the peace agenda

One of the topics I've been thinking of focusing on when I do my master's project is peace journalism, or the peace initiatives of Philippine media. Obviously, this is still very broad, but my interest in this stems from the idealistic notion that journalists can contribute to peace as they go about their work.

Ten years ago, the term "peace journalism" first came into use when Professor John Galtung of Peace Studies and Peace Research lectured at the Summer School at Taplow Court in the UK. Since then, the term has been used to both refer to and recognize approaches to reporting conflict that focus on peace initiatives, and ultimately, promote nonviolence.

This is not to say that peace journalism is new. I remember Carol Arguillas of MindaNews saying that she'd been practising journalism from a peace perspective for years without knowing that there was a name for it. Indeed, the term "peace journalism" can be applied to any journalist's efforts to report on war or conflict situations guided by conscience and from the desire to bring about change.

The history of wars and other conflicts played out throughout the world shows proof of the media's role in either perpetuating such conflicts or helping to end them. The truth is, we have gotten so used to the "conflict frame" -- "A versus B" or "us versus them," a two-dimensional, myopic approach that tends to pit a protagonist against a sometimes unwitting antagonist -- that we forget that there are other options, other angles, and other players. The coverage of the Subic rape case, for example, was done mostly from the frame of "Nicole" versus Daniel Smith, female versus male, or even the Philippines versus the US. Other media practitioners did well to go a step further, and reported on the impact of the Balikatan exercises in general, the Visiting Forces Agreement, and the history of crimes committed by US military personnel while here.

A conflict frame ends up justifying the conflict in the guise of rallying the public in support of the cause, and soon leads to divisiveness. This is what happened during the Vietnam War, when the media were initially manipulated for the purposes of propaganda. We see this locally as well, with the use of such terms as "Muslim rebels" or "Muslim extremists" by the media, reflecting a bias against those who are not of the dominant religion. Though perhaps done unconsciously, it is unfair and damaging. Why not "Catholic murderer" or "Protestant corrupt official" then?

Peace journalism provides a more holistic approach to the coverage of conflict, one that considers all sides without making judgments, focuses on the goals of the different parties, and allows for solutions. Where there is war or any sort of conflict or violence, there is the opportunity for journalists to report from such a perspective. Doing so sends a strong message to the audience and will go a long way in contributing to peace. But beyond the presence of war or conflict, peace journalism can be practised anytime -- as a conscious effort to prevent future conflict, no matter what the status quo.