"no news is good news"

The title above is meant to justify my absence from this blog. I have not been blogging elsewhere, and though there was a lot to blog about, I just didn't have the time.

+++

I wonder (a little) about how 9/11 was remembered today. I didn't see any coverage of special ceremonies or other acts of commemorating the historic event that certainly changed lives -- at least on the news programs I watched.

Food for thought for the day:

How has 9/11 changed media coverage?

How would peace journalists have covered 9/11?

How can peace journalism prevent another 9/11?

many small fish

Some very striking concepts and vivid images will remain with me now that the PJ1 workshop has ended.

One of these was the image of a small fish up against a huge, mean-looking fish (a shark?) -- one of the last slides in PECOJON International Coordinator Antonia Koop's presentation.

That is what peace journalists are. No longer part of the status quo, they swim against the tide. They are aware that how they report can contribute to the escalation -- or resolution -- of a conflict.

Many times, we have seen media practitioners making mountains out of molehills, or fanning the flames of conflict. It is unfortunate. But now we know that we don't have to sell conflict, pitt A against B, or report things from the same tired old box. Though we've been trained to recognize conflict as one of the things that make news newsworthy, we know that we don't have to highlight it in our reporting.

It won't happen overnight. But one day, maybe peace journalism will become the status quo. And many small fish together will have the power to change things.

+++



I had the opportunity of a brief but educational exchange with Antonia. What she said strongly echoed James Nachtwey's sentiments: It's all about the people most affected by conflict situations.

People caught in conflict situations are very much like small fish in the sea of humanity. Media practitioners often reinforce this. While journalists focus on the powerful, the top brass, the big players, and the celebrities, any reportage that examines ordinary people's lives is lost.

Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel said journalism's first obligation is to the truth. Certainly, to tell the truth means more than just to meet the standards of veracity. I think that philosophically -- and maybe from a human interest perspective -- it means finding an ordinary person's truth and telling it.

So this is how we fulfill another of Kovach's and Rosenstiel's journalism standards: to give voice to the voiceless. When we point our cameras and our voice recorders or microphones to tell their stories, it is a glimmer of hope to them, a possibility that maybe -- just maybe -- they matter after all.

'evoking a sense of humanity'

Yesterday's sessions ended with War Photographer, a film documentary about photojournalist James Nachtwey. I found it to be an eye opener not just for Nachtwey's stunning photos, but more so for his insights about his work. Certainly, covering war is one of the most dangerous things one can do -- yet, Nachtwey seems to have succeeded in capturing heartbreakingly truthful images.

Through it all, he has kept a level head. "The people I photographed were much more important than myself," he said in the film. This explains his success in being "invisible" in his documentation of people living in difficult conditions. He is not a paparazzi but a sensitive storyteller. The photos are not eye candy but they must be seen. In the film, he says of his photography, "We must look at it. We're required to look at it. We're required to do something about it." A long pause, and he continues: "If we don't, who will?"

One might describe Nachtwey as an advocate of the power of photojournalism: "The strength of photography is its ability to evoke a sense of humanity," he said. "If used well, it can be a powerful antidote to war."

Fittingly, Nachtwey has won numerous awards. In this TED talk, he accepts his 2007 TED Prize:

when the word 'press' can kill

Today was the start of Peace and Conflict Journalism 1, a training workshop given by the Peace and Conflict Journalism Network (PECOJON) to media practitioners involved in reporting conflict situations. From today up to 10 March, I will try to blog daily about the workshop.

One of the things PECOJON International Coordinator Antonia Koop talked about briefly, by way of introducing tomorrow's sessions, was the changing media landscape. The above title, borrowed from the Al Jazeera documentary Shooting the Messenger, underscores the shift in attitudes toward the press -- and for that matter, toward their work: Previously, identifying oneself as a member of the press could get you a measure of protection, if not respect, for what you did. Today, it can get you killed -- in places like Gaza, for instances.

But we don't have to go very far to cite other examples. Right here, in the Philippines, three journalists have been killed since the start of 2009.

Antonia left us with these thoughts as the last session for the day ended: With such changes in public perception and treatment, how do journalists adapt?

'no to war. yes to peace and human rights.'

The above title is from Worldpress.org's interview with Shirin Ebadi entitled "Follow the Path of Negotiation and Peace" -- a hopeful keynote with which to start the new year, as well as a firm stand against what seems to be the impending US bombing of Iran.

Shirin Ebadi is an Iranian human rights lawyer and the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize laureate -- the first Iranian and the first Muslim woman to have been named as such. In 1969, she began serving as a judge -- the first woman in Iran to do so.

Ebadi continues her private practice as a lawyer, taking on cases of national interest, most involving children's rights and freedom of expression. She teaches human rights courses and has written several articles and books. What strikes me most about Ebadi is that, in a paternalistic society, she espouses and represents equality between men and women.

I'm sure I'm not alone in the hope that any and all efforts towards peace -- such as Ebadi's National Peace Council -- will succeed. Let's hope that 2008 will see more of such initiatives.

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.