Alternative Assessment of Women and Media based on NGO Reviews of Section J, Beijing Platform for Action coordinated by Isis International-Manila on behalf of WomenAction 2000 Compilation: Meena M. Shivdas Regional Reports and Editorial Support: Mavic Cabrera-Balleza, Susanna George and Luz Maria Martinez of Isis International-Manila; Karen Banks, Dafne Sabanes Plou and Jill Small of the Association for Progressive Communications- Women's Networking Support Programme (APC-WNSP); and Sally Burch of Agencia Latinoamericana de Informacion and APC-WNSP. Translations: Dafne Sabanes Plou of APC-WNSP, Maryvon Delanoë Layout: Irene R. Chia of Isis International-Manila Looking Back The Beijing Platform for Action (BPFA) adopted by UN member states in 1995, outlines the issues around women and media under Section J and points to key strategies and actions that address the media concerns of women. While the BPFA recognises the advances made in communications technology, it is important to emphasise the continued stereotyped media portrayal with a significant increase in media images that perpetuate violence against women, and also women's lack of access to expression and decision-making in and through the media. The recommendations to governments, NGOs and media organisations are made under two specific strategic objectives: 1) increase the participation and access of women to expression and decision making in and through the media and new technologies of communication; 2) promote a balanced and non-stereotyped portrayal of women in the media. The BPFA calls for action to be taken in the areas of media policy on gender issues, women's portrayal by media and the relatively low-ranked positions of women in media organisations. The BPFA underscores the importance of a gender perspective in media policies and programmes. It also emphasises advocating for change within mainstream media that is based on sustained monitoring of media content and intent toward gender sensitivity. What has been the progress in implementation five years hence? This alternative assessment report brings together the collective analysis and efforts by women activists, media practitioners, academics and researchers to monitor and review government efforts to implement the recommendations from Section J of the BPFA. It also addresses the emerging issues and concerns that have been identified after the BPFA was adopted, and identifies strategies for change. About this report This report covers discussions on such emerging issues of concern as globalisation of the media and its implications on women's lives, and the challenges and obstacles presented by information and communication technologies (ICTs). The report calls attention to the rapidly changing media scenarios, and outlines strategies to increase women's access to expression and decision making in and through the media and new communications technologies, and bring in a more diverse and realistic portrayal of women's images. The report is presented in the format suggested by UN DAW and UN CSW to UN member states in reporting progress made in implementing the BPFA. The report is based mainly on three regional NGO reports on women and media that were specifically meant for the alternative assessment document. These are reports for Asia compiled by Isis International-Manila, Latin America and Caribbean compiled by (ALAI) Agencia Latinoamericana de Informacion--Quito, and by the Association for Progressive Communications-Latin America, and the UN European Union compiled by (APC) Association for Progressive Communications--London. The report also includes information from the alternative report on 12 critical areas of concern for West Asia--compiled by the network of women's NGOs from the Arab world, and information on Section J and the situation with ICTs from the African Information Society Gender Working Group (AISGWG). Information has also been drawn from UN regional reports (ESCAP; ECSWA; ECA; ECLAC, ECE), relevant UN Websites (WomenWatch; UN CSW; UN DAW), NGO analyses and reports on women and media, and online discussions that reviewed the implementation of recommendations from Section J of the BPFA. While every effort has been made to bring in the diversity of global media situations and the range of women's experiences with the media post-Beijing in the different regions, this report acknowledges the limitations of presenting a 'global' alternative document. First, the tendency to generalise situations and positions is recognised and care has been taken to illustrate statements and points with examples from specific regions or countries. Second, the report may not cover all of the measures undertaken by women's groups, researchers, academics, media activists, media practitioners, and others who are in the forefront of monitoring implementation of Section J and striving for change at the levels of policy formulation and practice and 'on the ground' realities. This is especially true for Africa and West Asia and much of Eastern Europe for which we were not able to get NGO reviews of Section J. In the case of Africa, as AISWSG rightly pointed out, in addition to logistical, time and information constraints, it has been noted that there is a limit to the value of producing a regional report for the sole purpose of compiling a 'global' document at this time. This is because there has been no uniform global review process of the implementation of Section J by NGOs using agreed upon indicators to measure progress and/or regress in the different regions. There has been no systematic construction of analyses for monitoring based on agreed variables and markers. Further, the group felt that any review or monitoring effort has to be seen within the framework of a sustained process for change. In West Asia, although there were intense efforts to contact groups to review Section J, time and other constraints prevented the inclusion of the results of such efforts. We are also aware that some of the regional reports and information are mainly on ICTs. While this is a reflection of the growing use of ICTs by women, it also indicates the work of the groups who compiled the reports. These groups use ICTs for their media implementation and advocacy efforts. However, this factor does not in any way negate the efforts of women who work with other media forms including print, radio, television, films and traditional and indigenous modes of communication such as oral histories, story-telling and dance. We acknowledge all of the efforts made by women around the globe to set right media wrongs. We thank all those involved in bringing out this report for their unwavering support and hard work. We hope this document would be helpful to media activists, media practitioners, media analysts and policy makers.