Are journalists too soft on aid agencies?
Blogged by: AlertNet
A young Afghan refugee carries her sister in the Jungle Pir Alizai refugee camp, near the Pakistan-Afghan border town of Chaman, June 2007. REUTERS/Mian Khursheed
By Ruth Gidley
When journalists want to know who's survived an earthquake in the Kashmir mountains, interview refugees on the run from an Afghan war zone or hitch a plane ride to Congo's eastern jungle, it's usually aid workers who help them out.
But when aid organisations cover journalists' travel costs and help with logistics - assistance that suits editors at a time of dwindling foreign news budgets - it makes it hard for reporters to remain unbiased about the agencies.
"I think journalists need to take their kid gloves off," David Pratt, foreign editor for Scotland's Sunday Herald newspaper, told a debate in London titled "Can journalists and aid workers trust each other? "They shouldn't be pulling wool over anyone's eyes, if a government or an aid agency isn't doing its job properly."
Pratt is not alone in suggesting the relationship between hacks and do-gooders can be a little too cosy - despite a natural tension stemming from the media's need for information and aid agencies' desire to be seen in the best light for fundraising.
Aid workers are generally portrayed in the Western press as the good guys. They tend to be given the benefit of the doubt and are rarely questioned with the same rigour as other multi-billion dollar industries.
But that day could be just around the corner, said Reuters AlertNet Editor Martyn Broughton. "The media has a tendency to build something up and then cut it off at the knees. That could happen soon."
While many aid workers get outraged when their agencies come under attack, they can also be philosophical about it.
And many actually want the media to distinguish between responsible humanitarians and the cowboy operations out there that ferry inappropriate aid around and dole it out without checking who needs it most.
The head of the British branch of international relief agency Medecins Sans Frontieres, Jean-Michel Piedagnel, said journalists were starting to get harder, more suspicious.
"We will be put under scrutiny," he said.
And times are changing in many ways. Citizen journalism is on the rise, with bloggers and snappers getting pictures, diaries and video online. "You don't need any qualifications except you've seen it and can put finger to keyboard," AlertNet's Broughton said.
So aid agencies might complain that conventional journalists sometimes distort or oversimplify the story, but bloggers are even harder - if not impossible - for aid agencies to control. And that includes bloggers in their own ranks.
In some cases, heroic citizen journalists might expose corruption or mistakes in the aid world. But they might just as well be guilty of bad reporting.
Most bloggers are unlikely to care about libel. They're probably not signed up to any code of conduct and they rarely publish corrections if they get things wrong.
Some journalists say the same applies to newly graduated students who are ready to risk their lives in the latest hotspot to kick-start their careers with a byline in a newspaper back home, whether or not they know what's going on in the war or disaster unfolding in front of them.
Like it or not, both bloggers and eager young freelancers are filling a gap that's been growing as print media and broadcasters slash their budgets for foreign correspondents and travel.
Journalists have been saying for a while that it's harder than ever to get their bosses to let them cover foreign stories.
"It's the bane of my life trying to persuade editors there's a story to be told, even if it's not in the headlines," Pratt said.
When aid agencies offer to cover the costs of taking reporters on trips to see the work they're doing in the field, it's a dilemma for journalists who then might shy away from being critical in their coverage.
"It fits the bill perfectly for editors (who are keen to save money), but it does mean enormous restrictions and ethical problems," Pratt said.
Now aid agencies are trying to do their own journalism too, sending blogs and videos directly to newspapers and broadcasters.
"New technology means news can travel quickly in so many ways," Piedagnel said. "The response to that is NGOs are becoming more active in putting their message forward... And sidelining the journalist more."
When journalists and aid workers start debating how much they trust each other, and whether they're working on the same side or not, they're usually talking about international aid workers and international media.
Sometimes they remember to take local journalists into account.
Relief workers say local journalists have the same problems as international ones in understanding the aid business, and aid agencies won't necessarily trust them either.
Despite that, Pratt is passionate that local journalists can often do the best job of reporting on their own countries in their own countries.
And in places where it's become almost impossible for international journalists to operate - like Iraq, for example - national reporters are the ones getting the story out to the rest of the world. "If there's no access, there's no story," Pratt said.
"I think the future in so many ways is indigenous journalism."
"Can journalists and aid workers trust each other?" was organised by Reuters AlertNet, the Overseas Development Institute think tank, the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action and the Humanitarian Practice Network.
You can read about the suggestions that came out of the debate.
And you can listen to an interview on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme with Martyn Broughton and Jean-Michel Piedagnel if you download realplayer.
And you can press play to listen to the podcast.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
14 responses to “Are journalists too soft on aid agencies?”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
This blog was written by one or more members of the AlertNet team.
NewsBlogs by theme
AlertNet Blogs
AlertNet bloggers
Guest bloggers
20 Sep 2007 21:58:33 GMT
After lived 5 years in northern Irak, I just left two months ago. I am a journalist and photographer and during the last 3 years, I was the resident representative of SI/A *spanish ONG*. From my experience there, I realize that NGO are need to change the approach to the media. The NGO seems to believe that the media is the perfect tool to marketing projects, organization and so on. It is a pity because something the NGO have a lot information that the media could use but is keeping for themselves.
21 Sep 2007 21:02:18 GMT
Two questions to be addressed :
1. Why do mainstream media usually focus on selected loud emergencies -- such as Afghanistan, Darfour, and Irak -- and rarely draw attention on other humanitarian emergencies such as in DRC, CAR, Cote d'Ivoire, Nepal, Pakistan, etc? 2. Why media are always reluctant to draw attention to ''success stories'' in order to illustrate how contributions from donor countries, organizations, and/or individuals do make a real difference? Such initiatives by the media should certainly not be considered as promotional or PR support to major international and national NGOs.22 Sep 2007 18:24:47 GMT
Robert is highlighting two very interesting issues.
1. Western media seem today more than ever reluctant to run stories that their audiences ââ¬" and their advertisers ââ¬" will find disturbing, so they stick to big emergencies that can't be avoided easily. Something is wrong with our news values but also with the way media outlet are funded. 2. Journalism is always seen as a powerful mean to bring positive changes informing audiences of wrongdoings. "Bad news is good news" right? It still lacks in many cases the interest of investigating what happens after the crisis or the conflict, highlighting success stories that could inspire people to contribute in similar ways. That is exactly what NEED magazine is trying to do with the publication of a hope-filled magazine that work in collaboration with NGOs and governmental agencies around the world.24 Sep 2007 09:13:44 GMT
While working in Darfur and required by my agency to shuttle the media around, a prominent journalist looked me straight in the face and asked me for 1). a dead baby and 2). a rape victim to launch an important piece on Darfur. I was sickened. Wouldn't you be?
24 Sep 2007 09:15:11 GMT
News of disasters has been successfully "dumbed down" for years. It suits the media now more than ever, as it's easier to present a scrawny baby image than to detail the myriad causes of the disaster. Some channels still try to do proper analysis and we in aid agencies should support this. We should ask ourselves if we are complicit to the spread of disaster porn and dumbed down analysis.
25 Sep 2007 16:27:52 GMT
This is a fascinating issue, thanks for exploring it guys. Journalists often talk of the isolation of operating in crisis zones dominated by aid workers. Some points worth touching upon ~ can journalists based in such areas rely on the security briefings of aid workers fenced in by insurance policies and red tape? If not, how might reporters know a crisis is not over-hyped, particularly if they are in and out in a matter of days? How does one balance accurate reporting with maintaining good on-the-ground contacts - is it worth losing your aid worker friends over a good story? And for freelancers, how do you cope with the isolation that comes from being independent when everyone else is tied to an aid organisation?
