An ethnographic approach to low-income youth’s engagement in Communication for Social Change

Número

Downloads

Article abstract page views:  428  

Authors

Abstract

This article presents an ethnographic approach to how low-income Brazilians of impoverished urban areas have engaged in community journalism and media activism. Exploring empirical materials collected during a seven-year research process (2009-2016), the article has two main objectives. One is to analyze how low-income youth reflect on their own processes of engagement in communication for social change (CFSC). Another objective is to demonstrate how ethnography can provide in-depth analyses of trajectories and initiatives in CFSC. The article primarily focuses on retrospective accounts of young adults who had participated in media-educational projects by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and subsequently became active agents of change in, through and about media. The analysis of these accounts indicates how the participation in NGO projects characterize actions for self-development. It also demonstrates how interactions among participants – not necessarily anticipated by NGOs – are crucial for low-income youth to engage in activist media and journalism in peripheral Rio de Janeiro. The article ends with a reflection about how ethnography is a useful method to add in-depth qualitative layers to the evaluation of CFSC initiatives.

Keywords


Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite

Custódio, L. (2017). An ethnographic approach to low-income youth’s engagement in Communication for Social Change. Commons. Revista De Comunicación Y Ciudadanía Digital, 6(1). Retrieved from https://revistas.uca.es/index.php/cayp/article/view/3289

Author Biography

Leonardo Custódio

Leonardo Custódio, PhD, is a researcher at the Tampere Research Centre for Journalism, Media and Communication (COMET), at the University of Tampere, Finland.

References

Bendell, J. (2006). NGLS development dossier: Debating NGO accountability. New York/Geneva: UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. California: University of California Press.

Cornwall, A., & Eade, D. (Eds.). (2010). Deconstructing development discourse: Buzzwords and fuzzwords. Warwickshire/Oxford: Practical Action/Oxfam.

Custódio, L. (2016). Favela media activism. political trajectories of low-income brazilian youth. Tampere (Finland): Tampere University Press.

Eade, D. (Ed.). (2000). Development, NGOs and civil society. Oxford: Oxfam.

Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (Eds.). (1992). Making a difference: NGOs and development in a changing world. London: Earthscan.

Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (Eds.). (1997). NGOs, states and donors: Too close for comfort? London: McMillan Press.

Freire, P. (1987). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.

Hemer, O., & Tufte, T. (2012). ComDev in the mediatized world. Nordicom Review, 33(Special Issue), 229-238.

Hilhorst, D. (2003). The real world of NGOs: Discourses, diversity and development. London: Zed Books.

Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability for empowerment: Dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Development, 34(6), 951-960.

Lewis, D., & Opoku-Mensah, P. (2006). Moving forward research agendas on international NGOs: Theory, agency and context. Journal of International

Development, 18(5), 665-675.

Perlman, J. (2010). Favela: Four decades of living on the edge in Rio de Janeiro. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rodriguez, C., Ferron, B., & Shamas, K. (2014). Four challenges in the field of alternative, radical and citizens' media research. Media, Culture & Society, 36(2), 150-166.

Sartoretto, P. (2016). Mobilization as communication. A latin american contribution to the study of social movements. Commons, 5(2), 95-116.

Snow, D. A. (2001). Extending and broadening blumer's conceptualization of symbolic interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 24(3), 367-377.

Thomas, J. (1993). Doing critical ethnography. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage.

Thomas, P. (2015). Communication for social change, making theory count. Nordicom Review, 36(Special Issue), 71-78.

White, S. C. (2000). Depoliticizing development: The uses and abuses of participation. In D. Eade (Ed.), Development, NGOs and civil society (pp. 142-155). Oxford: Oxfam.

White, R. A. (2004). Is ‘Empowerment’ the answer?: Current theory and research on development communication. Gazette, 66(1), 7-24.

Willetts, P. (2011). Non-governmental organizations in world politics: The construction of global governance. Oxford: Routledge.