Interview with Jennifer Sibanda - I

The Communication Initiative: Many people outside of Southern Africa might not be aware of the work of the Federation of African Media Women. What is your history and how do you see your role?

Jennifer Sibanda: Our beginnings can be traced to the first ever media Women's Conference in Kitwe, Zambia in 1976. There were a number of women journalists at that conference including myself. We realised that media and communication could play an important role in progressing the agenda outlined at that conference. We also realised that as women journalists we were not at all organised - there was no mechanism to pool our talents in support of the cause of women. The Federation of African Media Women was really born from that realization.

CI: So your concern is not just about the issues that affect professional women in media organisations - promotion obstacles, seniority, gender balance in management?

JS: Absolutely not - there is a much broader agenda revolving around the potential power of the media in helping to advance the aspirations of women. The critical issue here is that women, particularly disadvantaged women, have little or no opportunity to express their views and perspectives on the issues most relevant to them. That is crucial for development and we were determined to help redress that discrimination.

CI: So how did you commence building the network of women in the media and programming in support of that role?

JS: At that stage I was involved in Zimbabwe, my home country, working within the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation. Thelma Awori, who was then the UNDP Resident Representative in Zimbabwe supported us a lot as she was involved in the Kitwe conference in 1976. FAMW-SADC capitalized on her presence and that of Ceciwa Khonje the Director for UNIC who was also present in Kitwe. The Zimbabwe chapter of media women was instrumental in gathering together a group of media women working in the media. After much debate we settled on two basic approaches. In relation to the media itself we embarked on a series of training events and conferences. Perhaps more excitingly the other strand for our efforts was to support rural women making their own radio programmes, from their point of view, on the things that really concern them. This became the Development Through Radio Programme [DTR], sometimes called Radio Listening Clubs, though that is a misnomer as the project is much more than listening.

CI: In practice how do they work?

JS: Great - just great, probably because we planned it well, in close collaboration with rural women themselves. Members of the Zimbabwe Chapter of the Federation of African Media Women spent a lot of time in the rural areas of Zimbabwe talking with women in their villages about the issues that most concerned them. Then we raised the question whether they wanted to be involved in a radio programme that sought to make progress on those issues. Radio was chosen because it is far and away the most accessible medium. In almost all cases everyone was enthusiastic. From those meetings the group of women identified leaders, whom we called monitors. A group of monitors were gathered in Harare for orientation and training. We purchased each group a radio cassette recorder with microphones. The monitors were given some basic instruction on how to use these. There was also some training in running group meetings and basic interview techniques. ZBC agreed to give time slots for any work that the women produced. The groups of women asked for and received Mondays and Wednesdays at 2pm. Then the women began running group meetings in their villages. They would listen to the live broadcast of the show featuring the work of one of the groups. This was followed by discussion, amongst the group in each village, on the issues that most concerned them and the messages they wanted to get across. Then each group would record its own radio programme - maybe an interview or perhaps a group discussion. These are collected by project co-ordinators who listens to the cassettes and seeks responses to the question raised by the communities. These are then packaged and broadcast on ZBC.

CI: And how do the women involved get responses to their concerns - where is the progress?

JS: An important element of each radio programme is that a person in a position of responsibility in relation to the issues raised is asked to respond and comment. I can clearly remember when a project co-ordinator explaining to a politician, a leading politician, that his constituents were saying that he did not pay them enough attention, and that they never saw him. There was a clear feeling amongst a group of women in a village in his constituency that their needs seemed to come at the bottom of his priority list. When this was conveyed to him he didn't believe the co-ordinator and kept saying "my people would never say such a thing". So the co-ordinator played him the tape. He certainly was surprised and hopefully he paid them a lot of attention to the issues of rural women. There are many such stories.

CI: There often two criticisms of programmes such as these. First they are unsustainable, needing too many donor dollars to keep going. Second, that they don't address the real issues - what rural women in poor communities need is food for the families not the opportunity to be radio interviewers.

JS: These certainly concerned the media people in the Federation and we could see that the last of those issues was beginning to eat away at the 50 village groups in operation. So we discussed this with the women involved. Their solution was to use the opportunity of the regular, once-a-week meetings to do some income generation activities. The groups began to do things like bread making, chicken rearing, sewing and forestry. And then they began to exchange information between the groups on those activities. So, one group, having difficulties with it's choice of activity, received information from another group on making sunflower oil. They continue to do that very successfully. This aspect of the programme addresses both of the issues you raise but I think we will always need donors and that they get very good value from programmes such as these. And our donors and supporters have been just great.

CI: Just to change themes a little. Have the Federation been concerned about or paid attention to the changes in the communication scene in Southern Africa?

JS: Yes.

CI: And your view of those changes - positive or negative?

JS: At the moment we have to say, what changes! There has been a lot of talk, for example, about liberalizing the air waves, allowing private, commercial interests to run stations and supporting the commencing and operation of community radio. There have been some positive changes in countries such as South Africa, where a community radio stations such as Bush Radio, Soweto Community Radio, etc. stands out. But overall we have many concerns. Where there has been legislation to provide for private radio, the licenses have often gone to religious broadcasters. They have every right to stations but we need to see a balance in ownership and control. Part of the problem may be who oversees the licensing process. In some countries, the Ministry of Information issues radio licenses. They are much more likely to go with a safe bet than a station that may take a more independent stance. And sometimes the policies are not what they seem. In my own country of Zimbabwe we are currently working on a Draft Communications Bill. We have had some spirited debates with the Ministry about that. At the end of the day when you look at the scene in Southern Africa, with the possible exception of South Africa, little has changed. Broadcasting remains overwhelmingly controlled by government.

CI: And is that media in good shape?

JS: No and there is an irony here. Even though the commercial and community sectors are not getting the opportunities they expected at this stage, there is the increasing application of commercial principles by governments to the operations of their own media. This has had a detrimental effect on their ability to focus on pro-social issues. They need to generate additional income for the broadcast service. Again there is a classic case of this in Zimbabwe. TV 2 and Radio 4 were established as educational channels. They no longer do that, having been commercialized. People, companies and organisations can buy time for their programming on those channels. In all countries, those pro-social organisations which have purchased airtime for their programmes are finding it much more expensive as the broadcasting organisations raise their prices to earn that income. At the moment it is like having a commercial media that is government owned.

CI: Many thanks for your insights and observations.