Into the Looking Glass: What the Media Tell and Why: An Overview Roumeen Islam - World Bank
Dubai -keralamonitor.com The media industry, whether public or private, plays an important role in any economy by garnering support or opposition for those who govern, by highlighting or failing to do so the views and/or sins of industry, by providing a voice for the people or not doing so, and by simply spreading economic information. For their ultimate survival the media depend on the state that regulates them, on the firms that pay to advertise through them, and on the consumers they serve. Balancing these different interest groups is a difficult task. How the media industry does so determines not just its ability to survive, but its effect on economic performance. This book is about the factors that determine whether and how the media industry can support economic progress.Clearly as important providers of information, the media are more likely to promote better economic performance when they are more likely to satisfy three conditions: the media are independent, provide good­quality information, and have a broad reach. That is, when they reduce the natural asymmetry of information, as Joseph Stiglitz puts it in chapter 2, between those who govern and those whom they are supposed to serve, and when they reduce information asymmetries between private agents. Such a media industry can increase the accountability of both businesses and government through monitoring and reputational penalties while also allowing consumers to make more informed decisions.
This book cites many examples that demonstrate the value of information provided by the media. Alexander Dyck and Luigi Zingales (chapter 7) discuss how the media can pressure corporate managers and directors to behave in ways that are socially acceptable, thereby avoiding actions that will result in censure and consumer boycotts. They also report that in Malaysia, a recent survey of institutional investors and equity analysts asked which factors were most important to them in considering corporate governance and the decision to invest in publicly listed corporations. Those surveyed gave more importance to the frequency and nature of public and press comments about companies than to a host of other factors considered key in the academic debate. However, the dissemination of credible information in a timely manner depends critically on how the media business is managed and regulated. The chapters in this book document evidence on media performance and regulations in countries around the world and highlight what type of public policies and economic conditions might hinder the media in supporting economic development in poor countries.
Before discussing the three criteria for effective media - independence, quality, and reach - I would like to draw attention to two general issues pertinent to the themes of the chapters in this volume. The first is the relationship between free media and democracy. It seems obvious that generally, more democratic countries also have a freer press, as figure 1.1 shows, but do free media promote greater democracy or does a functioning democracy promote free media? Undoubtedly the effect can work both ways, and there are degrees of media freedom and democracy. Even among democratic countries, the level of freedom of the media varies between countries, and even relatively undemocratic states may differ in their tolerance of media freedom. For example, two democracies, Russia and the United States, have quite different attitudes toward the media and the concept of media freedom. In addition, within the same democracy certain types of news coverage may be unregulated while other types may be regulated, for example, economic news may be less regulated than purely political news. Freedom of the press is also correlated with income: richer countries seem to value information more, but there is variation. Colombia, Portugal, and Ukraine have similar measures of democracy but quite different measures of press freedom.
The second issue I would like to address concerns the general relevance of laws and formal regulations for the independence, quality, and reach of the media. In many circumstances laws affecting the media sector have only limited relevance. In addition, adopting a law is no guarantee that it will be implemented or effective. This is partly because implementing a law is much more difficult that simply adopting it. Also informal codes of conduct may be in conflict with laws and dilute their effectiveness. In most countries the freedom and independence of the media are guaranteed not solely by laws, but by the culture or accepted mores of society. Thus while the United Kingdom has had a rather restrictive Official Secrets Act (until 1989 even the type of biscuit served to the prime minister was a secret), the British media rank highly on any measure of freedom: Freedom House gives the United Kingdom a score of 80 out of 100 on its index of press freedom.
Changes in media freedom are affected by changes in culture and expectations, just as culture and expectations can be changed through information provided by the media. In countries where the media have had a long tradition of independence and are well­established businesses, legal restrictions mandated by arbitrary governments are hard to maintain over time. Nascent media face the greatest challenge. In countries where information has always been scarce or kept secret, several effects work against the media, namely: (a) the potential value of more information is underestimated or not well understood; (b) the public perceives that information alone will not help, because coalitions strong enough to make use of the available information do not exist; and (c) the weak financial state of the media and their shaky consumer base make the industry vulnerable. Nevertheless, each of these elements can be expected to improve slowly over time.
The evidence suggests that legal systems are important. Governments have manipulated laws and legal systems to legitimize their actions against the media, but also to safeguard the rights of the media. Journalists have used laws to protect their right to know and tell. Sometimes a law is important because even though governments may not deliberately withhold information, it is not readily available because it is not required to be in an accessible format. Laws promoting greater freedom of expression and information can be useful even when all parties are not convinced of their relevance. Merely the act of adopting a law can limit certain abuses and can build expectations of what is permissible and what is not, particularly if the judiciary is effective and independent. Adopting laws brings freedom of information issues to the forefront of public discussion, and can result in genuine change. As Kavi Chongkittavorn explains in chapter 14, Thailand's adoption of the Freedom of Information Act has encouraged people to ask the government for information, in essence changing expectations and behavior. In contrast, as Mark Chavunduka discusses in chapter 17, Zimbabwe's government has adopted several laws with the intention of silencing the press. According to Hisham Kassem in chapter 16, however, innovative media entrepreneurs often find ways to operate around the laws that bind them.
