voice their opinion on matters, and raise important issues regarding the welfare of the community. We managed to set up a platform for public deliberation, and now it was up to us to find the best means of representing their concerns and find solutions.
It is this last point where I believe we failed. Although, it must be emphasised, given the time and resources it was unrealistic to expect any sort of major change to occur. Nevertheless, we at least hoped to make the decision-makers aware of these problems and propel them to take action - and this, unfortunately, did not happen. I worked with Andy on a very different kind of documentary to anything we had done or even seen before. There were no voices of authority giving perspective on the issue. Instead we wanted to focus on individual voices from the community, and concentrate completely on their problems and pleas to the municipality. They were given the chance to tell their story however they wanted, and I believe Andy I really succeeded in telling that story in a simple, straightforward manner. It is a piece not meant to be viewed by the community – after all, the citizens of ward 6 are fully aware of the monumental problems highlighted in the video. No, this piece was meant for decision-makers - the police, the municipality, the housing department etc. The voices in the video are making a direct plea to them - and they must respond. It was up to us to make sure this happened. Unfortunately, the municipality refused to see us, after countless attempts to speak to them. They would not give us even 7 minutes of their time to watch something that concerned the people they were supposedly representing. This was shocking. I felt we needed to badger them for months on end till they eventually had no choice but to face us. This is what needed to happen. But as already said, time was not on our side.
In the end all we could no was show our work back to the community - to show them how much effort we have put in to try and voice their issues. I believe that the 50 or 60 people who attended did appreciate the projects. From the ward tabloid to the sound slides to the TV packages, everything was of an extremely high standard. It proved that we could go out into the world as journalists and behave like professionals. The community, I'm sure, respected us for all the hard work. However, I could feel the question in the community hall hovering in all the citizen's mouths: 'So what are we going to do about all this?'. I really hoped no one would ask this question because we simply had no answers. The one problem we found at this meeting was that there was not enough feedback. People were happy to watch the material, but did not wish to share their opinions and comments. I think if we had managed to get the municipality to contribute in the process of finding solutions, more people would have wanted to speak up. Instead it felt like this heavy atmosphere of gloom settled over everyone as we realised that acknowledgement of the issues was not enough. The citizens of ward 5 and 6 still have to deal witht their problems everyday, and nothing has come of our efforts.
To end off, I would like to emphasise that our efforts were not completely in vain. We have highlighted really important issues, and our work is available in public libraries and in the homes of respected community members. There is room for people to take up what we left and begin the process again. I only wish there was more time and money to fund something that was more on-going from outside. But it was a great semester, and I really learnt a lot about the value of journalism and its role in finding solutions to problems.
This course provided us, as journalism students, to really engage with the community we're covering and experiment with different forms of journalism. This was really exciting, because for over two years we had been streamlined through mainstream, conventional journalism, and now was our chance to do things differently in a way that might better serve the community. That, after all, was the ultimate aim of public journalism - to serve the community in whichever way possible using whatever avenues we have as journalists. The first public meeting we held in the community hall in extension nine was a huge success. The number of people who attended far succeeded our expectations. On top of that, they were not afraid to voice their opinion on matters, and raise important issues regarding the welfare of the community. We managed to set up a platform for public deliberation, and now it was up to us to find the best means of representing their concerns and find solutions.
It is this last point where I believe we failed. Although, it must be emphasised, given the time and resources it was unrealistic to expect any sort of major change to occur. Nevertheless, we at least hoped to make the decision-makers aware of these problems and propel them to take action - and this, unfortunately, did not happen. I worked with Andy on a very different kind of documentary to anything we had done or even seen before. There were no voices of authority giving perspective on the issue. Instead we wanted to focus on individual voices from the community, and concentrate completely on their problems and pleas to the municipality. They were given the chance to tell their story however they wanted, and I believe Andy I really succeeded in telling that story in a simple, straightforward manner. It is a piece not meant to be viewed by the community – after all, the citizens of ward 6 are fully aware of the monumental problems highlighted in the video. No, this piece was meant for decision-makers - the police, the municipality, the housing department etc. The voices in the video are making a direct plea to them - and they must respond. It was up to us to make sure this happened. Unfortunately, the municipality refused to see us, after countless attempts to speak to them. They would not give us even 7 minutes of their time to watch something that concerned the people they were supposedly representing. This was shocking. I felt we needed to badger them for months on end till they eventually had no choice but to face us. This is what needed to happen. But as already said, time was not on our side.
In the end all we could no was show our work back to the community - to show them how much effort we have put in to try and voice their issues. I believe that the 50 or 60 people who attended did appreciate the projects. From the ward tabloid to the sound slides to the TV packages, everything was of an extremely high standard. It proved that we could go out into the world as journalists and behave like professionals. The community, I'm sure, respected us for all the hard work. However, I could feel the question in the community hall hovering in all the citizen's mouths: 'So what are we going to do about all this?'. I really hoped no one would ask this question because we simply had no answers. The one problem we found at this meeting was that there was not enough feedback. People were happy to watch the material, but did not wish to share their opinions and comments. I think if we had managed to get the municipality to contribute in the process of finding solutions, more people would have wanted to speak up. Instead it felt like this heavy atmosphere of gloom settled over everyone as we realised that acknowledgement of the issues was not enough. The citizens of ward 5 and 6 still have to deal witht their problems everyday, and nothing has come of our efforts.
To end off, I would like to emphasise that our efforts were not completely in vain. We have highlighted really important issues, and our work is available in public libraries and in the homes of respected community members. There is room for people to take up what we left and begin the process again. I only wish there was more time and money to fund something that was more on-going from outside. But it was a great semester, and I really learnt a lot about the value of journalism and its role in finding solutions to problems.
