SEMINARS Passia Seminar 1999 Media and Communication Skills

 

 

 Palestinian Civil Society and the Policy process

 Dr. Nabil Khatib[1]

 

 

Civil society organizations (CSO) are organizations that rely on the (volun­tary) participation of people in order to serve a certain issue; the or­ganiza­tion could be a political party, or a group of people interested in ad­vocating environmental issues, etc., but all of them aim at making the State ac­countable. Media professionals claim that they also have a role in this, so both groups, the CSOs and the media, aim at influ­encing the State’s vari­ous policies. The question here is how CSOs can use media-communica­tion techniques in affecting the policy process?

 

The difference between the role of CSOs and the media in this process is that the media is better equipped to relay information to the general public. In addition, in CSOs there are inter­est groups that lobby for a certain issue, whilst the media is not supposed to have any predetermined interest in a particular issue, so that is another difference. The organizations have an agenda that they want to put into execution in order to influence the gen­eral policies or the policymaking process, while the media only aims at de­fending the general objective and the general good, although one has to take into account that this is not always the case.

 

The media, like the CSOs, aims at giving the people access to information and this is made possible through rendering the gov­ernment accountable and by exposing previously ‘hidden’ things. The in­terests of the legislative, executive and judiciary bodies are sometimes different to those of the pub­lic, which often poses problems. Accordingly, they always have something to hide, especially the executive branch and especially in states where the political process and institution building is not fully developed.

 

There is no doubt that the Palestinian Parliament, as it is, is one of the pil­lars of democ­racy, but the media is always a little suspicious. This suspi­cion is the result of our desire to defend the general good of the public and the reason why we are constantly asking, “What are the common interests of the executive branch and the legislative branch of the majority that cre­ated the executive branch?”

 

If I were an elected Member of Parliament, my main interest would be to be reelected, which would make me very interested in knowing what the peo­ple think about me and my performance. In the countries where the proc­ess of institution-building and democratic traditions are not developed in their final form, I might ‘violate’ what my role imposes on me in order to gain the confidence of the people in power – in the executive branch. If this happens, the interest groups and mass media should inform the public of what is going on.

 

There are two main characteristics that distinguish the Palestinian society as ‘civil society’ from other societies:

 

1.       It is still starting out on the institution-building process. Even though between 1967 and the early 1990s there were CSOs, NGOs, that were trying to govern, in one way or another, in the absence of a central government, they were not consolidated to the in­stitutions related to the State.

2.       It is a society that faces not only the central government, but also the occupation and therefore it needs to influence the local authority – the PNA – the policy-making process and also the occupation authorities. Sometimes we need, as CSOs, to make use of the international media in order to exert pressure on both the PNA and the Israeli Government by developing an international public opinion.

 

Therefore, it could be said that we are facing two major challenges.

 

In the particular case of Palestine, we have now neither self-rule nor autonomy. I once asked legal expert Zuheir Anis Qassem what ‘self-rule’ means from a legal point of view and he told me that he could not de­fine it, as there are 40 different types of self-rule in the world. It is clear, however, that in our case, the self-rule has the potential to develop into statehood, at least from our point of view. One of the main questions is how we, as CSOs, can deal with this rule, knowing that the occupa­tion still exists and that there is an authority – with legislative, executive and judicial branches - that is in power and in charge of policymaking in internal issues such as education, the environment, health services, etc. The fact that we are also trying to influence the Israeli authorities some­times entails attempting to influence the Authority in order to gain more from the Israelis with regard to the mandatory power of the PLC or the ex­ecutive branch.

 

One of the biggest crises that we are facing as Palestinians is that until now, we have not fully realized that we are dealing with two authorities. Many political factions act as if there were only the occupation and nothing else, while others see only the PNA and more or less ignore the occupa­tion, even though the Israeli authorities influence the PNA and the various aspects of our everyday life. Moreover, there is no Pales­tinian-Israeli con­sensus regarding the fact that the unique experience we are currently go­ing through should lead to statehood, which complicates the picture further.

