in my opinion

Replacing Shock Value with Substance

By Ashley Praetorius

News reports encouraging opponents of healthcare reform to disrupt the democratic dialogue of "town-hall meetings” are a prime example of the type of news coverage which directly counteracts the goals of peace journalism. Despite their potential to provide society with alternative views reflecting the value of non-violence, popular news networks often merely incite public zeal without offering a well-rounded or valid portrayal of conflict situations. Several attempts have been made over the last few decades to promote a higher standard of journalism ethics to help guide, for example, the selection of sources of information and methods of depicting events. Scholar Suleyman Irvan of Eastern Mediterranean University cites the Mass Media Declaration (1978) and UNESCO’s International Principles of Professional Ethics in Journalism (1983) as examples of attempts at ethical reforms.

Although, ideally, the media and journalism community would have adopted these broad initiatives by now, in reality, very little headway has been made in terms of their practical application. The most promising way of achieving some of these key objectives is to start working from the ground up. It is crucial that journalists place the truthful orientation of their work above all other priorities. Some logistics of bolstering journalistic integrity include supporting claims and perspectives with evidence, investigating the errors or wrongdoings of every party involved in a conflict, and diligently verifying the accuracy, fairness, and veracity of all material used in a story. Although less obvious, true peace journalism is defined by the ability to perceive and convey both visible and invisible aspects of a conflict. Only when we can transform the most basic systems of collecting and sharing information, will a fundamental shift occur toward the kind of peace journalism which incorporates objectivity as well as sensitivity.