That's A Wrap
By: Bradley Janssen
I am not going to lie to you it has been a long haul. When the department suggested undertaking such a project most of the class looked around in disgust because we knew the few hours we had to take time off, like going to the beach, would now go up in smoke. However, we all went in with the idea of the the glass being half full and tried to make the most of what we were expected to do. That's when we entered our first community meeting. It was held on the last Wednesday of third term and I think everyone got a sudden wake up call when over 120 people arrived to deliberate and talk about their problems. The fact that all these people took time out of their day to come to this meeting told me one thing. We needed to stop dreaming of the beach and start realising the responsibility we have on our shoulders. These people were desperate and needed help.
That started the weeks of investigation and the realisation soon hit home that all we were was a pin drop in a sea of issues. the investigations and stories went on with mine been about crime in the area. I think the most shocking issue was that the people who the community was supposed to be looking for help were not interested and made up the most interesting excuses. However, we pushed on and tried to structure our stories in light of the public journalism theory that we have been learning and trying to implement. One of these issues had to do was get the community to formulate solutions to the problems they had.
That then became our next assignment brief and we went back into the areas with our stories to hear what they had to say. The amount of suggestions that came out of those meetings was incredible. We felt that we were doing the work the people in power were supposed to be doing. We were laying the issues on a golden platter. All the authorities had to do was pick up the phone and make a couple phone calls. It did not even mean that had to leave their second lunch of fried chicken. But again they refused to listen and again they confirmed the issue all along. They just do not seem to be interested!!
So with this in mind the group decided to go back into ward 5 in Grahamstown and show the community what we had done. As in the first meeting we managed to arrange equipment at the last minute and as in the last public meeting had problems setting it up. However, on both occasions, and with a full team of people who think they know what is going on, managed to get something up.
The meeting was not as well attended as the first one but we still had in excess of 60 people. The difference here as well is that we had more children attending the meeting. A police official and high status members of the community were also in attendance. The other issue at hand here was that there was not as much deliberation and debate as we would have hoped. Our final concluding project is that we are going to hand out a copy of all the material to strategic places over the community so it can viewed over and over.
As a last thought, I think we entered this project with high ambitions and big ideas. However, with the time and resources we had, I think some of those ideas became a bit too ambitious. I still felt I had a job to perform, tough, and had a serious responsibility on my hands. I needed to put in the time and I think we did. The journalistic pieces we produced really got to the crux of the issue. I think we as journalism students have had a fantastic opportunity to discover ground breaking journalism ideas and have laid the platform for the next set of students to take it to the next level.
I am not going to lie to you it has been a long haul. When the department suggested undertaking such a project most of the class looked around in disgust because we knew the few hours we had to take time off, like going to the beach, would now go up in smoke. However, we all went in with the idea of the the glass being half full and tried to make the most of what we were expected to do. That's when we entered our first community meeting. It was held on the last Wednesday of third term and I think everyone got a sudden wake up call when over 120 people arrived to deliberate and talk about their problems. The fact that all these people took time out of their day to come to this meeting told me one thing. We needed to stop dreaming of the beach and start realising the responsibility we have on our shoulders. These people were desperate and needed help.
That started the weeks of investigation and the realisation soon hit home that all we were was a pin drop in a sea of issues. the investigations and stories went on with mine been about crime in the area. I think the most shocking issue was that the people who the community was supposed to be looking for help were not interested and made up the most interesting excuses. However, we pushed on and tried to structure our stories in light of the public journalism theory that we have been learning and trying to implement. One of these issues had to do was get the community to formulate solutions to the problems they had.
That then became our next assignment brief and we went back into the areas with our stories to hear what they had to say. The amount of suggestions that came out of those meetings was incredible. We felt that we were doing the work the people in power were supposed to be doing. We were laying the issues on a golden platter. All the authorities had to do was pick up the phone and make a couple phone calls. It did not even mean that had to leave their second lunch of fried chicken. But again they refused to listen and again they confirmed the issue all along. They just do not seem to be interested!!
So with this in mind the group decided to go back into ward 5 in Grahamstown and show the community what we had done. As in the first meeting we managed to arrange equipment at the last minute and as in the last public meeting had problems setting it up. However, on both occasions, and with a full team of people who think they know what is going on, managed to get something up.
The meeting was not as well attended as the first one but we still had in excess of 60 people. The difference here as well is that we had more children attending the meeting. A police official and high status members of the community were also in attendance. The other issue at hand here was that there was not as much deliberation and debate as we would have hoped. Our final concluding project is that we are going to hand out a copy of all the material to strategic places over the community so it can viewed over and over.
As a last thought, I think we entered this project with high ambitions and big ideas. However, with the time and resources we had, I think some of those ideas became a bit too ambitious. I still felt I had a job to perform, tough, and had a serious responsibility on my hands. I needed to put in the time and I think we did. The journalistic pieces we produced really got to the crux of the issue. I think we as journalism students have had a fantastic opportunity to discover ground breaking journalism ideas and have laid the platform for the next set of students to take it to the next level.
Ripples of change
By Tarryn Liddell
As our Journalism, Development and Democracy course comes to a close today I begin to think back to the start of this course. Confusion and trepidation over the mammoth task of implementing civic journalism in wards 5 and 6 lay ahead of us. The biggest concern that our group, Masithetheni, had was that if we were going to do this project we wanted to do it right and make sure that we were not going to exploit the people living in wards 5 and 6 for our own gain (that being marks). We decided from the outset that ours would be a community strengthening project that had an ultimate goal of acting as facilitators in an attempt to bridge the gap between actual communities and the people in positions of power. We hoped to establish sustainable ways for the communities to get their voices heard in public spaces that allowed for deliberation over ‘real’ issues.
The soundslide project that I worked on with my radio partner, Grant Bisset, was a story concerning the Joza Indoor Sports Centre in ward 6. We tried to do a more positive piece that showed the great potential that sports centres like the Joza one have in keeping children safe and off the streets. We visited the sports centre on numerous occasions in order to experience and record the activities that occur there. We witnessed first hand how good the sports centre can be and the not so good condition that it currently finds itself in.
After almost three months of investigating, photographing and recording all our work culminated in a public meeting held in the extension 9 community hall on Tuesday 19 October. This was attended by mostly youth in the area, but was a way for us to show the community the work we had produced in an effort to raise awareness around their concerns. The feedback that we received from this meeting was that the residents of wards 5 and 6 liked the work that we had done and believe that we are on the right track to try and help them help themselves, but that they were frustrated at the lack of response from official institutions like the Makana Municipality and the Police force.
Although I do not personally feel that we have made a huge difference in the lives of the people living in wards 5 and 6 I do feel that we have generated awareness over the fact that communication between communities and government needs to be improved and that civic journalism just might be a solution. I believe that civic journalism is a positive progression of journalistic traditions as one of my team members has said ‘things do not change, we change’ and civic journalism has definitely opened my eyes and changed the way that I will do journalism in the future.
Did we in fact ‘close the circle’ as our lecturer, Rod Amner, likes to put it? Well if by closing the circle he is referring to achieving what we set out to do I would say that despite our best efforts the work that we did in wards 5 and 6 is but a mere drop in the ocean. Only one of our production pieces actually managed to achieve something. The soundslide on the ward 6 old age home got the Rotaract involved and arranged sponsorship for them. Other productions were good and have the potential to cause an impact and perhaps even some change if we had the time and the authority to get them seen by the right people. As the situation stands our work is at present just creating small ripples that all we can do is hope that one day they turn into waves.
As our Journalism, Development and Democracy course comes to a close today I begin to think back to the start of this course. Confusion and trepidation over the mammoth task of implementing civic journalism in wards 5 and 6 lay ahead of us. The biggest concern that our group, Masithetheni, had was that if we were going to do this project we wanted to do it right and make sure that we were not going to exploit the people living in wards 5 and 6 for our own gain (that being marks). We decided from the outset that ours would be a community strengthening project that had an ultimate goal of acting as facilitators in an attempt to bridge the gap between actual communities and the people in positions of power. We hoped to establish sustainable ways for the communities to get their voices heard in public spaces that allowed for deliberation over ‘real’ issues.
The soundslide project that I worked on with my radio partner, Grant Bisset, was a story concerning the Joza Indoor Sports Centre in ward 6. We tried to do a more positive piece that showed the great potential that sports centres like the Joza one have in keeping children safe and off the streets. We visited the sports centre on numerous occasions in order to experience and record the activities that occur there. We witnessed first hand how good the sports centre can be and the not so good condition that it currently finds itself in.
After almost three months of investigating, photographing and recording all our work culminated in a public meeting held in the extension 9 community hall on Tuesday 19 October. This was attended by mostly youth in the area, but was a way for us to show the community the work we had produced in an effort to raise awareness around their concerns. The feedback that we received from this meeting was that the residents of wards 5 and 6 liked the work that we had done and believe that we are on the right track to try and help them help themselves, but that they were frustrated at the lack of response from official institutions like the Makana Municipality and the Police force.
Although I do not personally feel that we have made a huge difference in the lives of the people living in wards 5 and 6 I do feel that we have generated awareness over the fact that communication between communities and government needs to be improved and that civic journalism just might be a solution. I believe that civic journalism is a positive progression of journalistic traditions as one of my team members has said ‘things do not change, we change’ and civic journalism has definitely opened my eyes and changed the way that I will do journalism in the future.
Did we in fact ‘close the circle’ as our lecturer, Rod Amner, likes to put it? Well if by closing the circle he is referring to achieving what we set out to do I would say that despite our best efforts the work that we did in wards 5 and 6 is but a mere drop in the ocean. Only one of our production pieces actually managed to achieve something. The soundslide on the ward 6 old age home got the Rotaract involved and arranged sponsorship for them. Other productions were good and have the potential to cause an impact and perhaps even some change if we had the time and the authority to get them seen by the right people. As the situation stands our work is at present just creating small ripples that all we can do is hope that one day they turn into waves.
Over and Out - Marcelle Liron
In July 2010 we were introduced to a new Journalism and Media Studies 3 course which would run for the last semester of our undergraduate year, JDD-CMP. We were required to create a platform for the voices of Makana residents to be heard utilising what we had learnt about development journalism and the grass-roots approach to reporting and media production. Participating in the Critical Media Production section of the Journalism, Democracy and Development course over the last semester has encouraged me to go over and beyond what I think is a 'big deal'. While we all voice our own opinions during discussions and debates, whether we rate or slate Rod Amner's course as a whole, one thing my group could agree on was the fact that empowering the people of Joza was to be the most beneficial option regarding our vision and mission.
My partner and I created a Soundslide (a merging of photographic evidence and audio interviews) regarding the health issues in Ward 5, one of the issues that residents had brought up at our first community meeting held in August. This media output was developed in two stages which gave me the chance to expand on the audio and conduct an interview with Thandy Matebese, the Media and Communications Officer for Makana Municipality, who agreed with our sentiments, saying that "it’s not [always] the government’s responsibility". Once our group had completed their videos, documentaries, wall newspapers and Soundslides, we returned to the Extension 9 community hall where we had held our first community meeting. We held an exhibition to showcase our work and while the turnout was much smaller than our previous meeting, the audience was still large. There were a few familiar faces from around the Wards but some people did start leaving before all our productions had been viewed. This seemed to sum up just how little faith the youth (who made up the majority of our audience) had in a project like this.
While I may have had high hopes for the change we could bring to people’s lives, it seems that our positions as student journalists definitely hindered the effect our work had on the Ward 5 and 6 communities. Our government has many issues at hand and there are processes which need to be followed to ensure that our country runs smoothly however, the lack of co-operation between those in positions of political power and journalists is affecting the well-being of those living on and below the poverty line. I can only hope that our work within these Wards will spark a sense of empowerment amongst the people and encourage them to help themselves.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Drawing to a close
by Stephane Meintjes
As the Critical Media Production in association with Journalism, Democracy and Development course draw to a close I have had the opportunity to realise that there is only so much one can do.
The purpose of this course for our group was to create a platform to strengthen the communities we were given, getting them involved and giving them a voice to air their issues, opinions and concerns. We wanted to create awareness and supply them with the means to help their own cause and highlighting those in the areas already doing so. To a large extent I think that we succeeded in this project.
Our interactions with these individuals over the last three months have showed them that their issues, concerns and opinions do matter and that they do have a voice. We made the community aware of organisations and people who are in a position to help them or advise them on how to deal with issues.
Personally I found this course a rewarding one as I was shown a different way of creating media outputs by really taking the time to become acquainted with an area and people that I am covering for a story. By using the citizens' agenda to determine our media product for the term, I feel that we have succeeded in creating an output which is relevant to the people living in the area.
On Tuesday evening our group managed to have our second and final public meeting in the Ext 9 Community Hall. We were able to host a viewing evening for the residents of the area showcasing our finished products. The turnout on the evening was not as well attended as our last meeting. However, I think that we had a substantial turnout. The audience was primarily made up of the youth from the area, but there were some familiar faces from our previous meeting who also attended.
During the course of the showing I could not help but notice that some people did not stay for the entire viewing and it started to become clear to me, as the hall filled out after the conclusion of our productions, about what we really had achieved.
With no concrete feedback from the residents themselves on what we had showcased, I felt that our task had only made a difference to those we had showcased in our pieces. While I may be wrong in my assertion, I felt that they, themselves, did not really care about the issues at hand.
We have spent the last three months working to establish connections within these communities and have tried our best to make whatever difference we could. Even though our efforts with the Municipality to a large extent came to nothing, we, or at least I, really did care about my issue as well as the issues of my fellow student journalists.
I do, however, realise that the reason for this assertion might have been due to a variety of factors. Perhaps if we were able to get the same residents who attended our first meeting to see/view the media outputs we would have been able to get better feedback as they helped us to create our citizens' agenda. Furthermore, if we had more adults rather than youths at the meeting they might have been able to give us some feedback. However, those that were there did not make any comments about our work. The final factor which could be a reason as to why I felt that the residents did not really care, is the fact that they may be so de-sensitized to their own issues that whilst we realise the severity of the issues dealt with, the situation has become part and parcel of their existence.
In conclusion, whilst in the particular public meeting not much feedback was given, at our focus groups held in smaller groups I do feel that we did make some progress by getting the people to imobilize themselves.
However, on a more positive note, Mr Nase, one of the Ward Councillors who attended the public meeting said at the end that what we had done did make some difference, even if it was just to highlight and provide proof of what is really going on in the Wards. I think that if we had been able to show these pieces to a co-operative local government, perhaps we could have sparked debate amongst themselves as well as, hopefully, prompted them to want to do more.
As the Critical Media Production in association with Journalism, Democracy and Development course draw to a close I have had the opportunity to realise that there is only so much one can do.
The purpose of this course for our group was to create a platform to strengthen the communities we were given, getting them involved and giving them a voice to air their issues, opinions and concerns. We wanted to create awareness and supply them with the means to help their own cause and highlighting those in the areas already doing so. To a large extent I think that we succeeded in this project.
Our interactions with these individuals over the last three months have showed them that their issues, concerns and opinions do matter and that they do have a voice. We made the community aware of organisations and people who are in a position to help them or advise them on how to deal with issues.
Personally I found this course a rewarding one as I was shown a different way of creating media outputs by really taking the time to become acquainted with an area and people that I am covering for a story. By using the citizens' agenda to determine our media product for the term, I feel that we have succeeded in creating an output which is relevant to the people living in the area.
On Tuesday evening our group managed to have our second and final public meeting in the Ext 9 Community Hall. We were able to host a viewing evening for the residents of the area showcasing our finished products. The turnout on the evening was not as well attended as our last meeting. However, I think that we had a substantial turnout. The audience was primarily made up of the youth from the area, but there were some familiar faces from our previous meeting who also attended.
During the course of the showing I could not help but notice that some people did not stay for the entire viewing and it started to become clear to me, as the hall filled out after the conclusion of our productions, about what we really had achieved.
With no concrete feedback from the residents themselves on what we had showcased, I felt that our task had only made a difference to those we had showcased in our pieces. While I may be wrong in my assertion, I felt that they, themselves, did not really care about the issues at hand.
We have spent the last three months working to establish connections within these communities and have tried our best to make whatever difference we could. Even though our efforts with the Municipality to a large extent came to nothing, we, or at least I, really did care about my issue as well as the issues of my fellow student journalists.
I do, however, realise that the reason for this assertion might have been due to a variety of factors. Perhaps if we were able to get the same residents who attended our first meeting to see/view the media outputs we would have been able to get better feedback as they helped us to create our citizens' agenda. Furthermore, if we had more adults rather than youths at the meeting they might have been able to give us some feedback. However, those that were there did not make any comments about our work. The final factor which could be a reason as to why I felt that the residents did not really care, is the fact that they may be so de-sensitized to their own issues that whilst we realise the severity of the issues dealt with, the situation has become part and parcel of their existence.
In conclusion, whilst in the particular public meeting not much feedback was given, at our focus groups held in smaller groups I do feel that we did make some progress by getting the people to imobilize themselves.
However, on a more positive note, Mr Nase, one of the Ward Councillors who attended the public meeting said at the end that what we had done did make some difference, even if it was just to highlight and provide proof of what is really going on in the Wards. I think that if we had been able to show these pieces to a co-operative local government, perhaps we could have sparked debate amongst themselves as well as, hopefully, prompted them to want to do more.
Things do not change; we change.
Community Strengthening Project – that was our group’s aim. We donned our cameras, our notepads and recorders. We filmed, reported and documented the lives of many. At face value, it’s what we have been doing for the last two years. However, under the student-journalists- working-for-their-degree mask, our responsibility for society grew. We acted as a middleman between the blue-collared man on the street and the government official in the suit. While there were many instances where decision-makers left us with more questions than answers, our pursuit for service delivery challenged government to take shorter lunch breaks and do their jobs. We’re still waiting.
In Ward 5 and 6 in Joza, Grahamstown, the families still face crime. They still have unbuilt houses and unemployment is rife. Many have felt disillusioned at the outcome as we evaded and took stories without fundamental change. We have to understand that we are journalists; professionals who can give the people a voice. We have set out to find stories where they matter.
Obscene alcoholism in the streets and brutal crime stories. Rain rushing in people’s homes. These were but some of the adversities in Joza. I wrote a story on Ward 6’s Indoor Sports Centre, a haven for children after school. The story was hopeful of change and brought about a glimmer or aspiration for the youth in the area. We all expected the bad. No one expected the good. By giving people a chance to talk, we gave them a chance to be heard. The course provided us with a chance to understand issues people are facing. We learnt their names and came into their homes. We used journalism for good during this JDD CMP Course. Instead, of restricting ourselves to campus, we ventured to the outskirts, many for the first time. It was a new world for us and economic disparity was shoved into our faces at every turn. This is what mattered. This is where life was. We gave the community a platform to air their thoughts at a general public meeting. Each resident who lended their voice to the microphone were given the amount of power that they have never got before: a public ear to their emotions. As journalists, we proved that our job is crucial in community strengthening. We were on the side of the unheard. However, while the government get their shoes polished, there are children playing with litter in the street. A relationship between municipality and journalists needs to be smoothed over so that those in power can pursue development.
On Tuesday, 19 October, a public meeting was held so that residents could watch various media outputs on their wards. Issues raised were presented in individual experiences. This meeting made me realise how public journalism’s outlook is necessary for the strengthening of any community. When there is a close collaboration with journalists and sources, the media begins to challenge and rouse. When there is a sphere of deliberation in place, the media is pivotal in raising eyebrows in government circles. Whether or not they’re listening now, our effort is getting people talking. Isn’t that change in itself?
In Ward 5 and 6 in Joza, Grahamstown, the families still face crime. They still have unbuilt houses and unemployment is rife. Many have felt disillusioned at the outcome as we evaded and took stories without fundamental change. We have to understand that we are journalists; professionals who can give the people a voice. We have set out to find stories where they matter.
Obscene alcoholism in the streets and brutal crime stories. Rain rushing in people’s homes. These were but some of the adversities in Joza. I wrote a story on Ward 6’s Indoor Sports Centre, a haven for children after school. The story was hopeful of change and brought about a glimmer or aspiration for the youth in the area. We all expected the bad. No one expected the good. By giving people a chance to talk, we gave them a chance to be heard. The course provided us with a chance to understand issues people are facing. We learnt their names and came into their homes. We used journalism for good during this JDD CMP Course. Instead, of restricting ourselves to campus, we ventured to the outskirts, many for the first time. It was a new world for us and economic disparity was shoved into our faces at every turn. This is what mattered. This is where life was. We gave the community a platform to air their thoughts at a general public meeting. Each resident who lended their voice to the microphone were given the amount of power that they have never got before: a public ear to their emotions. As journalists, we proved that our job is crucial in community strengthening. We were on the side of the unheard. However, while the government get their shoes polished, there are children playing with litter in the street. A relationship between municipality and journalists needs to be smoothed over so that those in power can pursue development.
On Tuesday, 19 October, a public meeting was held so that residents could watch various media outputs on their wards. Issues raised were presented in individual experiences. This meeting made me realise how public journalism’s outlook is necessary for the strengthening of any community. When there is a close collaboration with journalists and sources, the media begins to challenge and rouse. When there is a sphere of deliberation in place, the media is pivotal in raising eyebrows in government circles. Whether or not they’re listening now, our effort is getting people talking. Isn’t that change in itself?
Did we complete the circle?
I had so many doubts throughout the JDD and the CMP courses: were we wasting our time? Was I annoying people with my very middle class, very journalistic questions, was I, were we, going to make a difference? These questions plagued me throughout every visit to the township until one of the visits to the township, where I heard something so positive that it made me stop questioning the project and rather focus my energy on the ways in which we were, as a group, able to make a difference in the community.
As Daniel Charvat mentioned earlier, the wallposter that we produced created a lot of business for the man that he initially interviewed. Although I was not involved in this interviewing process, I accompanied Daniel to see him, which shed some light on the purpose of the project and helped me to see it in a more positive manner. The wallposter had made the community more aware of the services that this man offers and in this way, generated more business for him than he had had in weeks. Hearing this man tell Daniel how excited he was about the new customers filled me with hope, and helped me to understand that the JDD and CMP courses have not been about making a world of difference for an entire community - they have been about initiating change for at least one person. If all we did in this project was to make the community more aware of its members, and the services that they offer, then we have in effect done or duties.
On a slightly less positive note, an element of my skepticism has remained intact until the very last meeting we had, where, after it was over, the entire hall filled out and we were left with an empty hall and no feedback from the community. This made me tired, frustrated, and questioning the whole purpose of the project. The old adage, "you can't help people who won't help themselves came to mind".
However, inasmuch as this course has been challenging, and sometimes, downright frustrating, the delight of one or two of the community members who felt that we had changed something in their lives, is enough to sustain me through writing yet another blog post. That said, this course needs a more rigid structure, and a definite set of guidelines which hopefully our own feedback can provide for the next group of third year journalism students.
Did we complete the circle? I'm not sure. We documented peoples' problems; opened our hearts and our minds to the opinions, lifestyles, viewpoints and lives of others; and did something positive for one or two individuals. However, to be honest, I have not been sure from the beginning what "completing the circle" actually means, so perhaps the point of this blog post is rather to say that this course needs to go on a serious theory diet: where it can drop the jargon, cut out the focus on identity formation and get rid of the negativity, because Grahamstown, and especially Joza, is not a place for academic, pie-in-the-sky rhetoric, nor is it a appropriate for those who do not believe that even the smallest change, is change nonetheless.
As Daniel Charvat mentioned earlier, the wallposter that we produced created a lot of business for the man that he initially interviewed. Although I was not involved in this interviewing process, I accompanied Daniel to see him, which shed some light on the purpose of the project and helped me to see it in a more positive manner. The wallposter had made the community more aware of the services that this man offers and in this way, generated more business for him than he had had in weeks. Hearing this man tell Daniel how excited he was about the new customers filled me with hope, and helped me to understand that the JDD and CMP courses have not been about making a world of difference for an entire community - they have been about initiating change for at least one person. If all we did in this project was to make the community more aware of its members, and the services that they offer, then we have in effect done or duties.
On a slightly less positive note, an element of my skepticism has remained intact until the very last meeting we had, where, after it was over, the entire hall filled out and we were left with an empty hall and no feedback from the community. This made me tired, frustrated, and questioning the whole purpose of the project. The old adage, "you can't help people who won't help themselves came to mind".
However, inasmuch as this course has been challenging, and sometimes, downright frustrating, the delight of one or two of the community members who felt that we had changed something in their lives, is enough to sustain me through writing yet another blog post. That said, this course needs a more rigid structure, and a definite set of guidelines which hopefully our own feedback can provide for the next group of third year journalism students.
Did we complete the circle? I'm not sure. We documented peoples' problems; opened our hearts and our minds to the opinions, lifestyles, viewpoints and lives of others; and did something positive for one or two individuals. However, to be honest, I have not been sure from the beginning what "completing the circle" actually means, so perhaps the point of this blog post is rather to say that this course needs to go on a serious theory diet: where it can drop the jargon, cut out the focus on identity formation and get rid of the negativity, because Grahamstown, and especially Joza, is not a place for academic, pie-in-the-sky rhetoric, nor is it a appropriate for those who do not believe that even the smallest change, is change nonetheless.
Closing the chapter
After more than two months of working in Extension 9, working with the Community Police Forum, I still feel that we took more from this community than we could give. In the end, we wrote stories, filmed stories and took photographs that will for the most part remain in our files gathering dust as we pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.
Truth be told, we really haven't done any good by these people. We didn't get the answers that these people wanted or deserved, we didn't meet our end of the bargin which was more than just reproducing their stories but to also get those in power to answer for their failings, because after all is that not the fundamental role of a good journalist?
I still feel like we didn't do anything beyond just completing another 'journ' assignment and I always knew that this was the conclusion that I was going to reach in the end. I am over this process and I never again want to feel like I'm using people for an assignment.
No matter how we continue to justify this process, we stirred up the hornets nest, gave people hope no matter how unintentional, that somehow someone out there, someone of some relevance, with some authority, would listen to their stories and would pay attention but that is not going to happen, not today, not tomorrow and not next year when the next group of 'journ' students do the exact same thing.
We need to stop using real people, with real problems as our playground for 'good journalism'.
I am glad that this is over but I wish it had never happened.
But what does it matter what I think right, because next year, someone will be forced to do the same thing all over again all in the pursuit of good grades....
Truth be told, we really haven't done any good by these people. We didn't get the answers that these people wanted or deserved, we didn't meet our end of the bargin which was more than just reproducing their stories but to also get those in power to answer for their failings, because after all is that not the fundamental role of a good journalist?
I still feel like we didn't do anything beyond just completing another 'journ' assignment and I always knew that this was the conclusion that I was going to reach in the end. I am over this process and I never again want to feel like I'm using people for an assignment.
No matter how we continue to justify this process, we stirred up the hornets nest, gave people hope no matter how unintentional, that somehow someone out there, someone of some relevance, with some authority, would listen to their stories and would pay attention but that is not going to happen, not today, not tomorrow and not next year when the next group of 'journ' students do the exact same thing.
We need to stop using real people, with real problems as our playground for 'good journalism'.
I am glad that this is over but I wish it had never happened.
But what does it matter what I think right, because next year, someone will be forced to do the same thing all over again all in the pursuit of good grades....
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Thoughts on the CMP project - Daniel Charvat
In trying to collect feedback from the community in response to our media outputs, I visited our wards with six of my group members. Together we walked through the streets, primarily focussing on areas in which we stuck up our wall posters. These areas consisted largely of spaza shops and spaces in which community members gather informally.
We asked many bystanders to give us their thoughts and opinions about the wall post to try and gain an understanding of our impact in the community. There was a general feeling of agreement that the posters were good, but nothing overly positive came up.
I thought that instead of asking random bystanders, I should head through to see the man I interviewed, and whose story appears on the wall poster, to get his opinion. After walking about 500m up the dusty roads, I found his home. In his useful jovial manner he invited me in and we got to talking.
He told me that over the past week he has been flooded with work, with many people from all over the wards recognizing his face on the wallposters he said that five cars had already visited him that day alone. It was refreshing to get some genuinely enthusiastic praise regarding our project. He was even cheerful (maybe that's not quite the word) about his TV 'test' box being broken, since with all the new business he was sure he afford to get a new one. After our encounter I headed home and thought back on his responses.
Even if our project was not overly successful in raising awareness and solving the problems found within the location, the fact that we made a difference - even if it was just for this one man - validated the project for me.
We asked many bystanders to give us their thoughts and opinions about the wall post to try and gain an understanding of our impact in the community. There was a general feeling of agreement that the posters were good, but nothing overly positive came up.
I thought that instead of asking random bystanders, I should head through to see the man I interviewed, and whose story appears on the wall poster, to get his opinion. After walking about 500m up the dusty roads, I found his home. In his useful jovial manner he invited me in and we got to talking.
He told me that over the past week he has been flooded with work, with many people from all over the wards recognizing his face on the wallposters he said that five cars had already visited him that day alone. It was refreshing to get some genuinely enthusiastic praise regarding our project. He was even cheerful (maybe that's not quite the word) about his TV 'test' box being broken, since with all the new business he was sure he afford to get a new one. After our encounter I headed home and thought back on his responses.
Even if our project was not overly successful in raising awareness and solving the problems found within the location, the fact that we made a difference - even if it was just for this one man - validated the project for me.
The Report Back Meeting- 19th October
We held our final communtiy meeting on the 19th October. Where we played the soundslides and televison pieces we had made.
I bleive that it was good to go back and show them what we had made, and I am glad that we kept to our word in that regard.
A few of us thn spoke to some of the resident that attended the meeting and the general response was that they felt that we had captured the essense of their community well. I spoke to two other ladies who had hoped that there could have been answers fromt eh decision makers, and some direction given at the meeting regarding the issues that need to be dealt with.
I have said it time and again, it is really unfortunate that we could not get word from the decision makers to help in bringing solutions to the problems.
It terms of playing the facilitative role- we definitely played our part. We allowed there to be a platform where deliberation could take place, its just that the missing link in the journalist-citizen- decision-maker spectrum, was the decision- maker. Which meant that no condusive communication and action could happen.
Thus personally, I am a disheartened in that regard because I dont feel like anyone's life has been changed, those problems are still there and because the decision makers have not answered our calls (literally)!
I only hope that a change will come ultimately... to a communtiy that has been waitng and waiting for change. It's so difficult to have an optimisitic attitude when we see the same problems all over the country. I am however grateful that I could practise civic journalism, and merge this with the conventional way of reporting.
Andiswa Leve
I bleive that it was good to go back and show them what we had made, and I am glad that we kept to our word in that regard.
A few of us thn spoke to some of the resident that attended the meeting and the general response was that they felt that we had captured the essense of their community well. I spoke to two other ladies who had hoped that there could have been answers fromt eh decision makers, and some direction given at the meeting regarding the issues that need to be dealt with.
I have said it time and again, it is really unfortunate that we could not get word from the decision makers to help in bringing solutions to the problems.
It terms of playing the facilitative role- we definitely played our part. We allowed there to be a platform where deliberation could take place, its just that the missing link in the journalist-citizen- decision-maker spectrum, was the decision- maker. Which meant that no condusive communication and action could happen.
Thus personally, I am a disheartened in that regard because I dont feel like anyone's life has been changed, those problems are still there and because the decision makers have not answered our calls (literally)!
I only hope that a change will come ultimately... to a communtiy that has been waitng and waiting for change. It's so difficult to have an optimisitic attitude when we see the same problems all over the country. I am however grateful that I could practise civic journalism, and merge this with the conventional way of reporting.
Andiswa Leve
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Second Community Meeting
We held our second community meeting last night (19 October 2010) and whilst we initially only had children in the audience, people soon came flooding in!
The audio in the hall was a bit of a problem, what with people talking in an echoey hall but once everyone had quietened down, I think everyone could hear what was going on! Maybe it was just me, but I think people were quieter when listening to the isiXhosa pieces. There was also much hilarity when children recognized people in the soundslides!
I think it was important to hold a second meeting as it gave the project a sense of closure (to use Nan's metaphor: we closed the tap we had opened!) Mr Plaatjie addressed the crowd in the beginning and Nan made an opening and closing statement too (in between our "talent" in the form of a rap artist). Despite my isiXhosa not being up to scratch, it seemed to be a success with members of the community shaking hands with group members and telling Andy what they thought of the pieces.
Well done everyone! Proud to be part of this group :)
Friday, October 15, 2010
JDD CMP – Focus Group Reflection Part 1 – Point summary
1) What is Public journalism?
