|
1 The practice
2 Hints for an evaluation
2.1 Strenghts
The organisation's perspective
“We are actually the best in the field of representation”, states Veronika Leiner from "Radio FRO". Indeed, representation and free access has to be appreciated as one of the biggest strengths of the radio.
The radio makes a real effort to implement the idea of participation shows the example of the programme’s restructuring, following the demands of the migrant listeners in order to be actually listened (see 1.2 When and how long).
Interculture map perspective
"Radio FRO" realizes the idea of being a platform in different ways. According to Veronika Leiner, firstly they provide a place of diversity on a micro-level as it can be seen in the different reports about personal situations. Secondly, on a macro-level, broadcasting a big amount of different community radio shows. That plurality is supported proves the activity of many associations. It allows them to go beyond their limited means within association membership meetings in order to reach a broader public and to spread their ideas. In doing so it leads to a real presentation not only of different ethnic groups but also of a reflection of different political and cultural orientations.
But "Radio FRO" serves not only as a platform to reflect already existing discourses but it can also be seen as a medium for intercultural exchange and new ideas. A good example is the founding of the intercultural media projects MEDEA, and later followed by PANGEA. These today autonomous projects originally emerged as a spin-off project from the education programme of "Radio FRO" (see CASE STUDY PANGEA).
Additionally, intercultural practise takes place on a more informal level, when people meet each other in the locality of the radio.
2.2 Critical Points
The organisation's perspective
The main deficit still exists in creating a “real intercultural” dialogue. This is also affirmed by Veronika Leiner, for whom it is a pity that there aren’t enough resources in order to initiate and moderate intercultural dialogue between the different programme makers.
The radio is not able to fulfil the goal of providing a structure in which - besides the autonomous programmes - intercultural support, care and discussion with the single programme makers are possible. Here, it lacks of work force and financing. On the other hand, to involve more migrants in collective actions would need more active and interested persons from that side. This lack is obvious as well.
Interculture map perspective
The autonomous non-German speaking program remains very fragmented. But it can be seen as a first step and, following Husbands theory, it is inevitable. The other possibility would be the total deficit in medial representing and further misperceptions in public about society’s composition.
|