By Kate Tapiwa Kujaliwa

Every year, organisations switch into crisis mode on the eve of the 16 Days of Activism. Suddenly, inboxes light up with press briefings, colourful hashtags, branded fabrics, and a blitz of statements that all sound painfully familiar.  Like clockwork, the nation is told that “the campaign is about to start.” But here’s the uncomfortable truth: by the time you’re announcing the campaign, you’ve already lost the plot.

Gender-based violence is not a seasonal communications assignment. It’s a year-round behaviour-change agenda that demands continuity, intentionality, and frankly, a bit more courage from those of us who sit in communication roles.

Let’s be blunt. After the 16 days, what exactly are we communicating? If all we offer is silence until the next November rolls around, we are not driving transformation, we are running an annual ritual. Rituals don’t change society; consistent, data-driven, emotionally resonant communication does.

As communicators, we are not on the sidelines of the GBV response. We are part of the operational core. We shape narratives, drive public sentiment, influence institutional posture, and set the tone for national conversation. When we underperform, GBV messaging becomes noise. When we step up, GBV messaging becomes power. Our role is threefold.

First, we must normalise the conversation.

Not sensationalise it. Not bury it. Normalise it.

GBV should appear in corporate reports, development communications, community dialogues, and digital content with the same strategic consistency as climate change, governance, or economic inclusion. When the public hears it often and not only during global commemorations, they begin to recognise it as an everyday accountability issue, not an episodic tragedy.

Second, we must push institutions beyond statements.

A press release does not prevent violence. A pledge is not protection. A walkathon is not justice.

Our communications must force alignment between the words organisations publish and the systems they operate. If we are not interrogating workplace policies, reporting pathways, survivor care practices, and HR culture, then we are simply polishing the façade instead of fixing the structure.

Third, we must humanise the narrative without exploiting survivors.

People disengage from statistics, but they respond to humanity. Storytelling (ethical, survivor-centred, consent-driven storytelling) is one of the most powerful tools we have. Not to shock the public, but to anchor empathy, shift attitudes, and inspire collective responsibility.

The 16 Days of Activism is not the problem. The problem is the mindset that communication begins on 25 November and expires on 10 December. Real influence is built in the off-season. Sustainable change comes from drip-feeding values, not dumping content in bulk.

Communicators need to challenge their organisations to invest in long-term behavioural insights, year-round engagement, multilingual messaging, and digital-first strategies that capture the energy of young people who are not only the most active online but also the most vulnerable offline.

GBV is not waiting for campaigns. Survivors are not waiting for awareness weeks. Communities are not waiting for international commemorations. And frankly, as communicators, neither should we.

If we want to drive mindset shift, if we want to embed prevention rather than reaction, if we want to see Malawi step out of this cycle, then we must stop communicating for the 16 Days and start communicating for the 365 days.

This is the moment for communicators to evolve from announcers of campaigns to architects of social change. Not seasonal technicians but strategic influencers.

Because ending GBV is not a communications event.

It’s a communications responsibility.