From making us cry to making us act: five ways of communicating ‘development’ in Europe

By Maria Cascantmariacs-60

A few weeks ago I watched the ‘Red Nose Day‘, an annual TV show in the UK that collects funds for development projects. IDS fellow Spencer Henson wrote a blog on the apparent disconnect between the high levels of donation for such events and UK citizens’ scepticism on keeping the target of spending 0.7% of national income on aid. As for me, I got caught by the images used, namely helpless children. I went to sleep that night wondering how much development communication had really evolved in the last decades.

picture of sad boy in Kenya

example of ‘shock effect’ type image

laughter blog 4 April

example of ‘positive image’ type

Some days ago, a colleague passed me the article ‘Post-humanitarianism: humanitarian communication beyond a politics of pity‘ (2010). I was fascinated by the read. The author, LSE fellow Lilie Chouliaraki, suggested three types of appeal used in humanitarian and development communication. Type number 1, the ‘shock effect’, may be familiar. An early example is the Red Cross/Life magazine photos on the 1951 Bihar (Indian) famine showing starving children, old women calling out ‘Sir, we are dying’ and a begging mother with a child in her arms. With increased criticism and ethical controls on these images, a more ‘positive image’ type of appeal emerged in the late 80s. These are images of children smiling or farmers with newly acquired farming tools. They can be easily found in most of current sponsorship ads.

One would think that starving children and smiling children are pretty opposed ways of communicating. Yet Chouliaraki sustains they are not. They are in fact the two sides of the same coin. Both use photorealism in their format and are emotion-oriented (guilt or gratitude) in their content.

It is here that Chouliaraki’s article suggests the emergence of a third ‘post-emotional’ type of appeal, which breaks with previous ones in both format and content. The format defies photorealism and experiments with a range of artistic methods. The content moves from using emotions to using branding (i.e. of a renowned NGO) to attract the spectator. A paradigmatic case is Amnesty’s ad ‘Bullet. The Execution’, which won the ad production prize at Cannes Festival in 2006. The use of popular TV stars in development communication and campaigning could also be seen to follow this post-emotional trend. In short, it is the message’s format and spokesperson what validates the message itself, more than its content.

Pretty different this time from the other two, one would think. Yet Chouliaraki objects again. All three types still transmit a disgraceful context ‘there’ while the sole action expected from the European spectator ‘here’ is to feel attracted (by pity or by brand) and to donate to solve the matter. The sufferers are depicted as perpetually awaiting the spectator’s generosity, portraying development as a gift from Europe to elsewhere. None of the three types opts to explain at least one of the many reasons that create the unequal situation in the first place. None addresses, in this sense, the limitations of development interventions.

Chouliaraki’s article concludes here, with the description of these three types of appeal. With current initiatives like the Red Nose Day show or Kony 2012, one would think, yes that must be it – development communication has not really advanced much further. But perhaps you may have in your inbox, as I do, one of those emails asking to ‘sign the petition’. Most of these do not seek (only) our money, but our ‘click’ – a click to show ideological support to a cause; to lobby a decision-maker, MP, bank or firm. Other petitions even take a step further: they ask you to sign but also to change something in your lifestyle.

For instance, the Clean Clothes Campaign (2010) explains how jeans produced with the abrasive technique of sandblasting have toxic effects in the Bangladeshi female workers that make them. Besides appeals for e.g.  lobbying those firms using sandblasting and asking governments to regulate on the practice, the campaign asks us to stop buying that type of trousers. In the same line, the Bank Secrets Campaign (2009) lists those banks investing in human right abuses such as polluting powers, controversial weapons, and repressive regimes. It then asks us to move our money to ethical banks and to organise chats, stalls and video-debates besides more lobby-based appeals like ‘discuss with a banker’ and ‘send an e-card’.

Are petition appeals different from previous ones? Perhaps not on the format. Petitions can be as creative as post-emotional type appeals (i.e. caricatures) but they don’t really suggest anything aesthetically new. Yet in terms of content, they do. They are political. They engage the spectator in an intellectual exercise instead of an emotional or consumerist one. They present a cause-effect message between the ‘here’ of the spectator and the ‘there’ of the sufferer, showing that at least one of the causes of the other side’s distress originates in the spectator’s own context (i.e. a MP decision, a consumption pattern).

Petitions have their own constraints. Lobby-type ones may become repetitive and bring a certain ‘petition fatigue’. They also miss out on self-reflection and personal change, and may even remind us of the immediacy and superficiality of post-emotional, consumerist modes (‘email this MP and done’). Conversely, lifestyle-type appeals are less efficient on tackling urgent actions than, say, crowd bombardment of a MP’s inbox. Both types seem thus complementary. For instance, one-off, massive, urgent petitions can be matched with longer-term pledges on the same cause by more committed, self-organised groups. What seems important in any case is that appeals use both consumer and citizen power to put pressure not only on those firms and banks operating unjust practices but also on states, the ultimate regulatory and decision-making bodies.

