citizen media – Page 12

Community Broadcasting: A way forward in Asia

In an earlier post, I wrote about what I presented to the workshop on community broadcasting and ICTs during Asia Media Summit 2007 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, last week.

The workshop on ‘Connecting Communities through Community Broadcasting and ICTs’ gave us a chance to clarify key issues and concerns, and to agree on a common understanding for future action.

On behalf of our workshop, dynamic young Manisha Aryal, broadcast activist from Nepal who currently works for InterNews in Pakistan, presented our recommendations to the Summit plenary.

Here, for the record, are the recommendations. I don’t hold my breath on this, but it’s good to synthesize a long and hard day’s work — over nine hours of talking! — into a few short paras.

Connecting Communities Though Community Radios and ICT

Recognizing the importance of community media in economic, political and social development, in promoting good governance practices, and in empowering marginalized groups and communities in participating fully in society in urban, rural as well as remote areas; and

Understanding the importance of encouraging community media initiatives that are owned and managed by communities and with material produced predominantly by, for and about communities,

We, the participants at the workshop on Connecting Communities through Community Radios and ICTs at Asia Media Summit 2007:
• Advocate for the recognition of community radio and other community media as a distinct tier of legislation and regulation, alongside public service and commercial broadcasting, thus, contributing to the promotion of “air diversity”
• Advocate for the recognition of community media practitioners as valuable, professionally competent resources who can be involved in both peer training and training of other media professionals
• Organize awareness building and sensitization programs on community radio and other ICTs’ potential in development for legislators and community broadcasters
• Invite community media practitioners and include the topic of community broadcasting prominently in regional and global meetings (for example: a plenary session on community media at AMS 2008, World Electronic Media Forum later this year, etc.)
• Organize training and mentoring sessions for Community Broadcasting practitioners with special recognition of the role of younger generations on how community radio can capitalize on the development in the ICT sector, on new ways of addressing financial and organizational sustainability, etc.
• Include Community Media practitioners in the documentation and sharing of local and indigenous knowledge, as well as other discussions on global themes (for example the discussions on GM, MDGs, etc.)
• Look for ways to ground community media initiatives to initiatives in other sectors (health, agriculture, education, etc.)
• Facilitate partnerships between efforts to promote community broadcasting and efforts to promote newer ICTs among communities such as Community Multimedia Centers, etc.
• Recognize community broadcasting stations as an effective entry point to take ICTs to the grassroots both in rural as well as urban settings.
• Document and disseminate best-practices and learnings in community broadcasting

Photo courtesy Manori Wijesekera, TVEAP

Communities are not what they used to be…so let’s get real!

I like busting myths when I see them. That’s probably the result of my training as a journalist to be evidence-based, open-minded and always ask probing questions.

This makes me popular in some circles and very unwelcome in others!

I took a few shots at persistent development myths while speaking last week to a group of Asian broadcasters gathered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for a workshop on ‘Connecting Communities through Community Broadcasting and ICTs’ in the run-up to Asia Media Summit 2007.

I was speaking during a session on ‘ICTs – Bringing Added Value to Community Radio’. ICT stands for information and communication technologies.

The first myth I exposed was what I call the development community’s ‘rural romance’ — almost exclusive obsession with the rural poor to the exclusion of similar, or even more compelling, needs of the urban poor. I have already devoted an entire blog post to this topic, so won’t repeat it here.

The next myth I tackled was the popular notion of ‘communities’.

I told my audience of researchers, activists and broadcasters: Communities are not just rural and unspoilt as some of you might imagine.

Here’s the relevant excerpt from my remarks:

What does ‘community’ meant to many card-carrying members of the development community? For starters:
• To begin with, people must be remote and rural, and in a geographically confined location.
• They are invariably poor, under-developed and living on the edges of survival.
• If they also have unique cultural artefacts or performances, that would offer convenient photographic or videographic opportunities to the development workers travelling from the city bearing gifts.

You get the idea. Now I ask you to get real.

Yes, such idyllic, hapless and romanticised communities probably exist in some endangered form in a few locations. But in most parts of the Real World (at least in Asia), communities -– both urban and rural -– are undergoing rapid transformation:
• People are on the move in search of jobs and opportunities.
• Technologies are on the move — especially mobile phones that no development agency put their money on!
• People are discerning and demanding, not blissfully ignorant or willing to settle for any offering from the outside!

These may seriously shatter some of your visions of an idyllic and ideal community, but these are essentially positive changes.

And communities no longer need to be defined merely by geographic proximity.

Newer ICTs now allow individuals scattered over larger areas to be connected via the airwaves or the web. This enables the creation and sustaining of:
• communities of practice;
• communities of shared interest/need;
• single issue agitation such as rallying around for constitutional reform, or repeal of an unfriendly law; and
• clamouring for political or democratic reforms.

So please move away from your narrow understanding of communities. Members of any of the above kinds of communities can benefit from community broadcasting.

I added that broadcasting itself isn’t what it used to be. The days of centrally manufactured content being imposed upon a hapless audience are now over.

Interactivity and user-generated content are IN.

Pompous, know-all anchors and presenters are OUT.

My plea to all my colleagues was: Things have moved on in the media world. So must we!

Read full text of my remarks to the workshop (cleaned up after delivery)
ams-2007-connecting-people-via-icts-ng-remarks.pdf

Read my op ed on Media: Step-child of WSIS? published by OneWorld in Nov 2003

Asia Mediasaurus Summit 2007 now on in Kuala Lumpur?

As the Asia Media Summit 2007 started this morning at Hotel Nikko in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia, I had to kick myself hard to make sure it was not a bad dream concocted by my often over-active imagination.

The first plenary session was on ‘Era of participatory media: Rethinking mass media’. It was a response to what many of us had urged the organisers, Asia Pacific Institute for Broadcasting Development (AIBD), to do this time around: take a closer look at how the citizens’ media are evolving and impacting mainstream media.

The session had three speakers — the Director General of Deutsche Welle (DW) of Germany, Director General (international planning) of NHK Japan, and an Editor Emeritus (no less!) from The Toronto Star newspaper in Canada. (The fourth speaker, Director General of Al Jazeera Network, didn’t show up – is it because he no longer holds that job after a recent shake-up of the network’s top management? See: Pro-US coup at Al Jazeera?)

Image courtesy AIBD

The panel was chaired by Jennifer Lewis, who edits Singapore Straits Times Online, Mobile and Print offering — better known by its abbreviation STOMP. She was the only interesting speaker and, tellingly, the only speaker who had any direct experience with the new media or participatory media.

Age has something to do with it, I guess. I’m 41 years old, and I don’t consider myself a digital native. I didn’t grow up with computers and mobile phones like my 11-year-old daughter is now doing. For all my interest in the new media, I remain a digital immigrant trying to find my way in the digital world.

For sure, DW, NHK and The Toronto Star are venerable media institutions that have long served the public interest. No argument there. But why were their chiefs pontificating on the limitations of new media — especially blogs — while there was not a single new media practitioner on the panel (not counting Jennifer, who as moderator didn’t get to share her own experience)?

We sat there hearing from the worthies of the old media that bloggers have limitations of outreach, legitimacy and credibility. They grudgingly acknowledged the existence and some advantages the new media have over their own (old and tired?) media. But all of them failed to say anything new or interesting.

Some, like the emeritus Canadian editor, in fact could not understand why there was no business model in blogs. (Yes, we know it stumps the commercialised media to see so many of us working for no gains or perks of any kind!). He then ventured to make sweeping generalisations about all new media by trying to make a tenuous link between new media platforms and their use by terrorist groups. That was so off the mark that does not warrant a response. The moral is: Elderly editors must stick to what they know best.

During question time, a few audience members tried to point out the complementarity of the old and new media, but by then the tone had already been set: this is going to be yet another gathering of the now rapidly endangered mediasaurus – about whom I have talked about in this previous post.