 

In order to influence the general policy in one way or another, all CSOs should know how to influence the media. The best known way to do this is by coming up with a ‘hidden agenda’ and deciding upon the most suitable time to release information to the media. It is only natural that organi­zations have their own interests. Save the Children, for example, is an international organization that is interested in children and their environ­ment, and thus, in influencing the general pol­icy related to children in what it views as a positive manner. One must re­member, however, that the vision of other organizations working in the same field could very well differ from that of Save the Children. Once an organization such as Save the Children has studied the current situation of children, the laws related to them and the environment in which they live etc., it decides what it wants to advocate. This could be on a minor level (e.g., projects for children) or on a larger level (e.g., legisla­tion to further protect children).

 

How should Save the Children go about dealing with the media? It should set an agenda, i.e., decide upon a timetable for the media, in order to direct the media towards a predetermined slogan, a defined demand of the or­ganization (or a number of organizations sharing the same vision). The ‘agenda setting’ involves bringing up the topic and changing it into an issue that interests the public. Many issues become meaningful the minute they are raised by the media and the public starts discussing it; this is the first step in influencing the policymakers.

 

The responsibility for the ‘agenda setting’ is a controversial issue. From the point of view of the media, they should do the ‘agenda setting’. In the his­tory of ‘big politics’, there is the famous Watergate Scandal, in which two journalists working at The Washington Post played a major role. It seems that one of the people working with President Nixon came and gave them some inside information concerning the money used for the elections cam­paign, and they went ahead and raised the issue without first obtaining any decisive evidence. Regardless of the lack of evidence, the fact that it had been suggested that the election campaign of the President of the United States had been marred by corruption was enough for the judiciary to start studying the is­sue, and when US District Court Judge John Sirica had col­lected enough evidence he asked for a special hearing in the Con­gress, which led to the resignation of Richard Nixon. Was it the two journal­ists from The Washington Post who were responsible, or was it the judicial system, the mass media, or the person who leaked the information to the journalists in the first place? Media specialists say that only the me­dia trans­formed it into a public opinion issue, and thus was practically re­sponsible for the ‘agenda setting’ with the help of the institutions that had certain in­terests in raising this issue.

 

Although organizations themselves frequently do the ‘agenda setting’, it is not at all unusual for governments themselves to set an agenda by leaking some information, uncovering previously unknown information or by hiding it and then bringing it to light at the appropriate time. For exam­ple, there is the issue of the Strategic Defense Initiative and Star Wars that was first raised by President Reagan and then became a public opinion issue that was cov­ered by the media for a very long time. What really happened was that Reagan faced problems in obtaining the money that was re­quired to cover the annual defense budget, especially the MX missiles project, so he raised the issue in order to scare people into pushing Con­gress to fund the proj­ects that he favored. To do this, he used the magical words, “We want to protect the people from the incoming enemy missiles from the USSR by es­tablish­ing this defense network in space.” Here, the President himself, the head of the executive branch, instigated his own agenda setting proc­ess.

How can Palestinian CSOs raise an issue related to the corruption in the PNA, such as last year’s case concerning the flour that was unfit for human consumption? First, they need information about the topic and to pass it on to journalists. Again, like with the Watergate Scandal, partial information concerning the flour scandal was leaked by someone in the government to journalists. As a matter of fact jour­nalists often try to benefit from the con­tradictory in­terests of different power groups. In this particular case, one of the minis­ters wanted to uncover the responsible people, so he leaked the information to journalists who wrote about the scandal on the front pages of Al-Ayyam and Al-Quds. In theory, once organizations have given informa­tion to the media, the judiciary branch should then follow the necessary legal proce­dures, but in the case of the flour scandal, this did not happen; the issue was forgotten about after it reached the media and neither the judiciary nor the legislative branch took the appropriate measures.

