Side by side comparison:
Peace Journalism and Traditional Journalism
Peace Journalism and Traditional Journalism
Traditional “War” Reporting
Skopje, UPI—Peace talks aimed at ending the
conflict in Macedonia lay in ruins last night after the massacre of eight
policemen by Albanian rebels who mutilated the bodies. The atrocity took place
at the mountain village of Vecje, where a police patrol was attacked with
machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, said a spokesman. Six other men
were wounded and three vehicles destroyed.
The bodies were cut with knives after they
died, he said, and one man’s head had been smashed in. The attack was believed
to be the work of the National Liberal Army terrorists from the hills near
Tetevo. Ali Ahmeti, a political leader of the NLA, said that his men may have
fired “in self-defense”… (From Peace
Journalism, Lynch/McGoldrick, p. 58).
This is a traditional report in every way.
Notice first how the writer begins with the inflammatory comment that peace
talks are “in ruins.” If indeed peace talks are in ruins, this is a
determination that readers should make themselves. A peace journalist would
ask: what is the consequence of this kind of reporting? Does this make peace
more or less possible? If peace is not possible, then one might logically
conclude that violence and war is the only viable solution. This story is also
unbalanced and is largely based on the claims (propaganda?) made by one
government source. Notice also the emotive language that may incite and
inflame.
Here is the same story, framed differently.
Peace Journalism Story
Skopje, UPI—There was condemnation across the
political spectrum in Macedonia after a police patrol suffered the loss of
eight men. Both the main parties representing the country’s minority Albanians
distanced themselves from the killings, believed to be the work of the
self-styled National Liberation Army. Ali Ahmeti, a political leader of the
NLA, denied that his men had attacked the patrol, saying they may have fired
“in self-defense.” But the Macedonian government said it had done nothing to
provoke the machine-gun fire and rocket-propelled grenades which destroyed
three trucks. A spokesman added that the bodies appeared to have been cut with
knives and one man’s skull caved in … (From
Peace Journalism, Lynch/McGoldrick, p. 58).
This story is much better. Notice first how
instead of hopelessness, the writer highlights an area of agreement—condemnation
of violence. While the violent acts aren’t ignored, they aren’t
sensationalized, either. The imprecise, emotive language is gone. The story is more
balanced and doesn’t present as gospel truth claims by the government
spokesman.
In this second example from the NewYork Post, we see the difference between traditional journalism and peace
journalism in stories about the aftermath of a school shooting.
Traditional Reporting
Disgraced
deputy haunted by failure at Florida school shooting
The disgraced Florida sheriff’s deputy who stayed outside
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School as a killer stalked its halls has spent
the 90 days since the massacre wondering why he failed to save lives, according
to a report.
Since the Valentine’s Day attack at the Parkland
school — where 17 people were killed and 17 more injured —
Peterson has lost his job with the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, been dubbed
the “Coward of Broward” in local media, and been served with a lawsuit from a parent whose daughter died in
the shooting.
According to the newspaper, he now spends most of his
days hiding in the duplex he shares with his girlfriend, armed with a motion
detector and a sheet covering his front door, replaying every minute of the
shooting.
He’s re-watched surveillance footage, read witness
statements, and studied dozens of pages of documents, trying to figure out what
happened. Prior to the shooting, the former school resource officer mostly
chased down stolen cellphones, confiscated weed, and broke up the occasional
fight…
Peterson had
gone to annual conferences about school shootings, taken a class on confronting
active shooters and led lockdown trainings for teachers — but in the moment, he
didn’t know how to react. (Lapin, 2018. Edited for length only.)
This is a traditional,
sensational news report. It uses inflammatory language (“massacre”,
“disgraced”, “coward”, “stalked the halls”, etc.) It strives to frame the
deputy in the worst possible light (“hiding”), impugning his motives and qualifications
(“chased down cell phones”). It offers no alternative explanation for his
actions. It offers little of value to the reader, other than stoking hatred
against the officer, who is essentially tried and convicted by the article.
Here’s a different version of the
same story, pieced together with information from the Post article and another, later article on the same topic from an article in USA Today.
Peace
Journalism Story
Deputy
questions his actions at Florida school shooting
The Florida sheriff’s deputy on duty at Marjory Stoneman
Douglas High School during a shooting has spent the 90 days since the event
questioning his actions, according to a report.
Reports say Peterson remained outside the school while
the shooting occurred inside.
Since the Valentine’s Day shooting at the Parkland school
where 17 people were killed and 17 more injured, Peterson has lost his job with
the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and has been served with a lawsuit from a
parent whose daughter died in the shooting.
According to the report, he now spends most of his days
in the duplex he shares with his girlfriend, replaying the shooting. He’s
re-watched surveillance footage, read witness statements, and studied dozens of
pages of documents.
Previously, Peterson attended annual conferences about
school shootings, took a class on confronting active shooters, and led lockdown
trainings for teachers.
Peterson’s attorney Joseph DiRuzzo said his client has
been scapegoated for what happened at the school. Vanderbilt University
Sociology Professor Jonathan Metzl adds that “focusing on the actions of one person raises the risk of overlooking
much bigger, systemic issues that impact mass shootings.” (Bacon, 2019)
Notice the differences in this
story, starting with the headline. The inflammatory language is gone, along
with the accusatory and denigrating tone. The “questioning his actions” angle
is still in tact, but without the sensationalism. It offers a more balanced
approach, along with an alternative perspective (scapegoating). The information
on Peterson’s background is still present, but without the disparaging “he
didn’t know how to react” comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment