Can community media programmes serve as developmental approaches for at-risk youth?

Rachel-Ann Charles

doi:10.5334/csci.72

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines the Shoot to Live community media initiative and data collected from this study will provide a discussion on whether or not this programme can be used as a development approach for at-risk youth. Discourses on community media, youth and development will be used as the theoretical framework for this study. Accordingly, theory and practice from these constructs can be used to develop ideas that emerge from the Shoot to Live programme. This paper initially assesses some of the various degrees of success of this community media initiative. Finally, the findings of this study will play a pertinent role in the creation, evaluation and transformation of future community media programmes and youth development approaches particularly in developing countries.

Highlights

The Shoot to Live initiative was a creative mentorship programme designed by the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) to address the needs of at-risk youth in Trinidad and Tobago
Lewis’ (2008) reproduced definition of community media serves as a useful starting point in positioning the Shoot to Live programme as it best describes this initiative
Documents were used as a source of information on all of the activities prior to, during and after the Shoot to Live programme

Summary

Introduction

The overall aim of this initiative was to empower approximately 20 young men between the ages of 12-16 years residing within at-risk areas of Trinidad and Tobago. This initiative provided a combination of life skills, photography and video training. This combined programme was an attempt to improve social inclusion, creativity, communication, self-expression and self-esteem (YMCA 2010). This programme seeks to provide access to cameras, mentors and a host of facilities for the young persons involved in this programme. “Community media is a term used to describe the use of media by communities, social groups and civil society organisations...” (Lewis 2008)

Methods

Results

Conclusion