Comment on page


Feedback from the GFMD IMPACT donor-practitioner-academic learning and information sharing meeting on 15 March 2021.

Overall event feedback

“I'm really interested to hear all these different initiatives that people are talking about [...] I would just like to understand more really.” - Donor
“I was completely impressed with this event and feel like it was/is much needed. I appreciate being included in the conversation as a researcher who has been involved with media development as well as studied this form of development without being part of the intervention.” - Academic/researcher
“Once again, congratulations to you for organizing such a rich and fruitful meeting. There are many useful lessons to be learned and debates to be followed up. Thank you all!” - Academic/researcher
As well as being heartened by the large turnout and lively discussions at the first meeting we are also pleased to report that the meeting received overwhelmingly positive feedback:
80% design/structure = good/excellent.
90% quality and effectiveness of the speakers, chairs & rapporteurs = good/excellent.
90% relevance of themes and topics discussed = good/excellent.
There is also considerable support for holding more in-depth conversations on the subjects discussed:
60% thought the breakout groups were too short
90% want to attend a longer meeting dedicated to the breakout group that they attended.

What topics and which speakers would you like to see in future meetings?

Responses from participants in breakout group 1

“Theories of change topic is a good one for donor-practitioner exchange because it is an area with much controversy. More knowledge could help improve the design of programs, so I would advocate more work on this topic through such exchanges.” - International media development organisation
“A continuation of the areas that we discussed would be very useful and how we can create a vision that is research supported and practitioner/collaborator-driven would be a big step. I also would very much appreciate a conversation about best practices (or movement "toward better practices") in media development in conflict/post-conflict/reconstruction environments where risk and protection of media practitioners is a central part of the issue. It would be really helpful to draw in practitioners and researchers around the world who are working on disinformation/misinformation issues and ways of addressing these in societies. How are donors/practitioners/media development organizations working on building civil society and media in concert so that the latter supports the former? How are organizations working long-term in environments that have had substantial donor funding over the last decade yet largely have media capture in these times? How is the concept of resiliency being operationalized/measured (pre/post interventions) in these and other challenging environments?” - Academic/researcher
“I would like to listen to more donors” - International media development organisation
"A follow up event with Professor Spurk on Theories of Change and result chains." - International media development organisation / News media, journalism and publishing
“Future business plan for media outlets.” - News media, journalism and publishing

Responses from participants in breakout group 2

“Global South media development approaches; donor information and learning systems (what are they?)” - International media development organisation
“Would love to hear media outlets talking about what impact means to them.” - International media development organisation
“The notion of impact raises the question of the absence of impact and obsolete intervention methodologies. Could practitioners, scientists and donors agree on a typology of interventions that can be assumed today to have had little or no impact?” - Academic/ researcher
“PRIMED's findings from learning questions would be really interesting--testing our assumptions about what indicators do (or don't) help us get at outcomes and/or impact.” - Donor/Funder
“Case studies of support for innovative and specialized reporting.” - Academic/researcher
Of those who answered the post-event survey, who attended the PRIMED breakout group:
100% wanted to attend another event on this subject
75% rated the quality and effectiveness of the structure of the meeting as Good
100% rated the speakers, chairs and rapporteur as good or excellent
75% rated the relevance of themes and topics discussed good or excellent

Responses from participants in breakout group 3

“Financial sustainability and public trust.” - Freedom of expression/civil society representative

Breakout groups

“Break out groups should improve moderation; instead of answering the questions (which were interesting) we got all kinds of different statements repeating usual complaints or concepts about theories of change, or experiences, etc. This does not lead us to new constructive ways to go.” - International media development organisation
“Find better ways to present results from breakout groups. - Apart from that well done!” - International media development organisation


“It's key for these meetings that they don't turn into pitching or PR opportunities for the media development organisations present. I think there should be a rule that no one organisation can present on its own behalf.” - International media development organisation
“Initial presentations might need to be shorter and more dynamic.” - Freedom of expression/civil society representative
“Include a little more participants from the other parts of the (African) continent. More academics.” - Academic/researcher

Follow-up meetings - Theories of Change

“It was an extremely rich and fruitful meeting, but I would like to see more lively debates between proponents of causal attribution and skeptics, with moderators but also provocative elements to spark the debate. I would like to see non-media-related academics from development or political studies to enrich the approach. Finally, I would like to have more speakers from the South, in all their diversity, using a greater number of working languages, with simultaneous translation.” - Academic/researcher

Other comments


“This is extremely fascinating and I want to read the first paper too.”
“Very insightful and eye opening.”
“Thanks for a great event.”
“Thank you everyone! Great insights and look forward to future discussions.”
“Many thanks! Fascinating and rich”

International media development organisations

"Thank you all so much! I really appreciate it.
"Appreciated the presentations and conversations."
"Thank you all for organizing!"
"Thank you all for the exchange!"