Wednesday, October 28, 2020

Indian, Pakistani journalists talk objectivity, challenging officials
There were several loose ends and leftover questions from last week’s peace journalism seminars for 80 engaged Indian and Pakistani journalists. (See previous post, below).

Q: One journalist said his family was murdered in Kashmir, and noted that it would be hard to bury his own emotions were he to report on this incident. Can this be reported objectively?

A: No one would expect objectivity under these circumstances. Objectivity is a goal that is worth striving for, though 100% objectivity isn’t realistically attainable. We all have biases. The best we can do as journalists is to be aware of our biases, and try to mitigate them. In this instance, I would ask to be excused from reporting about Kashmir, or for that matter, anything like this that is deeply personal. Any good editor would understand. If there was no choice but for me to report something that personally involved me (or in which I had a conflict of interest), then I would at least make my editor aware of the situation, and my biases, so that she could edit my story accordingly so as to remove the bias.

Q: In many countries, journalists fear the consequences of challenging official government narratives and officials. This wariness often leads to self-censorship. Given this understandable fear, how can we implement some of the changes that peace journalism recommends?

A: This is a problem in many places around the world, at least the ones I’ve worked in. The answer from my colleague Stephen Franklin is perfect. He says the key is “taking small steps to see how far you can go, and slowly test the pushback from editors, politicians, and government officials. That's how I've seen journalists in similar places try to work things out - although I've also seen them lose their jobs and their publications shut down.”

These small steps, in my experience, are almost always possible, even in state owned or controlled media outlets. For example, I visited a state TV and radio outlet in Hawassa, Ethiopia in 2018, and was pleased to discover that peace journalism was possible even there. I wrote, “It’s clear at least some of the (state TV and radio) journalists feel frustrated and stifled, though it also evident from the discussion that they believe that at least some elements of PJ can be implemented at the state media in Hawassa. These PJ elements include giving a voice of the voiceless; responsible refugee and IDP reporting; media as reconciliation tool; and avoiding inflammatory reporting.” (http://stevenyoungblood.blogspot.com/2018/03/is-pj-possible-on-state-run-radio-and_27.html)

I’ve seen the “small steps” method work in places as diverse as Uganda (where politicians own many media outlets) and Yemen (with strict government censorship and licensing). The key, as articulated by my Pakistani and Indian colleagues last week, is to begin by reporting stories about what governments might see as non-controversial topics like climate, water, trade, agriculture, and Covid-19.


Monday, October 26, 2020

Pakistani, Indian journalists gather on Zoom
Among peace journalism’s many powers is an ability to help journalists see their key role as bridge builders, cross-cultural agents who can help bring conflicting parties closer to reconciliation.

This bridge building, cross border role was emphasized last week as I “met” 80 Indian and Pakistani journalists on Zoom. The seminars last Tuesday through Friday were organized by the East-West Center, based in Hawaii.

My 90 minute seminars, given for 20 journalists at a time (10 from each country), began with a discussion of how “the other” is portrayed in media. The journalists then explored the basics of peace journalism, especially how language and violent, sensational framing can exacerbate conflicts. The journalists analyzed stories from their both countries for peace journalism content (or lack thereof).

The sessions concluded with the journalists breaking into groups and creating their own set of guidelines for more responsibly reporting cross border issues. These ideas on how to implement peace journalism included:

--Beginning with small steps and reporting “softer,” non-controversial stories (science, agriculture, health, etc.). These stories might include climate, water, and trade, for example. These small steps could “test the system,” so that journalists could know how far they can push the boundaries of what authorities would allow.

--Getting sober analysis from all sides during TV forums, not just “jingo-ists.” 

--Being careful to avoid demonizing and inflammatory language, including words like “enemy” and “terrorist.” 

--Avoiding blaming “them” for environmental problems.

--Using cross-border teams to fact check and verify info from the other side.

--Reporting stories that highlight commonalities—environmental crises, Covid-19 challenges, etc.

-- Interviewing everyday people, and not just officials—giving a voice to the voiceless, in the parlance of peace journalism.

--Producing counternarrative stories about Kashmir that debunk the media-perpetuated myth that the region is nothing but a war zone.

--Turning down the temperature, a difficult task given the structural challenges in India and Pakistan that favor TV shows that both toe the government line and are sensational, often featuring angry shouting matches. “We need a voice of reason,” one reporter noted. 