In the remainder of the overview I have organized the discussion around the three main factors affecting media performance mentioned earlier: independence, quality, and reach. 1
Independence and Quality
Independence refers to the media industry's ability to report information it receives without undue fear of being penalized. It also refers to a media industry that is not controlled by any interest group, but still has access to necessary data. No media outlet can be completely independent: even when the government does not directly penalize unfavorable news, it can refuse to provide information about good stories. Stiglitz notes the mutual dependence of those who leak information to the media and the media. Leaks are important, because they get otherwise secret information into the public domain, but they also allow public officials to shape news coverage in ways that advance their own interests and causes.
The quality of the media is a difficult thing to assess, or even to describe. Here high­quality media are defined as those with access to and the capacity to report (more or less) objectively on basic economic, social, and political information; those that can express a diversity of views and are accountable for the information they publish; and those that have the capacity to analyze the information obtained for its news value and "truth.'' In chapter 13 Gabriel García Márquez defines the "best'' news as that which is not always the news that is obtained first, "but very often the news that is best presented.'' Edward Herman's definition of objectivity (chapter 4) - a key element of quality - is "first . . . presenting a variety of sides to a story, searching out facts without political constraint, and presenting those fairly and impartially; and second, deciding what is newsworthy on the basis of consistently applied news values, unaffected by a political agenda or biased by ideological premises or compromised by strategic or profitability considerations.''
Independent media may nonetheless take sides on an issue or be unable to produce credible reports. Given their potential to affect the behavior of a large number of people or of a few key players, the media can raise or diminish issues in the public eye, and therefore affect the distribution of benefits in society. Influence of this type needs to be subject to checks and balances, as discussed later. High­quality media have greater power to influence consumers of information: Dyck and Zingales report that in the Republic of Korea it was the Financial Times' reporting of insider dealings at SK Telecom that lent credibility to the story, because it is more reputable than the local newspapers.
Several factors determine the independence of the media, namely:
The ownership structure of the media The economic structure of industry, economic conditions, and the availability of financing The laws regulating access to information, production of information, entry into the media industry, and content The policies regarding industries related to the media. Notions of quality and independence are linked, for example, quality can be com­ promised by media dependent on concentrated sources of financing. For this reason they are discussed together. Two additional factors are relevant for quality:The training and capability of journalists and of those who manage the media business The checks and balances on journalists and people in the media industry.
OwnershipOwnership of the media confers control over the nature of the information disseminated. Proponents of public ownership of the media argue that because information is a public good - that is, once it has been supplied to some consumers it is hard to keep it away from others who have not paid for it - private owners tend to provide less information than would be socially desirable. They also argue that with private ownership the media industry runs the risk of representing the views of only a narrow group in society, 2 and state ownership of the media is necessary to expose the public to desirable cultural or educational themes or values and to ensure that broadcasts of locally produced content in local languages are available. 3
Opponents of public ownership argue that government control of the media can be used to manipulate people and distort the information supplied in the incumbent government's favor. Moreover, experience shows that government­owned enterprises (and presumably media enterprises are like other enterprises in this regard) are less likely to be responsive to consumer demand. Finally, government­owned media are not subject to competition, thus giving rise to the danger of both poor­quality production and inefficiencies. A recent article on the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) (Economist 2002a) claims that government ownership makes it harder than it would otherwise be for other media companies to grow. The article claims that the large amounts of tax revenue that are given to the BBC gives it an advantage relative to private companies. It also contends that as a private company, the BBC would be more dynamic, and therefore better able to compete with global media firms.
There are problems with both sides of the argument when faced with realities in developing countries, but the problems inherent in managing public enterprises effectively may bias the scales in favor of private ownership. In many countries, even "autonomous'' public agencies have a difficult time remaining truly autonomous and operating on a level playing field. This is particularly so in developing countries. Private media firms that have close links with business or government are also in danger of distorting information. Moreover, if they do not face competition they may be as guilty as government owners of ignoring consumer preferences. In Italy for example, control over the media by a few families has been the subject of significant discussion and controversy. Herman claims that where the mainstream media are privately owned and are funded almost entirely by commercial advertisers as in the United States, they align with the corporate community, in particular the larger players, who are hostile to antibusiness messages. While agreeing that the news media may bias public policy, in chapter 6 David Strömberg claims that increasing returns to scale in news production undermine the political power of special interest groups and minorities and enhance the political power of large groups. News production by private profit­oriented producers should therefore favor large groups.