You're right. Journalists and aid workers are often in the same place at the same time, but perhaps we're not on the same side. Is it that we don't understand each other? That we're too suspicious? Or is it nothing but friendly competition with a bit of envy (on both sides) thrown in? We need a book on this (preferably self-help).26 Sep 2007 15:25:46 GMT
One of the problems is the tendency of big Agencies such as the Red Cross, UN, Care, Oxfam etc, to employ their own full time media personel to push their own points of view. How can the public get impartial reports when jounalists are employed by agencies to send reports and to liaise and brief other media agencies, that don't send their own people but want a story from these sources?
26 Sep 2007 15:26:26 GMT
Your both just as bad as each other.
27 Sep 2007 07:45:57 GMT
No aid agency is perfect. Smart journalists should research the backgrounds of any agencies they plan to utilize in their storytelling.
The worst case scenario would be to have this avenue shut off in addition to the shutting of foreign bureaus. If the international media wants to cannibalize itself over an ethical debate, God help the poor of the world as their stories will be told less and less.30 Sep 2007 10:56:02 GMT
Accurate reporting isn't nessecarily based on the observations on the ground. Journalists should be much better at using the academic knowledge you find at the Universities, rather than among the aid community. Better co-operation between the journalist "being there" and the desk at home would be a start.
30 Sep 2007 10:57:56 GMT
International media, journalism and NGO are bias when trying to unfolding stories in world affairs and humanitarian crisis within fragile world; whether is newsworthy? Where is Humanity? Professionalism journalisms and NGOs must give a equal reporting and equal aid distribution to Somalia, Palestine, Kashmir, Darfur, Burmaâs and Chechnya civilians which are suffering too long; we must broaden the coverage above regions after that we can make a really difference a conflicts zones.
07 Nov 2007 13:50:15 GMT
What a joke. This has been going on for a long time. In the Balkans, the Media would love to quote all sorts of politically motivated organizations, think tanks or 'do something' NGOs. The ICRC was almost completely ignored because their data contradicted the official propaganda - i.e. refugee figures which give a much better insight into what is really happening.
The Media chose to go with a black and white story, editorial censorship was practiced (sorry, the 'political line' was maintained) and they willfully omit relevant information if it makes the story 'too complicated'. Clearly the Media thinks that we are too stupid to understand anything and thus have to reduce everything to good/bad, yes/no. After all, both the NGO's and the Media do have have their own interests to protect...07 Nov 2007 13:57:50 GMT
What a joke. This has been going on for a long time. In the Balkans, the Media would love to quote all sorts of politically motivated organizations, think tanks or 'do something' NGOs. The ICRC was almost completely ignored because their data contradicted the official propaganda - i.e. refugee figures which give a much better insight into what is really happening.
The Media chose to go with a black and white story, editorial censorship was practiced (sorry, the 'political line' was maintained) and they willfully omit relevant information if it makes the story 'too complicated'. Clearly the Media thinks that we are too stupid to understand anything and thus have to reduce everything to good/bad, yes/no. After all, both the NGO's and the Media do have have their own interests to protect...09 Nov 2007 11:49:18 GMT
Having just returned Sunday night from Jijiga, Ethiopia, while assisting an NGO for Somalian refugees, I am challenged myself both as a journalist and aid assistant as to the reality of the what I experienced. Cosy is not exactly the word I would use...I can't imagine compromising my journalist ethics for a feel good experience of this kind, and NO I did not ask for a dead baby or a rape victim to embellish my story or photo images. What I did do was roll up my own sleeves, delve into the ugly reality of these peoples lives and try to make a difference while in the moment. There is nothing pretty about this kind of work, whether you are an aid worker or a journalist covering the story....Is there a conflict of interest? Absolutely! But,ethical journalism requires that we be objective. Let's face it, NGO's are fighting for funds to keep their organization afloat, sometimes even at the expense of the very people they come to help, it's a sickening thought, but journalist have a responsibilty to weed out the good from the bad, before ALL aid workers themselves become branded as "do gooders" for the sake of their own vanity and exposure.