Literature review
This page features literature, case studies and mapping documents relevant to the Advocating for Public Interest Media and Journalism meetings in August and September 2024
Last updated
This page features literature, case studies and mapping documents relevant to the Advocating for Public Interest Media and Journalism meetings in August and September 2024
Last updated
This book is not yet published but is estimated to be published on 22nd October 2024.
Features previously unpublished interviews with network managers and journalists at Voice of America
Uses internal documents and private correspondence acquired via Freedom of Information requests
Builds a new theory about the government capture of public media and its relationship to democratic backsliding
The overall objective of the assignment was to map out and assess media coalitions in east, west and southern Africa, to contribute to the IMS Media Coalitions for Change (MC4C) project.
The assessment specifically aims to understand the development of innovative coalition approaches, systems and models that can strengthen the role of the media in democratisation in Africa, especially in collaboration with IMS partners and the networks and coalitions they are part of, and explore how coalition-building can contribute to media freedom through work in three distinct though related areas
The full report is available here
Media Matters draws together thinking and analysis that covers the breadth and depth of the media development landscape. The opening section, ‘Why Media Matters: Global Perspectives’ gathers the work of several thought leaders on major trends that cut across both the communications and development policy arenas; this is followed by an examination of the current debate that is engaging researchers, development professionals and media assistance experts alike, namely ‘How Media Matters: Measuring its Impact’. The third section, ‘Challenges in Media Matters: Practitioner Experiences’ presents a range of regional and sectoral case studies, and the final section forms a guide to cur- rent information sources and studies of the field of media support, in ‘Mapping the Sector - Literature, Surveys and Resources’.
Disinformation is for the information ecosystem what pollution is for nature. It upsets the existing equilibrium, harms organisms and prevents the overall system from functioning to the benefit of everyone. Thus, it may seem that any activity that combats disinformation has merit, because it helps to prevent it or even eradicate it. This paper presents a novel approach to the challenges associated with disinformation. It diagnoses a tendency towards stand-alone solutionism in most current media development strategies in this realm.
Internews’ new report documents the issues exiled media face and how governments, donors, and others can support these outlets to continue their vital work. The report, Flight and Fight: Supporting Exiled Media to Survive and Sustain is based on interviews with 25 exiled media outlets from 17 countries, including Cuba, Syria, Sudan, Russia, and China.
This paper explores the nuanced integration of AI in newsrooms across the V4 countries—Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. It highlights the substantial benefits of AI for efficiency and data management, especially for small and independent media outlets. Despite slow and cautious adoption, there is growing recognition of AI’s potential, particularly for automating repetitive tasks, allowing journalists to focus on critical topics. The research underscores the ethical concerns and need for transparency, reflecting a balance between technological advancements and journalistic integrity. It also contrasts V4 practices with global standards, noting the disparity in ethical guidelines and transparency efforts. The findings suggest that while AI offers significant opportunities, careful management is essential to uphold democratic values and foster regional collaboration.
The International Fund for Public Interest Media was originally proposed almost six years ago to solve two main problems.
The first was to mobilise money in the context of the looming threat of media extinction as the business model for independent media collapsed. The challenge was most acute in low- and middle-income countries.
The second was to provide a solution to donors – those with money – who wanted to support independent media but did not have the capacity, legitimacy or risk appetite to do so at the scale they felt was warranted.
A new report just published from the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), demonstrates just how sizeable those problems are.
The report is the most detailed mapping study of official international donor support to media and broader issues of “information integrity” ever undertaken. It makes for stark reading.
Lies spread six times faster than truth online. That’s a pretty alarming figure, but perhaps not as concerning as the amount of time it has taken the international development community to act in response to the world’s growing information crisis.
Misleading information, rumours, and lies – which caused a profound human toll during the global pandemic – look set to be turbocharged by artificial intelligence. At the same time, the collapse of traditional advertising markets has left independent media vulnerable to capture and suppression by illiberal political interests.
In a global context of autocratisation, censorship of the media is increasing, more journalists are being harassed, and freedom of expression is deteriorating across the world. While global technology platforms have improved access to information for billions of people, they also facilitate disinformation and misinformation campaigns and weaken the economic viability of print media, TV and radio stations. When used effectively, official development assistance (ODA) can help defend and promote public interest media, and the integrity of the information environment more generally.
