This report focuses on both a need for professional development for working journalists in developing countries and those countries with emerging opportunities for independent media and a need for training in independent journalistic practices. From a working group organised by Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA), the report represents input from twenty-three practitioners who have observed, studied, planned, and implemented media education programmes of the United States (US) and other Western governments, as well as those of private funders.

From the executive summary:


"Their recommendations are encompassed in three main ideas. First, improving media is a local project that requires local remedies, local partners, and deep understanding of local values and circumstances.... Second, success requires that the right people do the right job, preferably in concert on mutually determined goals, moderated by flexible rules and evaluated on long-term and qualitative goals. This means that donors should support creative programming by dedicated trainers and teachers who work with engaged journalists and persevering managers. Third, donors who want to be effective need to understand that short-term funding and training have not created long-term impact. Making media independent, ethical, and credible is a singularly intangible development effort for which there are no quick fixes and no universal answers about how to make success more immediate...."

The document reviews discussion by the group on the topics of universities, journalism centres, and "best practices" for training. The university discussion resulted in the recognition that some universities are more prepared than others to offer long-term local legitimacy. A number of mapping and census projects, as well as professional organisations, can help and have helped to identify these locations for developers and donors and for networking opportunities with schools of journalism in need of academic support. Participants recommended that university journalism programme lengths be altered to leave room for interdisciplinary academic training before journalism is approached; that international fellows be recruited and tracked with more energy and focus because of what they can offer their countries; and that maintenance of university technology centres be coupled with placing new technology training in university journalism departments.

Idea exchanges on the challenges and successes of media centres included discussion of whether to and how to refresh stagnating and inflexible centres with more innovative and entrepreneurial approaches. Suggestions included diversifying fee-based activities and donor-supported niche training, e.g., training on reporting health issues. Supporters suggested that media centres are more "nimble" than university programmes and knowledgeable about training in local languages, and they can be the sole media advocacy organisations in various countries. Critics reported that local centres perpetuate local standards and need international expert involvement. It was agreed that mid-career training locations are essential. Sustainability suggestions for these locations ranged from appending them to university programmes to linking a training institute and a sponsoring media organisation.


The training and tactics discussion highlighted the methods and work of three organisations. In the case of the International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF) Maisha Yetu programme to enhance HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria reporting in three African nations, the organisation selected locations and news media partners through research, determined local information and skills needs, and trained local African journalists with expertise on HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria to do continuous on-site training of journalists. They faced shortages of staff, equipment, and capacity and challenges of working around bureaucracy and hierarchies. They are responding to current funding challenges by engaging and growing their Maisha Yetu online network. A second organisation, the Journalism Development Group, described their Center for Investigative Reporting in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as focusing on doing journalism, not training journalists. They teach that ethics is what builds credibility and results in more readers and more business. They edit and train editors in the newsroom, rather than in the classroom. They recommend conducting programmes that "meet people’s information needs, training local journalists to meet international standards so they can produce reporting that creates local results and attracts readers." The third programme focused on digital media at the International Center for Journalists. It encompasses learning about and developing training for journalists as distance learning through digital media. The consensus of the group was that a balance of new technologies and new skills must be attended to in training, recognising that journalism training must also serve regions without electricity to power new technology.

Participants agreed on the practice of international trainer-mentoring as having the best success rate. A challenge of journalist training is bringing about change in organisational culture, particularly winning over editors to standards of ethics and quality. Long-term involvement in local capacity building with small and consistent amounts of donor support were among strategies that had advocates in the working group. Participants favoured having international journalists work side-by-side with local journalists "until the locals breathe international standards..." because, as stated here, "...[i]t’s a cultural change in addition to a skill-set change."

In short, the conclusion contained the following 10 recommendations:

1. Ethics should be included as a component in all training programmes.
2. The US government should lead a new and remodelled effort to bring media development donors together. Policymakers should understand that media development requires a long-term commitment.
3. Donors need to recognise that long-term programmes create the best chance for real change.
4. Media developers need to create new methods for evaluating programmes for funders.
5. Media developers should adopt a flexible policy allowing any number of possible models to support the professional development of journalists.
6. Donors and media developers should pay attention to universities, since they fill a vital role as a primary source of entry-level journalists.
7. Donors and implementers should target and track international students and future teachers.
8. Donors should fund journalism training centres as they play a vital role in mid-career training.
9. Donors and implementers need to focus on international journalism standards in programme development and implementation.
10. Donors and implementers need more information.