AMS 2007’s first session showed us well and clear the great divide between the old media and new media. The panel failed miserably and completely to find any bridge across the two. It was doomed from the start because there was no representative of the new media on it.

Asia’s largest gathering of media managers and policy makers has got off to an inauspicious start.

I don’t want to spend three days of my time if this is going to be Asia Mediasaurus Summit.

Source: http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/ariaillg2.jpg

Radio Sagarmatha: Kathmandu’s Beacon of hope on 102.4 MHz turns 10

Today, 23 May 2007 is a very special day for broadcasting in South Asia.

Radio Sagarmatha, the first independent community broadcasting station in South Asia, completes 10 years on the air today. It’s certainly a moment to reflect and rejoice for all of us concerned with broadcasting and the public interest in Asia.

Image courtesy Radio Sagarmatha

Here’s how the station introduces itself on its website:
Broadcasting daily from the center of the Kathmandu Valley on FM 102.4 MHz from 5 am to 11 pm, the pioneering radio station has earned a name as a free, independent and highly credible radio station in keeping with its objectives of producing a cadre of professional journalists, addressing the information needs of audiences, stimulating awareness and participation in public issues, and facilitating democratization and pluralism.

The Sagarmatha story is of particular interest to me personally.

Firstly, many involved in founding and running this station are good Nepali friends whose resolve and professionalism I salute on this 10th birthday.

Secondly, this radio station exposed to the whole world a persistent myth that was fabricated and distributed globally by Unesco and its local cronies: that community radio has been thriving in Sri Lanka from the early 1980s. I’ve lived all my life in Sri Lanka, and I’ve spent the past 20 years working in the media, but I have yet to find a single community radio station there — simply because no government has allowed any to be set up! I’ve been writing about this for years, but I’m a lone voice against Unesco’s well-funded ‘myth factory’ working overtime! Read my Panos Feature: Radio suffers as Colombo bosses callthe shots (October 2003).

But enough of that old hat. Today is Sagarmatha’s Day! Happy birthday to the courageous public radio station and everyone involved, past and present.

Recently, supporting the radio station’s nomination for an international media award (to be announced soon), I wrote a brief account about Sagarmatha. It has not been published until now, so here it is, with minor edits:

Kathmandu’s Silent Revolution

Almost a decade ago, a silent revolution started in the Nepali capital of Kathmandu. One day in May 1997, a senior official of the Ministry of Communications handed over a piece of paper to Raghu Mainali, representing a group of Nepali journalists and civil society organisations. It was the broadcast license permitting the first-ever citizen-owned, non-commercial, public interest radio broadcasting station anywhere in South Asia. Soon afterwards, Radio Sagarmatha (RS) was on the air, using the FM frequency 102.4 MHz.

The airwaves will never be the same again in the world’s most populous sub-region, where governments had a strict monopoly over broadcasting for decades.

The broadcast license did not come easily: it was under consideration for over four years, and entailed considerable lobbying by Nepali journalists and civil society groups. At the forefront in this quest was the Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ), a non-governmental organisation and a collective of journalists strongly committed to sustainable development, human rights and media freedom.

The senior and highly respected Nepali journalist Bharat Koirala provided advice and leadership for setting up RS, which was cited when he was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award — ‘Asia’s Nobel Prize’ — in 2002.

Read a brief history of Radio Sagarmatha on its website

As a long-standing partner of NEFEJ, we have had the opportunity to observe the evolution of RS from humble beginnings to what it is today. Remarkably, NEFEJ colleagues had laid the groundwork for the radio station in anticipation of the license: the hardware, manpower and institutional framework were ready to go on the air soon after official sanction. Beginning with an initial two hours of broadcasts, RS gradually increased its transmissions, providing a mix of music, news and current affairs, sports and cultural entertainment to the Kathmandu city and valley — home to nearly 2 million people. While broadcasting primarily in Nepali, it also carries programming in minority languages and English. In recent years, RS has also rebroadcast selected programmes from BBC World Service Nepali transmissions.

Image courtesy BBC Online Image courtesy Radio Sagarmatha

RS blazed a new trail in broadcasting in Nepal, and in its wake a large number of commercial FM stations and other community broadcasting stations have been set up. The Kathmandu valley’s hills are alive with a cacophony of voices, offering the people a greater choice than ever before. Across Nepal, RS has inspired a plethora of community-owned, community-based radio stations, who are enjoying different degrees of success. RS has also trained a significant number of radio professionals – from announcers and producers to technicians – some of who have moved on to employment with other channels. This commitment to capacity building continues.

In today’s multi-channel environment, RS retains its strong commitment to the public interest, good journalism and high production values. Among others, the following distinguishes this station:

• RS increases people’s participation in debating important day-to-day issues that directly affect their lives and jobs. Roaming producers talk to not just city dwellers but to people living in the most remote areas of Kathmandu.

• RS serves as a people’s forum to examine the merits and demerits of various development policies, efforts and approaches in Nepal, undertaken by government, development donors, civil society and others.

• RS has played its part to bridge Nepal’s digital divide. Suchana Prabidhi dot com (meaning ‘Information technology dot com’) is a popular programme that browses the Internet live on radio, connecting the unconnected radio listeners with information available online.

• In spite of being supported by a large number of development donors, including some UN agencies, RS has maintained its editorial independence, without allowing itself to become a propaganda outlet for any entity.

But it was in Nepal’s recent pro-democracy struggles that Radio Sagarmatha’s commitment to the public interest was truly tested and reaffirmed. The station joined human rights activists, progressive journalists and civil society groups in the mass movement for political reform, including the restoration of parliamentary democracy suspended by the King’s autocratic rule. The regime – seeking complete control over Nepalis’ access to information and independent opinions – imposed a blanket ban on private broadcasters carrying news. Soldiers were posted inside and around Radio Sagarmatha for eight days. Even after they withdrew, the spectre of absolute monarchy hung over all media for months.

Read BBC Online story: The Muzzling of Nepalese Radio (22 April 2005)

Read IPS story: Nepal plunged into the Dark Ages, cry dissidents

Soldier outside Radio Sagarmatha station - bad old days, now gone

That seige continued for much of 2005. On 27 November 2005, I was with some NEFEJ colleagues at a regional media workshop in Siem Reap, Cambodia, when the disturbing news reached us that RS had been forced off the air after police raided the station, seized its transmission equipment and arrested five journalists and technicians. The incident had happened while RS was relaying BBC Nepali Service live from London.

Fortunately, the judiciary intervened. Two days later, responding to a massive outcry from within and outside Nepal, the Supreme Court ordered the authorities to allow RS to continue its transmissions. The station started broadcasting news and current affairs again, and other stations soon found their courage.

The next few months leading to April 2006 were crucial for all associated with the pro-democracy movement. During this period, amidst various pressures, threats and obstacles, the managers and journalists at RS played a pivotal role in ensuring the free flow of information and plurality of views in Nepal. When broadcasting news was banned, RS resorted to innovative ways of getting information across while getting around the jack-boot of bureaucracy.

One method: singing the day’s news — as there was no restriction on broadcasting musical content!

The unwavering resolve of RS, other independent media and pro-democracy activists led to the restoration of parliamentary democracy in April 2006 and the subsequent marginalization of the monarchy. Now the pioneering radio station is working hard to ensure that Nepalis would make better use of their ‘second chance’ in democracy in less than two decades.

As Radio Sagarmatha now enters its second decade, there is much unfinished business: Nepal is one of the most impoverished countries in the world, held back by a decade of civil war. A free, independent and responsible media – epitomized by Radio Sagarmatha – will be essential for Nepal to break from the past and usher in a new era of peace, prosperity and equality.

Listen to Radio Sagarmatha Online

World Association of Community Broadcasters (AMARC) Asia Pacific website

Can you make a one minute film for a better planet?

One minute – or 60 seconds – is a lot of time on the air. Our friends in radio and TV broadcasting know this well.

And with shrinking attention spans, many news items on TV are now being packaged for a minute, or not much longer.