Recent research by Simeon Djankov, Caralee McLiesh, Tatiana Nanova, andAndrei Shliefer, reported in chapter 8, indicates that ownership of media firms tends to be highly concentrated. Firms are mostly owned by the state or families, and widely dispersed ownership structures are infrequent. Moreover, the percentage of total firms controlled by the state is high, especially in developing countries. On average, the state controls about 30 percent of the top five newspapers and 60 percent of the top five television stations in these countries. The television audience for privately­owned television stations in Belgium, France, and Japan accounts for 56 to 60 percent of the total market. In Australia 83 percent of the audience watches privately­owned television stations, and in Canada 66 percent of the audience does so. In the industrial countries newspapers are mostly privately owned. In many poor countries such as China, Egypt, and Malawi the state controls all television. Poorer countries and countries with more autocratic governments are more likely to have high state ownership of the media. Djankov and others find that high levels of state ownership reduce the effectiveness of the media in providing checks and balances on public sector behavior and are negatively correlated with economic and social outcomes.
To encourage independent reporting many countries, such as the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, have created independent or autonomous state media agencies that are charged with providing public interest programs that the private sector might not offer, but are allowed to operate without political interference. For example, the BBC is state owned, and its board of governors, appointed by government officials, is accountable to the government. However, the BBC's charter establishes it as an independent corporation and guarantees it freedom from government interference in the content and timing of its broadcasts and in the management of its internal affairs.
In theory, a system of checks and balances could be built into the design of autonomous state media agencies to insulate them from undue influence by either the government or business, but the issue of whether private agencies would face "unfair'' competition still remains, that is, whether the public agency would receive preferential treatment such as subsidies. Another issue is that the independence of such agencies can be eroded over time in countries where a well­developed system of checks and balances on the state does not exist. In 1981 the Zimbabwean government established the publicly­owned but politically independent Mass Media Trust to manage Zimpapers, the only national newspaper chain. Yet the government has twice dismissed the entire board in retaliation for unfavorable media coverage, and it now regularly intervenes in decisions regarding content.
Where the state does not dominate the market, but accounts for only a relatively small share, it is less likely to stifle private media. Defining the relevant market, however, is not always simple. If newspapers and broadcast and electronic media all serve the same audience but the state is only dominant in one area, competition from private sources in the market for news may be sufficient. If the market is segmented according to the type of media considered (newspapers, television, radio, electronic) and the population's income group or education levels, then dominance in one area is more likely to have negative effects, irrespective of whether the dominance is by publicly­owned or privately­owned media. People who cannot read will not buy newspapers and will only get their information from the radio; however, if their neighbors or relatives can read and transmit information, this factor is mitigated.
Privatization, with all its flaws, is a potential solution for assuring arms­length (from government) reporting. In Mexico, for example, the privatization of broadcasting in 1989 substantially increased the coverage of government corruption scandals. This greater coverage contributed to a 20 percent increase in the private station's market share, forcing the government­owned station to cover these issues as well. The privatization of state­owned media in transition countries supported by broader market liberalization and knowledge transfers from foreign owners with experience in journalism has generated dramatic increases in the coverage of economic and financial news (Nelson 1999). In chapter 9 Bruce Owen contends that in general, the privatization and deregulation of electronic mass media has increased competition and reduced concentration.
What does this say for the choice between privatizing and creating autonomous public agencies? Privatization can wrest control of information flows from the government, but privatization and subsequent regulation need to be approached carefully to avoid monopoly control of information. The case for creating autonomous state agencies is weakened if one considers that autonomy may be easily eroded and that regulation and public financing allocated on a competitive basis for "socially desirable'' programs could achieve similar results. In any case, a dominant role for the state is hard to justify.
Economic Structure and Financing
How nonmedia industries are structured and the government's overall economic policies have significant effects on the media's independence and performance. The harassment of Russia's private media, which are critical of the government, by Gazprom, a gas company in which the state has significant ownership stakes and influence, is a case in point. Where state­owned firms dominate the economy even private media can have difficulty surviving without state support. In describing the history of the Bangladeshi media sector, Mahfuz Anam (chapter 15) mentions that even privatizing the media industry will not solve the problems of bias if the only advertisers, and thus the financiers, are state­owned enterprises, or even a select group of private firms. In some countries the choice may be about choosing the lesser of two evils.
As Bruce Owen (chapter 9) and Tim Carrington and Mark Nelson (chapter 12) point out, the survival of the media as a business - often under adverse economic conditions - takes priority. If the business does not survive, then quality is not an issue. In many fledgling economies new, small firms can provide a sufficient source of financing for the media, as evidenced by the case of TV2 in Tomsk, described by Victor and Yulia Muchnik in chapter 19. Overall economic policies will determine the entry and survival of such firms. Connections and networks can be important too. In the case of TV2, the start­up costs were financed with the help of a loan from a domestic bank. These entrepreneurs had access to credit because their loan was guaranteed by the chairman of the Tomsk city council, a friend.
Carrington and Nelson point to the importance of foreign investment in helping new media companies stand on their feet in developing countries. Under a new regime in 1991, the government newspaper Rzeczpospolita in Poland was deprived of public funds, told to be independent, and thrust into a failing economy. Its survival was ensured by foreign investment: the French Hersant newspaper group bought 49 percent of the company and helped upgrade its technology and printing plants. Similarly, in the Slovak Republic the Media Development Loan Fund backed a private newspaper, and in addition a strong private sector had emerged to support the media industry.
A competitive market structure (as well as sources of financing) promotes diversity and provides checks on quality. According to Stiglitz, the most important check against abuses by the press is the presence of a competitive press that reflects a variety of interests. Owen points out that the content that best serves those media owners whose goal is power and influence is not, in general, the same content required for commercial success, and perhaps therefore for survival in a competitive market environment. This might be interpreted as meaning that a more competitive environment can limit the abuse of power by media owners.
Licensing media enterprises can be an effective way to control content and limit competition. 4 Licensing restrictions may be explicit, prohibiting certain kinds of broadcasts, or implicit, as when the government might not renew licenses unless it perceives the broadcasting content as favorable. For the newspaper industry, unlike for television and radio broadcasting, licensing is not needed for technical reasons. The primary purpose of licenses for newspapers is to allow governments to influence information flows by limiting entry. 5 In the case of Korea, soon after licensing regulations were liberalized the number of daily newspapers in Seoul alone grew from 6 to 17, and dozens more were launched in other parts of the country. Moreover, a diversity of voices found expression, with opposition, progovernment, business, sports, and church papers competing with one another (Heo, Uhm, and Chang 2000; Webster 1992). In some countries, such as Ethiopia, newspapers renew newspapers' licenses annually following payment of a renewal fee. Licensing is contingent on proof of solvency, which requires all current and prospective newspapers to maintain a bank balance of Br 10,000 (US$1,250) as collateral against any offenses their journalists might commit. Publications that fail to prove solvency at the start of every year or whenever requested to do so by the Ministry of Information and Culture lose their license (Committee to Protect Journalists n.d.).
Entry restrictions come in other forms too. As Kassem reports, extensive registration requirements with uncertain delays led journalists in Egypt to set up their offices offshore. Furthermore, journalists were not allowed to become union members, and therefore to receive certain health benefits, unless they worked for a government newspaper. More than a third of Latin American countries regulate journalists through licensing or accreditation procedures (see the Inter­American Press Association database at http://www.sipiapa.org/).
Aside from the regulatory structure, the media business confronts forces that favor monopolies on the one hand, and other forces that favor producer diversity on the other, as described by Owen. First, the production of mass media content is characterized by enormous economies of scale, which tends to favor large firms. Second, advertising to large circulations is more efficient than advertising to small ones. However, a third basic characteristic is that output is heterogeneous: firms compete by differentiating their output, because different people have different tastes. This means that smaller companies can differentiate their content and find a niche. New, small firms seeking a niche may be more likely to diversify than larger, older ones. 6 For example, local newspapers may specialize by having more local content (which also means that they often cannot effectively compete in other localities). Owen cites the example of Ulaanbaator in Mongolia, which could probably not have supported 18 principal newspapers in 1994 if these had not been sharply differentiated along political and other lines.
Technology, infrastructure, and geography also limit the scale of newspapers and affect the nature of market competition, because they affect transport costs and delivery delays. These barriers are more easily breached by broadcast media, hence even the United States had national radio and television networks long before it had national newspapers. In Africa, where the state of technology is less developed and literacy is low, private radio stations seem to be booming (Economist 2002b). In Uganda, for example, those villages that in 1985 had 10 community broadcasting stations now have 300 or more.
One disadvantage that developing country governments face is their limited ability to enforce competition policy where such safeguards are needed. Some countries, both industrial and developing, prohibit or limit the cross­ownership of competing media in an effort to ensure greater diversity of sources of news and opinion. As Owen states, media concentration raises concerns if it results in monopoly or facilitates collusion leading to increased prices and reduced output. Aside from competition and diversity in content, concentration among media outlets in a given city might raise economic competition issues with respect to certain advertisers even if numerous other vehicles, such as television, the press, magazines, and online services, are available for the expression of ideas, including political dissent. Assessing anticompetitive behavior is always a difficult task, and the appropriate agencies in developing countries often lack the necessary skills and resources.
Legal Structure
Two types of legal institutions are critical to the performance of the media, namely, (a) those that determine access to information, and (b) those that constrain how the media use the information they obtain. The media industry's ability to report is constrained by the amount and type of information - on public and private agencies and on general economic conditions - to which it has access through either formal or informal channels. As Dyck and Zingales point out, information disclosure that is mandated by the government is the most reliable, because it is not affected by selectivity, and is not provided in exchange for something. Informal or unregulated ways of obtaining information include interviewing contacts or getting information from those who want to present a particular point of view to the public. Here I will restrict my comments to the formal process of obtaining information.