My four peace journalism seminars were only the beginning of a larger project for these Indian and Pakistani journalists titled, “Reporting on cross border issues of mutual concern.” This week, they will be trained on multimedia journalism, and later, split into groups to study reporting in four content areas—agriculture, environment, health, and economy. Each of these sessions is being taught by Univ. of Missouri professors. Then after these virtual sessions this month and next, the plan is to continue the project face-to-face by bringing the journalists and trainers to Kathmandu, Nepal sometime in 2021, depending on the pandemic. The idea is to get reporters from each country to team up on mutually compelling stories in the four content areas.  (For more, see https://www.eastwestcenter.org/professional-development/seminars-journalism-programs/reporting-cross-border-issues-mutual-concern )

The project is funded by the U.S. Dept. of State and implemented by the East-West Center, which “promotes better relations and understanding among the people and nations of the United States, Asia, and the Pacific through cooperative study, research, and dialogue,” according to its website. The Center is an independent, public, nonprofit organization with funding from the U.S. government, and additional support provided by private agencies, individuals, foundations, corporations, and governments in the region.


Wednesday, October 7, 2020

Study: Media don't celebrate Trump's Covid diagnosis
The media’s coverage of Donald Trump’s bout with Covid-19 has been largely free of “just desserts” narratives, while attacks against him for being irresponsible have grown as the president has recovered, according to a new study.

A NexisUni database search of news on Oct. 3-4, the two days following Trump’s positive test announcement, maxed out at 10,000+ hits for “Trump and Covid.” (Maxed out means there were at least 10,000 stories, though the database shows only the first 10,000). Of these, only a small number of stories contained “just desserts” keywords like “karma” (114), “deserved” (370), “inevitable” (265), and “ironic” (65). There were even 126 hits for “didn’t deserve.” If fact, the phrase “just desserts” was found only twice in this search.

Using the total of 10,000 news stories on Trump and Covid on these two days, even the most frequently appearing “just desserts” keyword, “deserved,” appeared in just 3.7% of the stories. Clearly, the media steered clear of most attacks that would imply that Trump got what he deserved, as well as language that might be seen as celebrating Trump’s infection. To do otherwise would have given right-wing media the red meat they crave to feed their narrative about the liberal media hating Trump.

According to a second NexisUni search, the “just desserts” narrative did not gain any additional traction the following two days. On Oct. 5 (the day Trump returned to the White House from the hospital) and Oct. 6, the keywords of “karma” and “deserved” showed slight increases (from 114 to 137 and from 114 to 137 respectively) while the term “inevitable” (265 to 199) had a decreased number of hits. The keyword “ironic” stayed about the same (65 to 68).

Statistically, the press took it easy on Trump on Oct. 3-4 when it came to his perceived lack of personal responsibility, and what some see as his cavalier attitude when it comes to exposing others to his infection. On these two full days, the search of 10,000+ Trump and Covid news stories showed a modest number of hits for the keywords “reckless” (267) and “irresponsible” (280—just 2.8% of the 10,000 stories).

However, on Oct. 5-6, the press attacks on Trump’s personal responsibility escalated. A NexisUni search found 10,000+ Trump and Covid stories on these dates. Of these, 858 used the term “reckless,” while another 579 used the word “irresponsible.” Both totals were more than double the preceding two days, perhaps indicating that the press felt increasingly comfortable justifiably attacking Trump as he recovered and his prognosis improved.

One interesting aside: Whether a deliberate poke in the eye or not, the press liberally used a term Trump hates, “obese.” From Oct. 3-6, “obese” appeared in 1296 of 10,000 Trump and Covid stories—about 13%.

In summary, despite what one might hear from conservative outlets, there was almost no celebration in the news media when Trump contracted the virus. Instead, between Oct. 3-6, in 10,000+ articles, the media offered “prayers” (1364 hits) and hopes for a “speedy recovery” (1602). Once Trump was back in the White House, attacks against his irresponsible behavior did escalate, justifiably so, since his behavior calls into question his judgment and commitment to protecting others.


Friday, October 2, 2020

The new Peace Journalism magazine has arrived!
The October, 2020 edition of the Peace Journalist magazine is out! It features reports on Zoom conferences and peace journalism projects from Brazil, Israel, Yemen, Sudan, and elsewhere.

The magazine is posted on Issuu at:
 https://issuu.com/peacejournalism/docs/peace_journalist_oct_2020-web .

A downloadable/viewable .pdf file of the magazine is at: 
https://www.park.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Peace-Journalist-Oct-2020-web.pdf

The Peace Journalist is a semi annual publication featuring news and information by, for, and about peace journalism practitioners, academics, and students. Our next edition is April, 2021. See page 2 of the magazine for submission details. We welcome and encourage submissions from everyone.

Enjoy!