· People whose voices aren’t heard
· Representative of the public
· Forum/platform
· By the public for the public
· Linking problems to problem solving
· Facilitative
· Stories of the underrepresented in society
· Shape citizens agenda
· Connect to people on a personal level in individual HYPERLOCAL spaces
· No top-down approach – not journalists preconceived agendas
· Problem solving
· Processes of gate-keeping from the public sphere
· Gives people a different avenue to share a different stance – those who are permitted – more deliberation may lead to upliftment of societies considered sub-altern
· Less hierarchical because it is produced via submersion in communities which could lead to social action
· Direct line of communication from people
· Democracy from the ground up (people’s voices)
· Implement ideals of participatory democracy
· Empowers citizens to not only look to government
· Breakaway from the elitism of content
2) Usage for public news stories
· We were unsuccessful in terms of acquiring accountability from ward councillors – limited response all round
· Communication with NGO’s and other communitarian organisation was successful – we defined what the greater good was and achieved it
·
3) Was the deliberative space fostered on a large scale?
· No, but we could not force deliberation
4) The student journalist label
· Our work often chastised as “little project” – which lowers credibility
· Maybe because we were students we kept on hitting brick walls (with government). It could be a general trend/attitude of government officials to journalists
· Need to put extended pressure on people to get results
· People (mainly government officials) get defensive with journalists, which leads to slow responses
· We don’t carry enough authority
· We did well in terms of the goals of our readings to create discourse within our society and engage with issues
· We maintained a good relationship in the community that we worked with, which creates a better perception of journalists within that community.
· We have been accountable by collecting feedback within our wards
· Opened up lines to the community
· Opportunities to ask questions
· Deliberation on how they and we can better engage with the councillors
· We faced real life problems which will confront us as practising journalists
5) Transformation
· Interacting with community
· Less one dimensional than standard curriculum
· We emerged more capable people and realised our potential
· Potential difference has been made in the community
· Leaving projects now make some feel like the community were guinea pigs
· What we started will fade unless there are dedicated people within communities
· Try to make projects sustainable (helping crèches, old age homes)
· Way in which we approached project won trust and created links
· It was community strengthening
· Encouraged citizens to realise their own interconnectedness
· Work we produced was excellent BUT personally some people felt linguistic barriers made it very hard to connect – high reliance on Xhosa speakers
· Raises awareness of how important it is to be bilingual/trilingual, or at least have an understanding of isiXhosa
· Would make for sellable stories
· Public journalism can’t work on scale larger than community papers
· Mainstream projects maybe have one or two public journalism stories but that gatekeeps too in terms of who gets involved in project
· This should be a longer project for the Journalism department – the potential is huge
· The municipal manager emphasised that it was a project
· Length of project means that we are not taken seriously which does neither the community nor us justice
· But we have spent a longer time on stories than most journalists
· Average journalists would constantly be producing outputs
· So far, nothing has appeared in Grocott’s
1) What is Public journalism?
· People whose voices aren’t heard
· Representative of the public
· Forum/platform
· By the public for the public
· Linking problems to problem solving
· Facilitative
· Stories of the underrepresented in society
· Shape citizens agenda
· Connect to people on a personal level in individual HYPERLOCAL spaces
· No top-down approach – not journalists preconceived agendas
· Problem solving
· Processes of gate-keeping from the public sphere
· Gives people a different avenue to share a different stance – those who are permitted – more deliberation may lead to upliftment of societies considered sub-altern
· Less hierarchical because it is produced via submersion in communities which could lead to social action
· Direct line of communication from people
· Democracy from the ground up (people’s voices)
· Implement ideals of participatory democracy
· Empowers citizens to not only look to government
· Breakaway from the elitism of content
2) Usage for public news stories
· We were unsuccessful in terms of acquiring accountability from ward councillors – limited response all round
· Communication with NGO’s and other communitarian organisation was successful – we defined what the greater good was and achieved it
·
3) Was the deliberative space fostered on a large scale?
· No, but we could not force deliberation
4) The student journalist label
· Our work often chastised as “little project” – which lowers credibility
· Maybe because we were students we kept on hitting brick walls (with government). It could be a general trend/attitude of government officials to journalists
· Need to put extended pressure on people to get results
· People (mainly government officials) get defensive with journalists, which leads to slow responses
· We don’t carry enough authority
· We did well in terms of the goals of our readings to create discourse within our society and engage with issues
· We maintained a good relationship in the community that we worked with, which creates a better perception of journalists within that community.
· We have been accountable by collecting feedback within our wards
· Opened up lines to the community
· Opportunities to ask questions
· Deliberation on how they and we can better engage with the councillors
· We faced real life problems which will confront us as practising journalists
5) Transformation
· Interacting with community
· Less one dimensional than standard curriculum
· We emerged more capable people and realised our potential
· Potential difference has been made in the community
· Leaving projects now make some feel like the community were guinea pigs
· What we started will fade unless there are dedicated people within communities
· Try to make projects sustainable (helping crèches, old age homes)
· Way in which we approached project won trust and created links
· It was community strengthening
· Encouraged citizens to realise their own interconnectedness
· Work we produced was excellent BUT personally some people felt linguistic barriers made it very hard to connect – high reliance on Xhosa speakers
· Raises awareness of how important it is to be bilingual/trilingual, or at least have an understanding of isiXhosa
· Would make for sellable stories
· Public journalism can’t work on scale larger than community papers
· Mainstream projects maybe have one or two public journalism stories but that gatekeeps too in terms of who gets involved in project
· This should be a longer project for the Journalism department – the potential is huge
· The municipal manager emphasised that it was a project
· Length of project means that we are not taken seriously which does neither the community nor us justice
· But we have spent a longer time on stories than most journalists
· Average journalists would constantly be producing outputs
· So far, nothing has appeared in Grocott’s
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)