Now, Friends of the Earth (together with FilmMinute) are challenging us all to come up with very short films that are one minute long — and still pack a message that benefits our planet.

Image courtesy FoE UK

Their challenge: make a film of exactly 60 seconds which explores how we look after our planet and use it like there is a tomorrow.

Here are the key rules of the game:

60 seconds – no more, no less.
Ideally broadcast quality.
Consider audience – Internet, TV, phones, etc.
Contributors must be the sole author(s).
You can submit more than one film.
No unlicenced use of copyrighted material.
No rude, unlawful or discriminatory material.
No promotion of products or services.
Some prizes are only open to UK residents.
All green one-minute films can be entered, regardless of previous screenings and awards.

Deadline is 20 August 2007. That should give us plenty of minutes to come up with some really compelling one minute films.

Image courtesy FoE

Helpful links:

Making your greenfilm

How to submit your film (via YouTube!)

Competition rules and regulations in detail

Awards and prizes
FilmMinute – the international one minute film festival: make every second count

Press freedom in the digital age: Seeing beyond our noses and tummies

See later post on 3 May 2008: Who is afraid of Citizen Journalists?

On 3 May 2007, we mark another World Press Freedom Day.

This day is meant to ‘raise awareness of the importance of freedom of the press and to remind governments of their duty to respect and uphold the right to freedom of expression enshrined under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.’

Read more about the Day on the Wikipedia and World Association of Newspapers. (Ah yes, that cartel of governments called UNESCO also puts up a show every year to mark this day, but it’s no better than the mafia bosses coming together to pontificate about the rule of law and justice for all. So let’s completely ignore the irrelevant UN behemoth and its meaningless hot air.)

The essay I wrote two weeks ago about saving our (electro-magnetic) spectrum to safeguard media freedom and media pluralism has been widely reproduced on the web.

That’s precisely the kind of insidious, hidden dangers to media freedom that don’t receive sufficient attention at many events to mark World Press Freedom Day.

I found this out the hard way when the Editors Guild of Sri Lanka invited me to address their observance of the 2001 World Press Freedom Day in Colombo. In the audience were over 250 Sri Lankan journalists and editors, and my topic was global trends and challenges to press freedom.

I decided to talk about ICTs – information and communication technologies – and how they were impacting the profession and industry of journalism. I recalled how technologies like mobile phones and satellite television had completely revolutionised the nature of news gathering and dissemination during the 1990s. The Internet was once again turning the whole media world upside down, I said: sooner rather than later, the impact of these developments would be felt in little Sri Lanka.

I argued that by being well informed and prepared, we could adapt better to the new challenges posed by the Internet, and we will be able to seize the many opportunities the new medium offers to consolidate press freedom. I mentioned some examples from the Asia Pacific and elsewhere how social activists, indigenous people and political groups – including separatist organisations – are using the power of the Internet to disseminate information and opinions at a low cost to a worldwide audience, and how states and their censors were increasingly unable to control such flows across political borders.

Unfortunately, a section of the audience felt very strongly that I was talking ‘pie in the sky’ when journalists in Sri Lanka were grappling with much more urgent issues of survival – such as low salaries, poor working conditions, and threats of physical harm or even death in the line of duty.

I was told — firmly — not to talk about computers and Internet when some media organisations did not even provide sufficient seating or (book) library facilities for their journalists. “Internet is good for pampered western journalists. We have survival issues,” one ardent critic said.

Now, it’s far more interesting to talk to a room full of disagreeing people. I took these comments in that spirit.

In the ensuing discussion, I readily agreed that all immediate factors mentioned by my detractors were indeed major concerns. My point, simply, was that we could not afford to ignore the bigger trends and processes that shape our industry and redefine how we reach our audiences.

Cartoon courtesy WAN

Just as terrestrial television broadcasters had to adjust and reorient themselves when faced with challenges from satellite television in the 1990s, the entire media sector – print and broadcast – has to come to terms with the Internet and World Wide Web.

