Event to celebrate PJ Center's 10th Birthday
An international peace journalism symposium is being held on Wednesday, 2 March to celebrate the center's 10th birthday. The event, featuring experts from five continents, is being held via zoom. 

The symposium will mark the Center for Global Peace Journalism 10th anniversary by looking back on the Center’s accomplishments, and ahead to the future of peace journalism with leading experts from around the world. The complete program is below.

You can access the event at https://park.zoom.us/j/93231286343. No password is required.

The live 90 minute event will begin at 10am US Central Time (Kansas City/Chicago). This is 11am Eastern time (New York, Washington).

Everyone is invited! Please spread the word!

Center for Global Peace Journalism 10th Anniversary Symposium
Wednesday, March 2, 2022
10:00am-11:30am US Central time, on Zoom

 https://park.zoom.us/j/93231286343 No password required

(11:00am US Eastern time; 9:30pm India; 9:00pm Pakistan; 6:00pm Lebanon; 4:00pm Mali and Northern Ireland; 10:00am Zacatecas, Mexico; 3:00am Australia)

Program
10:00
Welcome—Shane Smeed, President, Park University

10:05
Celebrating the Center for Global Peace Journalism—Steven Youngblood, Founding Director, Center for Global Peace Journalism

10:10
Keynote address-Dr. Jake Lynch-University of Sydney
“25 Years of Peace Journalism”

10:20
Panel—Peace Journalism Around the World
Each panelist will present for 5 minutes, followed by a moderated discussion

Lebanon-Vanessa Bassil
India and Pakistan—Lubna Jerar, Pratyush Ranjan
Uganda—Gloria Laker
Cameroon--Rose Obah Akah
Mexico—Cristina Avila Zesatti
Northern Ireland—Una Murphy

11:10
Concluding address-Kathryn Johnston, VIEW digital, Northern Ireland
“Reaching the Future Through the Past”

11:20
Q and A

11:25
Closing remarks—Lynch/Youngblood

Connecting to the world with peace journalism
Editor's Note:
Global Ties Kansas City "develops sustainable international relationships and personalizes global diplomacy" by connecting Kansas Citians to visitors from around the world. Toward this end, they are launching an initiative called DiverseKC that will capture stories about how KC is connected to the world. They have asked me to write a blog about my experiences teaching peace journalism worldwide. That blog is below.  

About 12 years ago, while I was teaching on a Fulbright Scholarship in Azerbaijan, the U.S. Embassy called and asked if I knew anything about peace journalism. and if I would be interested in teaching a peace journalism seminar in neighboring Georgia. Of course, I gushed, “I am practically an expert on peace journalism.” When I got off the phone, I Googled peace journalism.

That phone call turned out to be one of the most serendipitous moments of my professional life.

In the years since, I have taught peace journalism in 27 countries face-to-face, and another 12 virtually.* We launched a Center forGlobal Peace Journalism at Park University in 2012, and have published 20 issues of The Peace Journalist, the world’s only magazine dedicated to peace journalism.

What is Peace Journalism?
Peace journalism (PJ) is when "editors and reporters make choices that improve the prospects for peace. These choices, including how to frame stories and carefully choosing which words are used, create an atmosphere conducive to peace and supportive of peace initiatives and peacemakers, without compromising the basic principles of good journalism. Peace journalism gives peacemakers a voice while making peace initiatives and non-violent solutions more visible and viable."

PJ is just better journalism—journalism that builds bridges instead of deepening divisions; reporting that gives a voice to the voiceless while rejecting inflammatory language; storytelling that offers counternarratives to traditional reporting that oversimplifies and stereotypes. At minimum, peace journalists don’t pour gasoline on the fire, and don’t make a bad situation worse.

PJ in Action
Peace journalism, while not in the majority, constitutes an increasing minority of reporting worldwide.

In Uganda, where I’ve done a number of PJ projects, peace journalists have launched the Refugees and Migration Media Network, which uses peace journalism reporting techniques to tell the story of the many refugees who call Uganda home.

In India and Pakistan, I’m working on an ongoing project sponsored by the East-West Center with journalists from India and Pakistan who have set aside their differences to work collaboratively on stories of mutual interest. They’ve launched a website, Journalists for Change, that is “dedicated to stories that inform, inspire, and engage our communities in both countries; focus on common issues that unite us rather than divide us; and offer solutions, not just describe problems.”

