This is a very interesting piece but if you're going to talk about the big picture of media development then surely it's more than a little mypopic not to mention USAID's funding of Internews implemented projects all over the map. Is this a good or a bad thing? What does USAID hope to achieve with all these projects? How is Internews really rated: a self claimed 'leader' in media development and media development thinking or a DC lap dog?
If you're talking about media development and you're not not mentioning any of this, then your picture is incomplete...no?
Bill wrote: "Yet much could be done that would foster greater donor collaboration and bring new money to the table."
I misread this at first: "bring new money to the trade".
Perhaps it's time to recognise that media development is an industry, and that this is not a bad thing. It opens the way for media-centric advocacy, professionalisation, ethical codes, alliances, etc. That participants may be self-interested (because they believe in their cause, because some earn their living there, etc.), does not denigrate the value of what is done.
Ultimately, that's what will attract more investment - and generate better results.
The whole picture
This is a very interesting piece but if you're going to talk about the big picture of media development then surely it's more than a little mypopic not to mention USAID's funding of Internews implemented projects all over the map. Is this a good or a bad thing? What does USAID hope to achieve with all these projects? How is Internews really rated: a self claimed 'leader' in media development and media development thinking or a DC lap dog?
If you're talking about media development and you're not not mentioning any of this, then your picture is incomplete...no?
table or trade?
Bill wrote: "Yet much could be done that would foster greater donor collaboration and bring new money to the table."
I misread this at first: "bring new money to the trade".
Perhaps it's time to recognise that media development is an industry, and that this is not a bad thing. It opens the way for media-centric advocacy, professionalisation, ethical codes, alliances, etc. That participants may be self-interested (because they believe in their cause, because some earn their living there, etc.), does not denigrate the value of what is done.
Ultimately, that's what will attract more investment - and generate better results.