The OECD DAC Governance Network (GovNet) commissioned this study to improve GovNet members’ responses to these mounting challenges. It involves a quantitative analysis of development partners’ funding reported to the DAC between 2002 and 2021, as well as a qualitative review of development partners’ policies and practices and four case studies of media assistance provided since 2016 to Ukraine and the Western Balkans, Myanmar, Tanzania and global programmes.
The full report is available here
TAI is a collaborative of donors whose priorities include supporting evolution and sustainability of a healthy information ecosystem. Given our coordination role, it is important for TAI to understand the funding trends, determine the current distribution of grantmaking, and identify gaps that might merit more support.
This mapping complements the analysis performed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) DAC Governance Network (GovNet), who undertook a parallel review of Official Development Assistance (ODA) flows related to the information ecosystem as reported to (OECD). Therefore, the focus of our analysis is the philanthropic funding directed to aid recipient countries, which will allow us to compare it with the ODA flows to better understand the difference in scale between governmental and philanthropic funding to support information ecosystems. Additionally, it will further inform our understanding of where the lion’s share of funds is going and where there are significant gaps.
This study analyzes trends in media development funding between 2010 and 2019 and looks at donor priorities going forward.7 Taking a historical look, it asks: how much funding have the major OECD DAC donors committed to media assistance and what are their main approaches? It also looks forward and asks: what are the prospects for new commitments, investments, and funding approaches aimed at protecting free and independent media by major bilateral donors?
This study has two components. First, an analysis of development finance data collected annually by the OECD DAC between 2010 and 2019 sheds light on the amount and nature of ODA allocated to media development and how that has changed over time. Second, in-depth interviews were conducted with several of the donor agencies that allocate the largest amounts of funding to media assistance and major international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) that implement media support programs. These interviews were supplemented with a review of available reports from these organizations, including research reports, program evaluations, and financial information.
This year's report reveals new findings about the consumption of online news globally. It is based on a YouGov survey of more than 95,000 people in 47 countries representing half of the world's population. The report looks at the growing importance of platforms in news consumption and production, including more visual and video-led social media such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. It explores audience attitudes towards the use of AI in news, the role of creators and news influencers, how much people pay for news and more.
This compilation provides a comprehensive overview of resources dedicated to supporting independent media in exile. It includes a carefully curated selection of organisations, funding opportunities, and research.
This resource is available here
This compilation of open access publications published in 2022 offers a curated selection of essential resources in media development. Highlighting particularly commendable guides, handbooks, and remarkable works—shaded in grey—this collection serves as a valuable reference for media professionals, scholars, and practitioners.
The full report is available here.
UNESCO’s World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: Global Report 2021/2022, analyses the state of media freedom, pluralism, independence, and safety of journalists over the past five years. Especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, access to information has never been more imperative. News media has struggled to keep up with the demand for reliable and quality news as revenue declines and limited capacities. This issue has particularly affected the Global South. This crisis was further accelerated by the easy access that audiences found to disinformation, leading to "a pandemic of non-verified or misleading information. Such falsehoods- spread intentionally or not- sowed confusion, division and, discord, impacting lives and livelihoods around the world."
This comprehensive report provides an extensive overview of the state of global media philanthropy. It includes discussion of data from the Media Data Map, results from a survey of leading organizations engaged in funding media-related projects, analyses of existing literature and reports, and insights offered by experts across a range of media funding issues. It concludes that, ‘power dynamics are skewed in favour of American funders’, ‘foundations can have an outsized influence on a country’s media system’ and ‘funders need to see the bigger picture’. (Humanitarian Journalism)
KEY FINDINGS
When donors provide assistance to the media sector, they frequently back projects that aim to strengthen the media’s contribution to good governance in some way or another. This kind of funding is consistent with recent declarations made by the international community on the importance of protecting independent media for the sake of democracy and development. Yet, in the bigger picture, donors still only commit a tiny fraction to this sector and appear to be responding slowly, if at all, to the unique challenges of press freedom in the digital age.
Media assistance represented on average just .3 percent of total official development aid (ODA) between 2010 and 2015.
Donor flows to media are small, but are holding steady.
China is an increasingly active player in terms of global media aid flows, although its interventions are largely focused on developing infrastructure and take the form of loans rather than development grants.
This report describes different phenomena of what the authors from DW Akademie, Fondation Hirondelle, and CIMA call the dark side of the media, and it looks at how the dark side interacts in a dynamic way with other features of the governance environment. It analyses societal dynamics and points out implications for media development.
This CIMA report examines the benefits and challenges of measuring audiences for news media and media development practitioners.
