The other journalism or why we need a guide to reporting diversity Yana Buhrer TAVANIER Social Issues Editor, Capital weekly
W
hile I am working on this text (which should explain the idea behind the just finished guide to reporting diversity published by the British Council and written by me), there is another file open on my computer. It is a letter I am writing to the Ethics Commission for the Print Media. A year and half ago together with my colleague from Capital Aleksey Lazarov, I sent a letter to that same Commission, calling it to consider and pass a judgment on the persistent violation of item 2.5.2 of the Code of Ethics of the Bulgarian Media, which states: ·We will not specify the racial, religious and ethnic affiliation, sexual orientation, mental or physical state, if these facts are not significantly important to the meaning of the information.” We enclosed a list of publications from different newspapers, illustrating a tendency we consider dangerous. In out letter to the Commission, we said that ·this way of reporting about the problems of the Roma hinders their solution and even intensifies them. All materials suggesting that ·a Gypsy steals/beats/kills again” not only generate an environment of ethnic tension, but also obscure the real reasons behind problems like criminality and Roma minority. It is even more difficult to solve a problem when the real reasons for its appearance are not perceived.” We also wrote that ·the requirement of the Code of Ethics is neither a meaningless wish, nor demonstrates
1 OBEKTIV
overzealousness on the part of the human rights advocates. The ethnic (and also racial and religious) affiliation of the people is not in any way relevant to their actions. It will be of significant importance to the meaning of the information only rarely - when reporting ethnic clashes or when making a profound analysis of the problems of a particular group. The text of item 2.5.2 of the Code does not hold us back from writing about the Roma problems, but only shows us how to be as correct to the Roma people and to our readers as possible.” Today I am copying the same paragraphs in the new letter. Because for a year and half nothing has changed. And because back then the Commission refused to consider the matter on its own initiative and to come up with a recommendation - and that was exactly what we called for. Several weeks later they sent a response informing us that they will follow the case and that, if there really was a tendency we were talking about, the Commission would consider the matter on its own initiative.* The fact that they did not do it, points rather to work not being done, than to a lack of a problem. * The response to another letter sent with two other colleagues from Capital - Borislav Kandov and Rosen Bosev - was similar. We sent this letter to the Ethics Commission for the Print Media in the summer of 2006 in connection with frequent violations of other articles of the Code of Ethics - e.g. labeling people criminals in publications before the court judgment (item 2.6.1) and lack of compassion and restraint in announcements concerning crime victims (item 2.3.3).
Because a problem does exist. The day I am writing this text I decide to make an experiment - I take a random newspaper from today’s pile on the big table in the Capital office. It doesn’t take me long to find what I’m looking for - a title reads ·Policeman shoots Roma swinging an axe.” I take an old newspaper at random - from November 2007. In the month’s first edition I come across the following: ·Maybe to the illiterate Roma men and boys for whom school is a cell and work - a prison, the wheels of the new ·Deziro” rail motors whisper: ·Come and see how strong we are.” Both newspapers I am talking about have signed the Code of Ethics of the Bulgarian Media. The road to quality journalism is still very long. And not only in relation to ethnic groups. People with disabilities are still ·invalids” and it is still the medical (and not the social) approach that dominates reporting concerning them. One characteristic of this approach is that the focus is put on the body and its deficits instead on the person’s abilities and skills. It considers the physical disability an illness, which requires therapy. Respectively, the person is treated like a patient. This model is governed by the belief that the people with disabilities cannot participate actively in the public life because of their ·defects” and not because of the hostile (architectural and cultural) environment. The image of the LGBT group (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual) in the media is based to a large extent on stereotypes and sensation-seeking. A profound knowledge of the terminology is not noticed - and the usage of an incorrect word may lead to negative connotations of even a neutral piece of news connected to the community. Reporting on HIV/AIDS is not limited to statistics, broadly covered by the media - where commonly a sign of equality is put between the people who are HIV-positive and those suffering from AIDS. It is necessary to stress on the stigma, on the discrimination and the personal stories of the infected; also needed are serious materials on prevention; access to treatment and its quality; the attitude of the medical staff; the reproductive rights of these patients; the growing number of HIV-positive people, who inject themselves with drugs... In the media and, respectively in the public space, the line separating refugees from migrants is unclear. Equally unclear is the difference between refugee protection and migration control as part of the policies of some countries. And the way a problem is characterized is crucial to the way the same problem is solved. These are some of the questions addressed in the British Council’s guide to reporting diversity. The idea behind its creation is to contribute to the quality way of talking and writing about those, who for one reason or another, are not part of the masses.
Quality journalism informs, explains and extracts the really important from the details; it looks for the facts behind the bias and the suggestions. The other journalism is powerful enough to destroy human lives. The other journalism has two possible sources aspiration to sensational writing and lack of knowledge. I am far from thinking that the guide will change the policy of editors who believe that xenophobic writing is OK once it guarantees them their audience. But to those who know they don’t know (me being one of them) and who realize that journalism is about making a difference, working with facts and being honest because what is said becomes true even if it is not - the guide may be of use. I am also far from thinking that the guide will succeed in shaping the diversity-related thinking of the students (the other target group of the document) in the presence of a musty journalism education, which worships theory’s inertness and detests the dynamics of practice. Practice is the only field in which this text could live its own life and make sense. This guide does not shake a finger. Its purpose is to be useful. The text to each chapter is short, but it includes a dictionary, cases, a list of words we can use and respectively ones we should avoid, contacts... This guide is not politically correct. It is simply correct. We refer to somebody in a particular way not because ·that is how it is done” or because ·the NGOs told us to do so” but because we believe that we must not offend and dehumanize. In fact if we do not believe in this, we will not find such guides useful.
Yana Buhrer-Tavanier (28) has been a journalist for nine years and an Social Issues editor in the Capital newspaper since 2003. She was awarded the Panitza Award for Reporting (2001); the first prize of the Investigative Journalists Association, the Media Development Center and the Guardian Foundation (2005); the UNHCR Journalist Recognition Award (2007). Yana wants to believe that she has contributed to the bestowing of the Dimitar Peshev award to the Capital newspaper for its overall policy of tolerance towards the ethnic and religious diversity (2006). OBEKTIV 2