Media love celebrity news, marginalize humanitarian news
Pandering media continue churning out copious amount of “celebrity garbage” news while marginalizing humanitarian news of much greater importance.

In the past month, there have been 231,000 articles about or mentioning Prince Harry’s new book, versus 676 results during the same period on Chad’s maternal mortality crisis (Google News search, 1/12). In the last year, there was nearly 100 times more media coverage of Will Smith’s Oscar slap than Malawi’s food crisis. There were 114,254 articles about Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez, compared to just 10,738 articles about the humanitarian situation in Mali. (Care International).

These journalistic transgressions are documented in a new report, Breaking the Silence, by CARE International. “This report shows us, once again, that there are no easy solutions. Humanitarian aid is often all that is left to make a difference for millions who don’t make the headlines,” wrote CARE’s CEO Eamon Cassidy.

The 2022 report outlines the 10 most underreported humanitarian crises, all of which this year are in Africa. See map for details. In 2021, the most underreported humanitarian crises also included Guatemala, Colombia, Honduras, and Ukraine. 

Why are these stories underreported? One reason is simply that many news outlets have closed their foreign bureaus, or cut them back substantially, leaving no one on the ground to cover humanitarian stories except perhaps stringers and freelancers. Between 1998 and 2011, for example, at least 20 US newspapers eliminated all of their foreign bureaus, according to the American Journalism Review (cjr.org). In 2015, the McClatchy newspaper chain shuttered its remaining foreign bureaus. (Huffpost.com).

Another reason these stories are underreported is a perceived lack of interest among news consumers—“we don’t cover it because our audiences won’t read it.” Assuming this is correct, why are audiences disinterested in humanitarian crisis news from Africa or elsewhere? It could be argued that a lack of audience interest reflects the audience’s lack of awareness—ignorance—about large swaths of the world. How can audiences expect to be interested if they don’t know what they should be interested in? A dearth of stories will naturally lead to a lack of interest.

One solution to this is a commitment to peace journalism-style reporting of humanitarian crises. This type of storytelling would add important human interest and “voice to the voiceless” perspectives, while presenting and weighing possible solutions. Such reporting can have a tremendous impact. Mwiinde Sizyongo from Zambia wrote, “When a disaster (or other crisis) is reported, it also puts the onus on local authorities to ensure that those affected get the necessary help they deserve.” (CARE)

Another solution involves funding international humanitarian journalism. “…Humanitarian journalists need more, transparent, reliable, and diverse sources of funding if they are to continue to draw public and political attention to ‘forgotten’ crises. As rapid increases in humanitarian need around the world continue to outstrip levels of international humanitarian support, this form of reporting is more important than ever,” noted Dr. Martin Scott, School for International Development, University of East Anglia. (CARE)

Anyone who calls him or herself a journalist should be ashamed and embarrassed by this report. We can and must do better.