Audience measurements, with their resulting influence on content and commercialization, are essential components of financially viable media and media markets. They help create marketplaces where diverse media can compete in viable niches, offer audience insights and thus increase the likelihood that media organizations will produce relevant content, and play an essential role in reducing corruption by exposing it. From a media development perspective, audience measurements reveal whether people are engaging with the content that news media produce. Although it has become essential for media organizations to have core strengths in understanding their audiences, building capacity for measuring audiences is seldom included in media development initiatives.
Download the full report here.
The Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Penn - sylvania, Fondation Hirondelle, Internews Network, the United States Broadcasting Board of Governors, and the Center of Innovation for Media, Conflict, and Peacebuilding at the United States Institute of Peace commissioned this report following a five-day multistakeholder meeting of donors, implementers, and academics on how to better evaluate media’s impact in ameliorating conflict, at the Caux Conference Center in Switzerland. The report both reviews the state of the art in evaluating media interventions in conflict and outlines the Caux Guiding Principles (hereinafter, Caux Principles) for improving the evaluation process. It stresses effective evaluation as a critical step forward for using the media in conflict prevention and peacebuilding.
The Mapping of EU Spending on Media Project, initiated by the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) in 2023, endeavors to tackle this complex question (how does EU funding contribute to the evolution of the European news media landscape?) through interviews with EU grantees as well as empirical research anchored in data on the specific areas where EU funds have been allocated.
The current study provides an overview of the first phase of the project, which focused on collecting data to better understand the allocation of EU funding for media-related activities. It examines the financial support provided by the EU over the period 2018-2024, including statistics on the amount of funding allocated, the topics and themes covered by the grants, the average grant size, the distribution of funds among recipient countries, the EU bodies responsible for disbursing the finances, target countries and type of activities most funded.
The primary objective of this initial study is not to evaluate funding decisions or analyse the strategies behind fund allocation. Instead, its purpose is to provide a description of how EU funding is distributed to media-related projects. The empirical data collected for this study will serve as the foundation for the next phase of the project, which will focus on assessing the impact of financial support in each specific area and in a series of case studies of EU-funded programs.
In Spring 2024, a delegation from the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) conducted a press freedom fact-finding mission to Tbilisi, Georgia as part of a project funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Throughout the mission, ECPMF met with Georgian journalists and media workers, journalists working in exile in Tbilisi, NGOs, activists, political figures, the National Communications Commission, and the office of the Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia.
ECPMF publishes a report detailing the findings of the mission, which paint a picture of independent media in the midst of an existential crisis.
European Journalism Centre - ADAM THOMAS
These three separate reports each provide a descriptive overview of the landscape of Philanthropic journalism funding in three European countries. They include a map of the key funders, examples of current funding and recommendations for future funding.
The December 2017 edition of Alliance Magazine included a special feature on philanthropy and the media. This included articles from journalists working at publications including Spiegel, The Guardian and the BBC, as well as representatives from a range of foundations. (Humanitarian Journalism)
The aim of this report is to map philanthropic interventions that support diversity, equity, and inclusion in journalism from 2009 – 2015. It draws on data from Media Impact Funders.
This research offers an extensive analysis of the state of foundation funding for non-profit media in the US, based on an analysis of 32,422 journalism and media-related grants totalling $1.8 billion distributed by 6,568 foundations between 2010 and 2015. It finds, for example, that public media received approximately $796 million or about 44% of the $1.8 billion in grant money, and twenty-five public media stations and content producers accounted for 70% of all funding. (Humanitarian Journalism)
The goal of this report is to provide a comprehensive overview and assessment of the approaches being employed in this formative period of assessing media impact, with a focus on what is termed here a social value perspective. Social value in this context refers to analytical approaches that extend beyond financial measures of success to take into account criteria such as improving the well-being of individuals and communities across a wide range of dimensions that are central goals of most public interest media initiatives. This report seeks to identify relevant analytical approaches, methodologies, and metrics for assessing media impact in an effort to develop a baseline inventory of analytical tools, methods, and metrics that can inform further work in this area; and to identify approaches that appear particularly promising.
This report discusses the implications of the entry of ‘new foundations from the new media technology sector’ into the field of media development. It illustrates how these foundations are changing the nature of media assistance. One of the recommendations is for U.S. foundations to, ‘try harder to think beyond their cultural context’ (Humanitarian Journalism)
EU Funding in the Media - Media and Journalism Research CenterMedia and Journalism Research Center -