 

If, as sometimes happens, the legislative branch fails to take action after an issue has been raised by media, certain steps can be taken. For example, CSOs can use the media report to exert pressure and lobby the legislative and judiciary branches to ensure that the issue is dealt with properly. In this case, the media wrote about the flour being unfit for human consumption and a committee was established to follow up on the subject. Ideally, the media should have fol­lowed up the issue whilst the CSOs should have transformed it into a public opinion issue to facilitate lobbying in the legisla­tive and the judiciary branches. However, neither the CSOs nor the media did what they were sup­posed to do, so the agenda setting was ‘amputated’ in a way. Cooperation between media and CSOs can be especially impor­tant in cases where the State is not inter­est in pursuing a certain issue or putting certain policies into practice.

 

There is a political crisis in Palestine as there are no political parties that con­stitute a real op­position and that try to influence the general policy of the PNA, which poses a major problem when it comes to playing the game of leaking in­formation to the media in order to serve the common good. A good exam­ple involves the political prisoners; was there a single case of a politi­cal party leaking information to the media in order to prove that the issue of the prisoners was not documented in the Wye River Memorandum?

 

With regard to the claims that certain ministries have been mishandling funds and failing to carry out the tasks assigned to them, interest groups made up of people interested in having good living conditions – it could be a political party or any other CSO – should, in practice, take it upon them­selves to challenge the role played by the ministries in question. Unfortu­nately, we do not see this happening.

 

 

Discussion

 

Participant: In our society, there are certain organizations that are ‘pro­tected’ by international organizations or governments, which means they could easily ‘attack’ the executive branch. The problems arise when it comes to local Palestinian organizations.

 

Dr. Nabil Khatib: Does the problem lie in the weakness of the PNA or in the weakness of the organizations? An authority should be subject to trans­parency and accountability, which means that there would always be the potential for it to be accused, either because of its bad intentions or be­cause it is incapable of taking the decisions and implementing the right policies, even though its intentions are good. If I, as a citizen, do not do my work properly, this may harm, for example, 20 people, whereas if a minister does not do his work properly, the whole population is harmed, which means that the degree of accountability should increase. The PNA always tries to protect itself if a ‘mistake’ is committed, be it deliberate or acciden­tal. The solution is to achieve a bal­ance between the influence of the PNA and that of the CSOs.

 

The only book that changed in the 3^rd grade’s curriculum is the national edu­cation book, which now says, “Why is Gaza blossoming? Because it has a port that is full of goods and merchandise and travelers.” Who at the Minis­try of Education has the right to raise my child to believe in lies? Who gave him the right to shake the confidence between the State, the educa­tional institution, the school and the child? And if the child that reads this happens to live in the Shati Refugee Camp in Gaza, how can we expect him later on to believe anything else that he is told? There is not one interest group talking about this issue, because there is a lack of confi­dence resulting from the weakness of the CSOs. This is the result not only of the influence of the PNA, but also of the fact that the CSOs are sur­rendering to the idea that the Authority has the power and if they do something in the name of human rights, they will end up in trouble.

 

There is no doubt that if we talk about the corruption or human rights, the PNA’s response might be blunt, but even when it concerns everyday is­sues, we do not see the role of the CSOs. Did any NGO inter­ested in edu­cational issues and developing the curriculum speak about the 3^rd grade book? Did they issue a press release or leak information to the press? In reality our problem has less to do with big issues such as corruption, hu­man rights violations, etc. - issues that are covered by the foreign media - than with local issues that are very important to us and that do not come in the circle of interest of the international media.

 

Participant: How can we benefit from public relations in creating and pass­ing on a message to the media in order to mobilize the public?

 

Dr. Khatib: The best method for exerting pressure is to transform a problem into a public opinion issue, using the media. During the Inti­fada, walls were used as a method to communicate information; the ‘wall media’ as Ali Al-Khalili referred to it in his research on the Palestinian me­dia. Usually if I want to raise an issue, the first step is to do the necessary planning before leaking the information, which entails setting an agenda.