I added: It doesn’t do any good to bury our head in the sand and wish it to go away. The much better option, as Sir Arthur Clarke has suggested, is ‘cautious engagement of the new media, so that we can exploit the inevitable’

Exploiting the inevitable is precisely the pragmatic approach we need. The globalisation of economics, media and information is taking place regardless of our individual opinions and reactions. By positioning ourselves for cautious engagement and to take advantage of tools and opportunities ushered in by the digital age, we can promote both media freedom and media pluralism.

Three years later, I expanded these ideas into a semi-academic paper (that is, as academic as I can ever get!) presented to the Annual Conference of the Asian Media Information and Communication Centre (AMIC) held in Bangkok, Thailand, in July 2004. I titled it: Media Pluralism in the Digital Age: Seize the Moment

It was later published in AMIC’s quarterly journal, Media Asia. Here’s how I ended my paper:

Newer ICTs can strengthen the outreach, quality and inclusiveness of the mass media. The true potential of this change can only be tapped when all stake-holders of the media play their part. A particular challenge to the ICT4D community is advocating the policy and legislative reform agenda that will enable this process.

There is an interesting post script to my experience with the Sri Lankan media on World Press Freedom Day 2001 quoted at the beginning.

During the past three years, more journalists, producers and their gatekeepers have begun using the Internet as a tool, information resource or alternative medium for expression. The initial apprehensions that some professionals harboured about this new medium have been replaced with growing enthusiasm and a recognition of its utility.

The vindication of my initially disputed seminar remarks came sooner than I expected. My most vehement critic that day was a fire-breathing young reporter then working for a Sinhala newspaper. Less than a year later, this avowed sceptic of the Internet launched his own website to disseminate news and commentary on social, political and economic issues that he felt he could not freely cover in the mainstream print outlets. The fact that his initiative did not last more than a few issues is another matter; clearly, he has been converted.

He would be happy to hear that I have been among regular visitors to his website.

Media Helping Media website

Mediasaurus — and the rise of bloggers

Earlier this month, I referred to science fiction writer Michael Crichton’s 1993 Wired article titled ‘Mediasaurus’ — in which he talked about how television as we know it (or knew it, at the time) was doomed.

I’ve just come across this cartoon, which I can’t resist sharing.

Cartoonists are the social philosophers of our time. And no one else achieves a better economy of words.

Source: http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/ariaillg2.jpg

SOS: Save Our Spectrum for media freedom

I’m strongly committed to promoting media freedom, but have never been the placard-carrying, slogan-shouting type. Street activism is necessary — but not sufficient.

I’ve been more interested in studying trends and conditions, trying to anticipate what the next big threats, challenges and opportunities are, and how best we can respond to them.

For years, I’ve been writing and talking about the need for proper spectrum management as a pre-condition for media freedom and media pluralism. Last week, I once again spoke about these core issues at OUR Media 6 Conference in Sydney.

I’ve just adapted my Sydney panel remarks into an op ed essay, just published by the UK-anchored media website, Media Helping Media.

Here are the first few paras:

On May 3, the annual World Press Freedom Day will once again be observed worldwide, focusing public attention on a multitude of threats to freedom of expression through the mass media.

But amidst the extremely relevant and necessary slogans, we are unlikely to hear this one: Hands off our spectrum!

Yet saving our spectrum is critical for ensuring media freedom.

The electro-magnetic spectrum has been called the ‘invisible wealth of nations’ — conventional broadcasting relies on the fair, equitable and sound management of this common property resource.

And as economic and cultural practices move more and more into the digital realm, the spectrum’s value is only set to increase.

But few people -– even within the media profession and industry -– appreciate our dependence on this finite resource. Out of sight does seem to push it out of most people’s minds.

Therein lurks a danger: what we don’t see and value can be quietly taken away, without many of us realizing it.

Read full article and leave your comments

Added on April 18: MediaChannel.org anchored in the US has also just re-published the article. Read their version here

Added on April 19: Free Press.Net has also reproduced the article.

Added on April 20: FreePress.Net in the US reproduces the essay

Added on April 21: Bytes4All South Asian ICT wevsite reproduces my essay

Added on April 21: Reclaim the Media website also publishes the article
Thanks to everyone who considered it worth amplifying to their audiences — we need to spread the word! – Nalaka

Money is not an issue: ‘No budget’ films have their own festival

After over a decade working in television and film, most of that time commissioning new content from independent producers or creating content ourselves, I have yet to come across a film-maker who had enough budget.

We’re are all used to getting by with less than ideal budgets.

Some more than others, though: there are low budget films, and then there are ‘no budget’ films.

A few idealists among us still believe money is not an issue in cultural expression.

They now have their own festival, unashamedly for just that kind of films: No Budget VideoFilmfestival, Heilbronn / Weimar & Tour 2007
No budget video film festival

Their self-intro reads:

In 2007 the „Geld spielt keine Rolle“ (“money is not an issue””it’s only money”) VideoFilmfestival will start a series of events during an independent art-, film- and musicfestival in Heilbronn. From the 8th to 10th of June 2007 it will be in Heilbronn, and thereafter will be ample opportunity to screen the films in Weimar (at the Lichthaus Kino in summer 2007), Magdeburg, London and other cities. The previous festival was carried by the faculty of media of the Bauhaus- University Weimar and took place in Weimar in May 2006.

Filmmakers characterized by creativity and idealism get the opportunity to present their films to a wide audience.
For the audience this promises good films which possibly fall through the cracks of commerce.

Remember: deadline for entries is 1 May 2007.

The festival is being organised by a group of German film enthusiasists calling themselves the film sharing community.

Under the topic GELD SPIELT KEINE ROLLE (Money is no issue) the film sharing community wants to provide a platform for productions of moderate means achieving remarkable outputs and meaningful films on a shoestring.

May their tribe increase!

Michael Crichton, Mediasaurus and end of broadcasting

I just wrote a post on digital pioneer and futurist Mark Pesce’s views on the end of broadcasting and the mass media as we know it.

Television broadcasting is probably a dinosaur facing extinction, but let’s remember a bit of pre-history here: dinosaurs didn’t die off in an instant. No time lord zapped them with some mighty extincter machine. Their decline and eventual extinction was, it is believed, a slow and gradual process.

So it will be with broadcasting. Even if their distribution and revenue models are now undermined and will soon be obsolete, conventional broadcasting (as we know it) will continue to operate and try to compete, at least for a few years. And in the less developed countries with emerging economies, that process will take longer.

Which means we still have to engage TV broadcasters even as their Empires of Eyeball slowly crumble.

And let’s not write off those Empires just yet. I still remember an article in the early days of Wired magazine: appearing in Sep-Oct 1993 issue, it was titled Mediasaurus , and written by the well known science fiction author (and medical doctor) Michael Crichton (of Jurassic Park and ER fame).

Michael Crichton, courtesy Michael Crichton website

He started the article as:
I am the author of a novel about dinosaurs, a novel about US-Japanese trade relations, and a forthcoming novel about sexual harassment – what some people have called my dinosaur trilogy. But I want to focus on another dinosaur, one that may be on the road to extinction. I am referring to the American media. And I use the term extinction literally. To my mind, it is likely that what we now understand as the mass media will be gone within ten years. Vanished, without a trace.

And he ended:
So I hope that this era of polarized, junk-food journalism will soon come to an end. For too long the media have accepted the immortal advice of Yogi Berra, who said: “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.” But business as usual no longer serves the audience. And although technology will soon precipitate enormous changes in the media, we face a more immediate problem: a period of major social change. We are going to need a sensitive, informed, and responsive media to accomplish those changes. And that’s the way it is.

I just re-read the full article, and Crichton’s analysis is even more valid today than when it was written over a dozen years ago. But it’s also true that the broadcast industry – and conventional media as a whole – have changed and adapted.

No doubt that Mediasaurus still has an expiry date, but it’s not easy trying to guess exactly when the last of their kind drops dead.

Read the full article on Wired Online