Peace Journalist magazine
PJ activities around the world are chronicled in the Peace Journalist Magazine, which published its 20th edition last fall. The most recent edition, for example, features stories on media narratives about refugees in Turkey; Giving voice to senior citizens in Spain; Empowering Yemeni youth to raise their voices; Rotary Peace Center PJ seminars for Zimbabwe journalists; and Media and women in Pakistan and India.

Conclusion
While I am gratified that PJ seems to be gaining traction, I acknowledge the uphill battle PJ faces in gaining broader acceptance. Both here in the U.S. and abroad, as media practice and public discourse deteriorates, the struggle for better reporting is one worth having.

 Peace Journalism projects by country
* Austria, Cameroon, Rep. of Georgia, Kuwait, Ireland, Colombia, South Sudan, Cyprus, Lebanon, Kashmir/India, United States, Sierra Leone, Azerbaijan, France, Jordan, Ethiopia, Germany, Kenya, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, South Africa, Costa Rica, Turkey, Northern Ireland, Pakistan, Cote D’Ivoire, and Uganda. (Virtual/Zoom: Moldova, Netherlands, Belize, Sudan, Yemen, India and Pakistan, Luxembourg, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Kosovo, Sahel region)

Jan. 6 coverage highlights need for bridge-building PJ
The anniversary of the January 6th attack on the U.S. capitol is yet another sad reminder of the alternative media universes inhabited by Americans on either side of the political divide—and of the need for peace journalism that rejects polarization and seeks to build bridges instead.

A quick perusal of news websites on the left (New York Times, CNN) shows stories that highlight Pres. Biden’s comments today about Trump “holding a dagger at the throat of democracy.” On CNN, another headline discusses “7 people who believed the big lie.” On MSNBC, a headline screams about how the “Jan. 6 insurrection was a pitiful performance of white victimhood.” Another story talks about how it’s “time to look past the mob and punish the liars who pushed them to the capitol.”

On Foxnews.com, their banner interestingly features a large photo of Vice President Kamala Harris (not Biden) along with the headline about how she compared 1/6 to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 as “infamous dates that will be remembered.” Under the large banner, one featured story was headlined, “'My training kicked in': Why one GOP congressman ran toward the danger when Capitol riot erupted.” Breitbart.com goes even further. Their lead stories are titled, “Democrat day of hysteria” and “Kamala unhinged.” The “hysteria” story smeared Harris as someone “who participated in a Black Lives Matter protest outside the White House in May 2020 just hours after rioters attacked police around the building, injuring dozens, assaulting journalists, and forcing the evacuation of the president into a bunker.” On the far right, Infowars.com completely ignores the 1/6 anniversary, instead presenting stories about Ted Cruz “stabbing conservatives in the back” and about a CNN video where a medical ethicist “calls for denying health insurance to ‘unvaccinated jerks.’”

Given the well-documented media bubbles inhabited by partisans on both sides of the political divide, it’s no wonder that so many Americans have distorted views of Jan. 6.  A December AP-NORC poll found that 29 percent of Republicans rated the events of Jan. 6 either “not very violent” or “not violent at all,” despite hours of video evidence to the contrary. Meanwhile, an American Enterprise Institute Survey Center on American Life poll found that nearly 40 percent of Republicans agreed that “if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.” (New York Times). 

As peace journalists, it’s incumbent on us to continue debunking the big lie, even as we admit that a certain percentage of the population is unreachable. Certainly, the embrace of violence is particularly alarming. One definition of peace journalism (Lynch/McGoldrick) talks about how PJ gives society a chance to consider non-violent responses to conflict. We need to redouble our efforts in this regard, and educate our audiences about the folly of violence while offering up substantive discussions of possible solutions.

On Twitter yesterday, political scientist and FiveThirtyEight contributor Lee Drutman wrote, “Dear journalists/editors: If you are writing about January 6, please consider offering some hope to escape our current crisis. An ‘everything-is-f-ed’ conclusion is demobilizing and self-reinforcing. If we are to escape this moment, we need a vision of a brighter future.”

Agreed. It’s our responsibility as peace journalists to lead discussions about this “brighter future” and how society can begin to build bridges between our polarized masses.

 

Sahel journalists overcome obstacles, learn PJ
Navigating a minefield of obstacles while reporting protest movements was at the top of the agenda today in our peace journalism project involving journalists from the Sahel region of north Africa. This project—eight 90 minute sessions—has been simultaneously a sprint and a marathon.

Held over 5 weeks, the sessions were part of a project titled “Strengthening the Role of Media in Countering Violent Extremism. “ It was organized by Equal Access International, with financial support from the U.S. Embassy in Algeria.

Today, the journalists had some fascinating insights about their coverage of civil unrest—protests, riots, and so on. Like their counterparts everywhere, the journalists said their media outlets are prone to showing “violent and shocking” images like burning tires and wounded people because these “attract viewers, and the public loves it.” One journalist commented that their reports often feature sensational language, while another said that the reporting they produce during protests is “far from peace journalism.” A third participant from Mauritania shared information about a troubling law that forbids journalists from showing any images of military or police.

Then, we discussed how peace journalism principles can be applied to reporting about civic unrest. My advice included avoiding sensationalism; using precise non-inflammatory language, reporting counternarratives that offer different perspectives on protesters and police; and reporting with reconciliation in mind.

The final element of this project will gather the participants together in Abidjan, Cote D’Ivoire in early January to further discuss peace journalism and the challenges the reporters face in their very difficult media environments in their Sahel region countries of Mauritania, Mali, Chad, Cote D’Ivoire, Morocco, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Algeria, and Niger.

I’m looking forward to meeting my colleagues, and to my first overseas trip since March, 2020.

Journalists have important role in reporting Omicron
As we’re flooded with news about the Covid Omicron variant, it’s important to remember our role as journalists in not speculating, fueling misinformation, or spreading panic.

On Nov. 30, the Washington Post wrote about the media are “freaking out” over Omicron. “Over the weekend, a debate took shape, among experts and journalists, as to whether all the coverage was too much. David Dowdy, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, accused fellow scientists of shamefully overselling fears about Omicron despite the paucity of hard data on the variant; Erin Biba, a freelance science journalist, tweeted that it is “completely and utterly exhausting” when “doomsday headlines and uninformed reporters create mass hysteria before we even have any details or information.”

Meanwhile, SFGate discusses how Omicron is reviving “old conspiracy theories…as widely shared social media posts falsely claimed the omicron variant was nothing but a cover-up for darker agendas.” These false claims included that Omicron was invented as an excuse to change voting laws, or as a distraction from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, or that Omicron was made up by President Biden to scare Americans. 

Others, however, praise the media for their Omicron coverage. Tom Jones writes at Poynter.org that “If you’re a news consumer, the coverage — for the most part — has been comprehensive and responsible.” He cites thorough interviews with experts who have cautioned that answers to most of our Omicron questions are several weeks away. Jones said the media have “turned to experts who have been quick to relay what we know and, most importantly, what we don’t know.” 

I agree with Jones. In this instance, the "what we don’t know" should be the headline. Toward this end, I recommend the article over the weekend in The Atlantic (Should you be panicking? No, but you should be paying attention). 

As a peace journalist, I offer these tips for responsible Omicron reporting:

1. Accuracy is paramount. Initial reports can be exaggerated. Facts can be slippery in mid-crisis. Don’t speculate. Check, double check, triple check facts with experts like virologists and epidemiologists. (Remember, politicians are not experts.)

2. Don’t prematurely jump on the “blame” bandwagon, or to conclusions. This variant isn’t South Africa’s “fault.” In fact, South Africa should be lauded for its openness in revealing and discussing Omicron.

3. Avoid inflammatory, sensational language that exacerbates the situation. Never embellish stories.

4. Don’t be shy in saying, and repeating, “We don’t know.”

5. Research the possible treatments, cures, and vaccines, so you know the background and can be sensitive to contested narratives and misinformation (vaccines are dangerous, hydroxychloroquine is a cure, lockdowns aren’t necessary, eg).

6. When reporting about the Omicron variant and the pandemic in general, journalists should give a voice to the vulnerable, marginalized voiceless in their societies—minorities, the poor, homeless, prisoners, immigrants, etc. How will they potentially be impacted by Omicron?

7. Reject partisan framing of Omicron, and call out partisan, polarizing framing in other media outlets.