Information flow is regulated by a variety of laws that may give wide or preferential access to critical data. Laws regulating disclosure of company accounts or access to individuals' credit history determine how frequently and easily the media can obtain "formal'' information about such matters. Laws regulating information dissemination to the private sector are generally established to enable markets to work smoothly and to improve the enforcement of various other legislation, but market responses also depend critically on information mainly available in the public sector. Stiglitz argues that the information gathered by public officials at public expense is owned by the public, and that using that intellectual property for private use is just as serious an offense against the public as any other appropriation of public property for private purposes.
Starting with the constitution, several legal arrangements determine the conditions under which private individuals and private or public agencies obtain access to "public'' information. In many countries their constitution broadly delineates the basic rights of individuals to freedom of speech and sometimes to access to information. Supporting laws may come under a variety of names, depending on the country. Yet even with these basic rights outlined, actually getting information in a timely manner (in an interval short enough to be useful to those who demand it) is difficult, because laws have to be implemented, people have to be trained and given the incentives to respond swiftly, and the information has to be available in a readily accessible and understandable format.
Many countries have adopted freedom of information laws and others are in the process of doing so. The objective of such laws is to provide a framework that defines the degree of access to public information and the rights of individuals and organizations to obtain such information. The adoption of a freedom of information law can signal the government's commitment to transparency. It can also encourage private agents to ask for more information, as explained by Chongkittavorn in the case of Thailand. Currently about 46 countries have freedom of information laws, and the numbers are increasing daily; however, few poor countries have such a law, and surprisingly, only about 54 percent of high­income countries do (Islam forthcoming). 7 Table 1.1 shows some simple correlations between a freedom of the press indicator and an indicator of journalist abuse with the existence of a freedom of information law. The existence of a freedom of information law is negatively correlated with high state ownership of the media abuse of journalists and significantly positively correlated with press freedom. 8
While adoption of a freedom of information law is an important initiative, a critical question is how does a country implement it? One option is setting up a separate agency whose sole concern is to deal with requests for various types of information, or alternatively each government department or agency may be provided with specific guidelines relating to the provision of information. Once the agency and personnel are identified, institutions need to be designed so that requests for information are attended to promptly. Additional considerations are designing the format in which the information is distributed and the associated fees required for access.
In Portugal, the Commission for Access to Administrative Documents is responsible for deciding whether to grant requests for information involving certain official documents, as well as deciding what documents may be shared among the branches of government, hearing appeals, establishing a system of document classification, and monitoring the proper application of the Access to Administrative Documents Law and other similar legislation (see http://www.infocid.pt/infocid/2092_1.asp). In Latvia each government agency or public institution is required to publish a summary of all generally available information in the public register. No single independent agency oversees the implementation of the Freedom of Information Law, and the process of access to information is governed by separate legislation that describes the procedures for reviewing proposals, complaints, and submissions. Appeals for denial of access are possible, and must initially be made to the director of the respondent institution (see http://www.delna.lv/english/legal_norms/ln2.htm).
However, the public sector produces a great deal of information that can readily be made available without a freedom of information law. All countries produce some information on basic economic outcomes; however, it may vary in terms of quantity, quality, frequency, and ease of access. 9 Cameroon provides even basic data such as gross domestic product (GDP), foreign trade statistics, foreign direct investment, and government finances with a lag of several years. By contrast Armenia, also a low­income country, provides up­to­date information, with reasonable frequency, on most major economic or financial statistics, suggesting that collecting and disseminating such information is not necessarily a function of income. Of more than 200 countries around the world, the central banks of around 100 countries have web sites that publish information, though their quality and timeliness vary significantly.
Other laws restrict the use of information obtained. The purpose of defamation and insult laws, discussed by Peter Krug and Monroe Price in chapter 10 and Ruth Walden in chapter 11, is generally to protect individuals from abuse by the media. While some form of these laws is needed to protect the reputations of individuals and ensure the accuracy of reported news, they can also be used to harass journalists, thereby encouraging self­censorship by the media (Walden 2000).
With respect to the design of such laws three main issues stand out: (a) when libel is a criminal rather than a civil offense, journalists lean toward self­censorship; (b) when truth is not a defense for libel, journalists have incentives to limit their investigations; and (c) when laws provide protection against libelous statements about matters of public interest and require individuals to show that defamatory statements are knowingly or recklessly false and made with malicious intent, these favor journalistic freedom. Governments may also censor information through legal requirements for prepublication or prebroadcast reviews by government agencies. The natural incentive for journalists under these circumstances is to engage in self-censorship as a way of avoiding suspension.
Policies Governing Industries Related to the Media
Industries with direct links to the media include the paper and distribution industries. Even with free and independent media, if distribution is strictly regulated by the government, then the independence of the media can suffer. The government can also use price controls and taxes on inputs to disrupt operations, and the regulatory structure and condition of infrastructure can restrict media operations. For example, the Internet often provides a source of competition for domestic media and allows easy access to global media; however, in many countries Internet connections are difficult to maintain and expensive because the telecommunications sector is not developed. Moreover, although cybercafes are becoming more popular, in many countries access to computers is still limited.
Training and Capacity of Media Personnel
In many developing countries media personnel lack technical expertise, thereby hampering economic and political reporting. This includes both the skills of those directly involved in researching, analyzing, organizing, and writing or broadcasting the news and the managerial skills necessary to sustain the enterprise as a profitable business. As in other businesses, managerial skills may be learned over time, but training can help, particularly by exposing managers to decisionmaking and production techniques used in other countries. As Muchnik and Muchnik report, in the case of the Tomsk TV station, the appearance of foreign consultants in Russia in the early 1990s was extremely helpful, and foreign advice on managing advertising and production were critical to the station's success. Similarly in Poland, foreign investment helped bridge the management and skills gap.
What is arguably more difficult is reporting on economic and financial issues. Some sort of training can significantly enhance analysis of these issues by journalists. Poor analysis will fail to capture the more discerning readers and may misguide the less discerning ones. But hiring media personnel with the appropriate skills, even when possible, may not be a profitable undertaking unless a large enough audience of the discerning type exists. Exposing corruption or wrongdoing, however, does not necessarily require much understanding of the details of the relevant transactions. For example, bribe taking by government officials can be exposed without understanding how it may have affected economic outcomes. Marquez argues that people who are self­taught tend to be avid and quick learners and that any kind of education for journalists should focus on three key areas: determining aptitude and vocation, establishing that all journalism must be research oriented, and stressing the importance of ethical standards.
Checks and Balances
While an independent media sector is a desirable outcome, every agency or organization needs some checks and balances. Many in the media business see the role of the media as defenders of the truth and a voice for the people. Márquez (chapter 13) and Adam Michnik (chapter 18) both discuss the glory of the journalism profession, but also the need for journalists to be incorruptible, honest, and unprejudiced. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, we sometimes fail to maintain the high standards that we aspire to attain. Without checks and balances to ensure accountability and a sense of responsibility, the media can abuse their power. As Muchnik and Muchnik point out, the abuse of power may come about from an unclear understanding of what journalism is about. They discuss how they freely participated in politics, taking sides, until they realized the difference between being dedicated to ideas and forming political alliances with specific individuals, and that good­quality journalism means maintaining a certain distance from politicians.
As Robert Shiller (chapter 5) and Timothy Besley, Robin Burgess, and Andrea Prat (chapter 3) point out, the media not only disseminate information, but can also manipulate public opinion and raise issues to unprecedented levels of importance or "salience'' in the public eye. They can accelerate the rate at which news is transmitted, influence to whom it is transmitted, and affect the type of action taken in a given situation. They may not report all sides of an issue. Sometimes media actions can support greater transparency, but there is no guarantee that they will automatically do so. The desire to bring in new and exciting news can overwhelm the desire to "tell it as it is.'' Unfortunately, the bias toward sensationalism exists in all types of news media, including the more reputable ones, though one could argue that these tendencies are more muted the more reputable the source. One automatic check to abuse of power is the loss of influence over time if abuse is sustained.
An appropriate legal system attempts to balance free speech against abuse by the media. Another institutional solution is the establishment of self­regulation councils. Self­regulatory bodies are well established in some industrial countries, but they are only beginning to emerge in developing countries. Among the latter, Guyana and Tanzania are establishing self­regulatory press councils that will determine codes for honesty, fairness, respect for privacy, and general standards of taste. Councils use such codes to guide their decisions on complaints against the media. In many cases the councils replace traditional court processes. In Australia, for example, complainants are required to sign a declaration that they will not take their complaint to court if they are dissatisfied with the council's decision.
Certain factors determine the success of these councils. First, the decision to set up such councils needs to originate with the press itself and be desired by members of the press. Governments, nongovernmental organizations, or other interested parties can encourage the establishment of such councils. Governments might do so by promising lighter regulation in exchange for their creation. Supporting institutions, such as civil society organizations for media freedom and responsibility, can reinforce the work of councils. Second, press councils need to carry sufficient weight with the individual media organizations that media firms feel obliged to comply with their decisions (International Center against Censorship 1993, Article 19). This may be achieved in many ways, for example, council members may publicly ostracize those who do not abide by the council's decisions. Third, such councils require leadership and a genuine desire among the media profession to improve on their work. Fourth, designing ethical guidelines that balance media freedom and responsibility is critical. Fifth, to maintain legitimacy, standards have to be applied consistently.