 

Everybody talks about the corruption but nobody appears to have any proof. Who did the ‘agenda setting’ when the famous report on corruption in the PNA was raised? This report was distributed by a commission that is related to the PNA, so the CSOs remained neutral in this case. One day the President’s Counselor for Eco­nomic Issues, Khaled Sallam, was asked to come to the PLC as three quarters of its members were furious because they believed that he was the main person involved in the corruption through Al-Bahr Co., which is backed by the PNA. After two sessions with Sallam, the PLC members apologized for the ‘misunder­standing’. Why did this happen? Not because they believed that he is the purest human being, but because they did not do their homework and be­cause the CSOs did not do theirs and supply it to them. It transpired that all the information in the pos­session of the PLC was incorrect. Of course, there is also the possibility that Sallam is ‘pure’ and simply has a ‘different view’ when it comes to eco­nomic policy, which does not mean that he is corrupt. Whether he is corrupt or not, the important thing to remember is that if the homework is not done well, one cannot come up with satisfactory results.

 

If one wants to discuss education from the point of view of the curriculum and the competence of teachers, for example, and there are no interest groups dealing with this issue, what can he do? Taking the example of the 3^rd grade book; to complain to the of­fice of the President, who is also in charge of the Ministry of Education, will not help much. Either the people at the ministry will try to convince you to reconsider your objections, ignore your complaint entirely, or perhaps listen to the complaint but then fail to follow it up. One of the few options, under such circumstances, is to create an interest group to defend the issue.

 

Participant: There are other options, such as getting a well-known journalist to write an article about the issue in the press.

 

Dr. Khatib: This depends. Usually, reports that contain facts and figures and the opinions of experts and quotes by people who have been affected in one way or another by the issue in question are far more likely to have an impact on readers than opinion pieces. For you as receptors, the author of an opin­ion piece or a letter to the editor might be right or wrong, whereas a press report, backed by experts and information, will usually be accepted as the truth. Even then, it we decide to raise a certain issue, there is still the problem of raising funds to cover the costs of transportation, etc., and of finding enough people willing to devote time and energy to changing the situation.

 

An interest group that aims at improving the education level has to decide upon the best method to raise this is­sue, as well as the tools available/ needed in order to exert pressure on decision-makers. Then it must decide which decision-makers to address - which in this case would be the Minis­try of Education, the PLC, and maybe some experts in the field who could lend their support - in order to convince them of the importance of its point of view. As an individual one will never be able to exert the same influence as an expert in the field, which is why it is important to gain the support of as many experts as possible.

 

The most instrumental medium to influence the general policy concerning education and gain the maximum support for our endeavors is the media. If the support of the public is won the PLC will most likely want to go along as it has become an issue about which the public feels strongly. But how can we use the media? How can you convince a journalist who is not particu­larly interested in a certain issue to tackle it, bearing in mind that you are the ones with information?

If an interest group has funds in the amount of US$1,000, it has to consider whether it would be worth while to spend US$500 of this on building good relations by inviting some journalists to dinner in order to convince them of the importance of a certain issue and whether it should give one of them $200 or so in order to do some preliminary research on the issue. The money could also be invested in a brochure to be distributed to the general public. In other words, one has to constantly think: “What is the most effi­cient way to influence people?”

 

Participant: Yesterday, Qatari Al-Jazeera TV spoke about the Palestinian prisoners - unfortunately, our own media has failed to cover this issue in a satisfactory manner – which means that the media of an­other country is actually serving as a pressure group in an indirect way.

 

Dr. Khatib: Right, but the situation here is different; we have three main newspapers, one public TV and one radio station, all of which are financed or influenced by the PNA. How, then, can we find other methods to influ­ence the people in order to change the situation, taking into account that the news­papers rarely deal with issues that affect our daily lives? The trans­portation system in Ramallah, for example, the fact that someone died because of a medical error, or the mishandling of public funds; these are all examples of the kind of things that are not being dealt with as they should be.

 

Participant: Is it difficult to form an interest group?

 

Dr. Khatib: There are today in Palestine more than 800 NGOs that are all backed by foreign funders, many of which have good objectives. We have pluralism in the media to a far greater degree than most of the Arab coun­tries, but the situation is the same as under the occupation: some are pre­pared to involve themselves in politics, to struggle and to be imprisoned, and there are others who are not pre­pared to pay the price. It is still a question of principles and of asking the question: “Am I prepared to accept responsi­bility for my actions?” Ideally, the CSOs should balance the power of the PNA by us­ing as a base the different types of media.