All in all, petitions are just petitions. They rely on large numbers saying ‘no’ all at once and are thus meant to be limited and timely to a particular cause. We can help save workers from sandblasting today, but forget their overall work precariousness tomorrow. Petitions may thus need other protest forms beside to help shake the more difficult political stuff. And yet, even within their limitations, petitions do have some relative power to keep firms, banks and governments thinking twice about their moves, and to keep citizens, including business, bank and government citizens, informed and active.

Promoting these more political types of appeal, rather than lingering on emotional ones or adapting to ad-like ones, would give development communication a more constructive role. Emotional types are still dominant, as seen with the popular Red Nose Day. Yet, some organisations and agencies have already made a move. They may lose in fundraising power and in popularity, but gain a lot in coherence. An opportunity cost worth considering. This would bring deeper levels of participation in development communication and campaigning, and ultimately, a paradigm of development engaged in personal and institutional change not only ‘there’ but also ‘here’.

Maria-Josep Cascant Sempere is a PhD candidate within the IDS Participation, Power and Social Change research team. She is interested in development activism with a focus on the links between popular education and economic (tax) justice campaigning in Nigeria and the UK.

Read other blogs by Maria Cascant

7 Responses to From making us cry to making us act: five ways of communicating ‘development’ in Europe

  1. Great post. This is a really interesting piece Maria and about an issue which I don’t think is being targeted for change adequatley. I wrote a couple of pieces about Red Nose Day if you are interested in taking a look (http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/dpublog/2013/02/19/comic-reliefs-dilemma-fundraising-vs-awareness-raising/) and (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/richard-moran/comic-relief-not-as-simple-as-believe_b_2964737.html).

    The five categories which you outlined are really useful for thinking about this. I think it is clear that Comic Relief rely very heavily on the first two kinds of discourse and particularly the shock effect. I think this is especially frustrating because the show engages with an audience which normally does not think about these issues and as such is a real missed opportunity.

    I think we are starting to see some changes. The IF campaign launched recently by many UK non-profits is quite a breath of fresh air. For me this is quite exciting because it seeks to engage the public with the root causes of hunger and how their patterns of consumption might be linked to these. It will be interesting to see how far it manages to communicate these more nuanced messages.

    Thanks for post and for highlighting the Chouliaraki article – looking forward to reading.

    Best,
    Richard

  2. Kanika Jha says:

    Thanks for posting this. I am glad we have started to focus on representation of the ‘other’ in international development. Beyond representation and the politics of pity – is the idea of connecting the cosmopolitan citizen with the malnourished/poor and the ‘other’ via global media images including popular culture references.

    NGOs like Survival International used the popular culture icons from the Hollywood movie ‘Avatar’ to represent the suffering of the Dongria Kondh tribe in Odisha, India.

    This emerging trend is reflective of the new ways in which development communications is trying to reach out to the West and in particular, consumers of these popular culture products.

    Thank you for sharing Chouliaraki’s article.

  3. [...] Maria-Josep Cascant Sempere is a PhD candidate within the IDS Participation, Power and Social Change research team. She is interested in development activism with a focus on the links between popular education and economic (tax) justice campaigning in Nigeria and the UK. This article was originally published on the Institute of Development Studies blog. [...]

  4. Maria Cascant says:

    Thanks Richard and Kanika for your comments.
    Great blogs Richard! Amazingly similar!!

    Let me share some other info on the topic I have been sent for those interested:

    - Newest book by Chouliaraki – “The Ironic Spectator” (2012) with more updated info on her article referred to in this blog (2010).

    - Upcoming conference in Finland next November (2013) on “Development Research Communication”
    http://www.kehitystutkimus.fi/conference/working-groups/wg13

    - Interesting article on “whose campaigning” in which two divergent ways of campaigning are presented – a “classic model of activism in support of local initiatives” and a “designer activism” more focused on promoting “a product in a western mediatized marketplace”.
    http://sites.tufts.edu/reinventingpeace/files/2013/04/Advocacy-in-Conflict_seminar-note.pdf

    Great,
    Kas (Maria Cascant)

  5. Maria Cascant says:

    El blog traducido al español (the blog translated into Spanish):

    De hacernos llorar a hacernos actuar: cinco formas de comunicar “desarrollo” en Europa – http://www.canalsolidario.org/noticia/31970

  6. [...] Maria-Josep Cascant Sempere is a PhD candidate within the IDS Participation, Power and Social Change research team. She is interested in development activism with a focus on the links between popular education and economic (tax) justice campaigning in Nigeria and the UK. This article was originally published on the Institute of Development Studies blog. [...]

  7. Alexandra Wanjiku Kelbert says:

    Hi Kas! I was just reviewing this article and the more I read the more I thought I should really post it here, as it is full of interesting notions repertoires of political action with a focus on Internet. Full ref.:
    Fung, A., Russon Gilman, H., and Shkabatur, J. (2013) Six Models for the Internet + Politics. International Studies Review 15(1):30-47. Online. Available from: http://archonfung.net/docs/articles/2012/SixModels6.pdf

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: