12 thoughts on "In defence of western journalists in Africa - By Michela
Wrong"

   1. Dean says:
   February 21, 2014 at 12:18
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34805>

   I have a friend who works in training up management skills in the
   region, especially post-DDR, and when I completed my degree and could cite
   liberals, neo-liberals, and the occasional neocon, he asked "but what about
   what's happening there, now?"

   My first few years post-university saw those type of questions being
   asked a lot; pragmatic questions which usually wanted a due diligence and
   an accompanying spreadsheet of some sorts - especially if money was going
   to be invested.

   While the complex roots to situations are often sought, sometimes
   starting off with the simple helps...
   2. Ngala Chome says:
   February 21, 2014 at 12:33
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34806>

   Noble idea behind the piece but not very convincing arguments.
   Especially not addressing the actual dangers of dominant narratives, where
   journalism plays a central role. Dominant narratives inform policy
   interventions including aid policies, which often exacerbate the problems.
   3. Paul Asquith says:
   February 21, 2014 at 1:02
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34810>

   As the comment above notes, the article glosses over the power of the
   media in shaping narratives (more so than any academic piece).

   Also, not all academics sit in the ivory tower analysing from afar; many
   spend far longer 'in the field' than journalists who move from story to
   story and crisis to crisis.

   Indeed, wearing body-proof armour in the back of a pick-up with an
   editors' deadline to meet doesn't in itself lend greater legitimacy.

   Interesting if deeply flawed argument that ends up being as defensive as
   the academics she criticises?...
   4. Ed says:
   February 21, 2014 at 3:15
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34815>

   I don't think Wrong is saying that there's no role for academics, just
   that a journalist is trying to inform a generalist audience. A news story
   has to compete with a breakfast-eating reader who is considering moving on
   to the heart-warming piece about a rabbit stuck in a tree or the sudoku.
   Journalism isn't really trying to drive policy. I suggest that if policy
   making is driven by news appetite alone, this would be the fault of those
   in a position making policies, not the journalist.

   A discussion of the epistemology behind a story may be interesting, but
   sometimes people need to try and communicate about what's happening in
   Darfur, I'd think.

   As the caption to the photo says, journalists and academics are not
   really in the same business.
   5. David Aronson (@MushamukaD) <http://congoresources.org/> says:
   February 21, 2014 at 3:18
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34816>

   Part of the problem, I think, is that Westerners lack much tacit
   knowledge about Africa. All we know of Africa is what journalists tell us
   about the latest coups or ethnic violence. It's as if we derived our entire
   understanding of airplanes from news stories of plane crashes and
   hijackings.
   6. Emily C says:
   February 21, 2014 at 5:31
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34823>

   Thank you, Michaela, for using your legitimacy and experience to speak
   out on this, when others of us perhaps can't. The clear self-promotion
   aspect of some of these critiques has been particularly galling, at a time
   when there are still a good number of "Western" journalists struggling to
   do a good and regular job of reporting from the African continent against
   daily-diminishing odds -- editors who won't risk their jobs to endorse
   reporting they think won't sell, while the outlets that do care are too
   poorly funded to support in depth work. While there are sometimes
   legitimate criticisms voiced in these articles, the overall tenor and
   blanket condemnation will only help to further constrict good coverage, as
   those of us who continue to struggle begin to truly feel that it just isn't
   worth it. The net result will be less good coverage, not more.
   7. Billy says:
   February 21, 2014 at 7:25
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34826>

   Great points, totally agree. The unwillingness of some to make
   conclusions, or to make any unqualified statement comes from the cowardice
   of saying "honestly, despite my extensive knowledge of the particulars of
   the situation, I dont know what policy option is best"
   8. Heather Tafel says:
   February 21, 2014 at 7:31
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34828>