Effective and independent judicial systems and other mechanisms that penalize undesirable behavior can complement the role of the media in improving governance, though an independent judiciary is insufficient to restrain arbitrary actions by the state. An independent judiciary can help protect journalists' rights, can help ensure that action is taken on matters exposed by the media, and can protect individu­ als from abuse by the media. In Zimbabwe, for example, the courts have had some success in protecting journalists' rights as discussed by Chavunduka. In the Philippines the media's exposure of toxic waste dumped by foreign military forces led to a congressional investigation, then to an official government investigation, and eventually to government enforcement of orders to discontinue the dumping.
Reach
Reach refers to the audience: how much access do people have to the print, electronic, or broadcast media? Media with reach have relevance for and bring news to most of the population. The effect that the media have on society depends to a large extent on whom they reach. The reach of newspapers, television, and radio varies a great deal across countries, with income being closely correlated with media penetration. Dyck and Zingales argue that newspaper readership numbers capture both the diffusion of newspapers and some measure of their overall credibility. That is, if newspapers were not credible, they would not be read. They find that ownership concentration has a negative and statistically significant effect on diffusion of the press and on the private sector's responsiveness to information disseminated by the media. Table 1.2 shows the diversity of penetration and circulation rates among countries at different income levels. While the high­income countries of Denmark, Japan, and the United States all have high levels of media penetration, Chad, Ethiopia, and Zambia, all low­income countries, vary widely in terms of media penetration. Botswana and Thailand have similar levels of GNP per capita, but differ markedly in the distribution of television sets.
On average, residents of industrial countries are more than 25 times more likely to receive a daily newspaper than residents in African countries; however, according to the World Association of Newspapers (2001), in many African countries, the average newspaper is read by as many as a dozen people. In villages in Bangladesh and Nepal newspapers are read out loud so that many others benefit in addition to the subscriber. While literacy does play a role in the disparity in measured circulation between countries, it is just one of the factors affecting the spread of the press. Both GNP per capita and literacy are lower in Ecuador than in Panama or Paraguay, but newspaper circulation is greater in Ecuador. Tradition or culture may also affect how people perceive different media: some cultures may be less television bound than others or less print bound than others at similar levels of GDP per capita. The state of infrastructure may also account for the differences.
Formal regression analysis indicates (table 1.3) that newspaper circulation is negatively related to illiteracy and income. This relationship is statistically significant. The Africa region has significantly lower circulation than other regions even after accounting for income and literacy differences. Illiteracy does not seem to affect television penetration rates in the same way as ethnic diversity does, though one might expect that in a multilingual context, there may be less demand for certain media if they cater to the main language. European countries and countries of the Organisation for Economic Co­operation and Development have higher television penetration rates than other countries even after accounting for income and ethnic differences (table 1.4). Dyck and Zingales find that a country's cultural tradition affects diffusion of the press.
Television viewers do not have to be literate, but they do need costly equipment, technology, and electricity. This puts television beyond the reach of many people in developing countries, with one caveat. If just one person in a community or village has a television, many others will have access to it. Radio broadcasting is cheaper, does not require electricity, and can be transmitted to remote areas to people who do not know how to read. Not surprisingly, radio receiver penetration is higher than other media penetration in all regions, and radio is the primary medium for reaching citizens in many developing countries. According to Strömberg in chapter 6, the radio broke rural isolation in the United States and increased the political power of rural counties. Strömberg finds that radio and television changed the political strength of different groups by affecting who was informed. In particular, minorities and those with little education gained from the introduction of television in the 1950s.
The difference between the reach of radio and of other media is far greater in developing than in industrial countries, with income and literacy affecting both supply and demand. To overcome demand constraints related to income, in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria, newspaper vendors charge people a fraction of the sales price to read the newspaper at the stand. International donors can play an important role in this context, and have supported telecenters that provide public access to a range of media and communications facilities in remote areas.
Higher media penetration does promote greater responsiveness by public and private agents as demonstrated by Dyck and Zingales and Besley, Burgess, and Prat. The latter look at media access in different states in India, within country comparisons having the advantage of adjusting for different political and economic systems in different countries. and find that government allocations of relief spending and public food distribution during natural disasters have been greater in states with higher newspaper circulation. The greater local presence of media allowed citizens to develop a collective voice, and the effect was greater for newspapers in local languages (Besley and Burgess 2000).
Even in countries with relatively low penetration rates, media actions can have significant consequences for a large number of people. For example, in Kenya, despite a low newspaper penetration rate of 9 per 1,000 people, the local press instigated a corruption investigation that led to a minister's resignation. In addition, by reaching influential coalitions that can affect financial or macroeconomic policies the media can affect the lives of the general population.
Government policies can also improve media access. Removing barriers to entry for new media enterprises, such as licensing requirements, would be a first step. Innovations by community groups and nonprofit organizations have also succeeded in increasing media penetration in poorer countries. Nonprofit foundations have significantly increased access to community radio in developing countries through wind-up radios and satellite technology. These services have proved especially important in delivering information about health and education issues. They have also provided a channel for residents of remote communities to voice their concerns and share information with other communities. Finally, investment in infrastructure and appropriate regulation that ensures access to infrastructure can go a long way toward increasing the reach of the media.
Foreign News Media
In an increasingly globalizing world the foreign media may also affect domestic outcomes. They may do so through two channels: (a) by influencing domestic opinions and coalitions; and (b) by influencing foreign opinions and coalitions, which then pressure their governments or international organizations to undertake actions that affect the country in question. Allowing the entry of foreign news media into domestic markets can immediately begin to ease the monopoly on news that characterizes some economies. For example, the state­owned Herald Online reported that Tanzania's recent elections were peaceful, free, and fair. By contrast, the Associated Press reported that ruling party representatives chased voters away from polling stations.
While foreign media reporting within a host country may seem more independent, over time their independence is usually eroded in conditions where the domestic media are severely curtailed. While foreign media may be subject to similar restrictions and harassment, in some cases they can complement the domestic media. For instance, harassment of foreign journalists attracts a great deal of unpleasant attention from the international community. Foreign journalists from high­income countries may also be better trained, be less vulnerable to domestic volatility (for example, if the parent company can tide them through bad times), have better management (see chapters 12 and 19), and be good competition for domestic media. Knowledge transfers from foreign owners with experience in journalism can generate dramatic increases in the coverage and quality of news. Finally, foreign or global media enable access to information on issues not reported by local media, as evidenced by countless examples of citizens first receiving news of domestic political crises through the foreign media.
Surprisingly, local news produced for the local market by foreign media is limited, and a World Bank (2001) project showed that foreign ownership is still relatively low. Across 97 countries studied, although most permit foreign ownership of the media, only 10 percent of the top five newspapers and 14 percent of the top five television stations are controlled by foreigners in these countries (chapter 8). The reasons for this low share could be either low profitability resulting from a small market share and few advertising revenues, or in some cases from government restrictions.
On the negative side, many feel that global media conglomerates may create unfair competition and take over the media market in developing countries. Like multinationals in other fields these firms, by virtue of their sheer size and superior financial condition, easily become dominant players in some markets. This can indeed stifle competition and the government may need to employ such regulations as restricting market share. Many also feel that an influx of foreign media tends to destroy the local culture. As Owen points out, in a competitive world the economics of mass media do not favor the survival of languages or cultures that are not supported by large populations or substantial specialized economic demand. This simply reflects the superior ability of such media to deliver consumer satisfaction at an attractive price rather than cultural imperialism. Regardless of the reasons for the success of global media, concerns that local culture important to long­term social welfare may be eroded can be dealt with by requiring cultural programming some of the time; however, these concerns need to be weighed against what the people in the market demand.
Conclusion
As has been aptly demonstrated around the world, the media influence economic, political, and social outcomes. By doing so, whether or not the outcomes support economic development depends on a variety of factors, many of which are discussed in this volume. The information industry, in which the media play a key role, tends to develop faster in democratic societies that generally foster freer information flows. However, the media industry can also promote greater degrees of freedom and stronger democracies over time. While each affects the other, the important question for those who are involved in designing policy is what types of discreet steps might be taken to establish and maintain free and independent media. This is a concern for all countries, rich and poor. Arbitrary actions by government are always to be feared. If there is to be a bias in the quantity of information that is released, then erring on the side of more freedom rather than less would appear to cause less harm.
Even nascent media in countries with nondemocratic and arbitrary governments stand a chance. Progress may occur in small steps, and may even be reversed temporarily, but if the people fight for a free press, there is hope. At some point the media reach and sustain what one might call a critical or threshold level of freedom when the people have become accustomed to this freedom, and constraints on this freedom are no longer possible.
In looking to shape policy so that it enables and supports the media to give voice to the people, the importance of research, study, and data gathering, common to work in other fields, has usually been underestimated. The development history of the media in countries with independent media gives clues as to what types of legal arrangements and coalitions have succeeded in bringing about change in countries. It is undeniable that laws advancing free speech matter: adopting a law in itself changes behavior. Yet how formal laws are enforced in different countries depends partly on the culture in which they are entrenched, that is, people's expectations and norms. Because of the limitations of legalistic approaches, the emphasis must be on creating a culture of openness where the presumption is that the public should know about and participate in all decisions that affect their lives.
While the legal framework defines certain rights, so does the ownership structure. Evidence indicates that the ownership structure of media firms and the nature of the owner, whether business or state, can clearly affect how and what information is disseminated. Economic conditions and overall industry structure also determine how the media perform.
A government wishing to truly expand the reach of the media can further this objective by enhancing competition, reducing restrictions on entry, and encouraging and participating in innovative ways to reach people. Establishing journalism schools or engaging with outside agencies to help train journalists is another avenue. Finally, there is no substitute for the voice of the people. If the people want and work for a more transparent and efficient economy, then they must fight for the freedom of those who disseminate information. They must fight for the right to know and the right to tell it like it is.