   Nuance can be achieved in few words. Try clarifying that extremists are
   usually the ones doing the killing, and not everyone of one group hates
   everyone of another group. This is a narrative that is very difficult to
   overcome with regular people (in my case, with university students), and
   part of the problem is that it seems to be repeated over and over in many
   media outlets because of inattention to use of words. Also, journalists
   could achieve some nuance by not using the terms ethnic or sectarian
   violence. It's violence for a variety of reasons, but calling it ethnic or
   sectarian violence leads people to believe that the who (Hutu extremists
   identifying Tutsis via identity cards) is the same as the why (Hutus hate
   Tutsis,which is not always the case, and suspicion towards other groups
   does not always lead to killing). Since most everyone has some sort of
   ethnicity or religion, how are these types of violence any different from
   others whose root causes are extremism, poverty, political power and greed,
   etc.? Rather than complain about word count limits and difficult
   conditions, which I am sure make the job of reporting extremely difficult,
   perhaps you could think about the message your 600 words send. Albeit
   difficult, nuance doesn't doesn't always mean academic loquaciousness.
   9. Richard Masson says:
   February 21, 2014 at 8:50
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34833>

   All Africans ask is that you listen to their view of events and give it
   some value, rather than the Western view.
   10. Dorothy says:
   February 22, 2014 at 1:48
pm<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34879>

   I believe most western journalists try their best. Nevertheless, they
   must be so prickly when their work is assessed. They need to understand the
   enormous impact their writing has on policy-making on Africa. They must
   have the humility to accept that sometimes make mistakes or misreport. CNN
   has done so variously e.g. reporting that civil conflict had broken out in
   Kenya while it was actually a terrorist attack by extremists and they were
   not willing to retract despite a twitter campaign by Kenyans. Beyond the
   question of nuance, sometimes entrenched stereotypes affect even straight
   up factual reporting and all journalists, western or otherwise, must be
   committed to the principle of accuracy and fact-checking.
   11. joe says:
   February 23, 2014 at 12:46
am<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34900>

   just stating the obvious: reporters can easily add a short statement
   that indicate a situation is complicated - you can yell that from a
   departing bus. but they rarely do. i've always found that very strange. why
   not simply write: "this situation is complicated"? when i was a reporter, i
   added that to pieces about small town politics in Ohio - and the editor, to
   her credit, left it in. because it was true. it is unfortunately often the
   case that reporters and editors believe that things are simple and can be
   simplified down to a few statements. they would do everyone a great service
   if they simply said, 'this is a complex problem or situation and what
   happened today can only be understood well when considered as part of a
   much longer, larger story." and if they were really honest they could add:
   "and we don't have space to tell it here." lol
   12. Peter says:
   February 23, 2014 at 7:06
am<http://africanarguments.org/2014/02/21/in-defence-of-western-journalists-in-africa-by-michela-wrong/#comment-34912>

   Excellent article, followed by the usual inane comments. For me,
   personally, I am sometimes the expert quoted by the press, in which case I
   get a small window for altering the dominant narrative, and sometimes I am
   the reader trying to get an overview of what the dominant narrative is.
   When, on the occasion I am somewhere in between, wanting deeper insight
   without becoming an expert, I peruse the specialist journals.

   When it comes to the press, the articles themselves are not the problem.
   The problem is the readership, which, by its nature, is interested in
   spotlight journalism. How many people would have been interested in
   emerging tensions in South Sudan before violence actually broke out? It is
   absolutely implausible that say, the Telegraph would maintain a monthly
   update to keep its readers adequately informed on South Sudan before a
   'newsworthy event' actually takes place. That is not the journalists fault,
   nor even the editors, but the time constraints of the reading public.

   As for the dominant narrative comment above... an uninformed audience
   needs a dominant narrative as a starting point for assimilating
   information. If a talking head, such as myself, can find a better way of
   projecting the idea, the reputable press are generally interested in that
   opinion. But expert opinion itself must rely on a substrate of accountable
   information, and a client who is willing to pay for the underlying opinion.
   The frequent absence of both of these,make talking heads in Africa far too
   rare on the ground.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14orEiNBEEYtmaknK5wNBp9jQi3hrb7qsuERdrGbYdwkhzw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to