Traditional news coverage of conflicts reports in the events taking place in conflicts, though it is known that this can actually exacerbate crises.
For instance, when the media reports that a state is increasing troops close to the border of another state, it stokes tensions between the two states. At the same time, such journalism will promote the onset of crisis or perpetuate it. State authorities and representatives are used as sources, and their utterances are reproduced, even though they are partial protagonists in the conflict.
Peace journalism refers to the orientation of journalism that has the objective of fostering and preserving peace. The Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung developed the idea in the 1970s.
Peace journalism avoids merely the reporting of events. Instead, it focuses on analysing conflict processes and backgrounds and an emphasis on peaceful alternatives. A situation is also monitored after the end of a violent conflict and peace journalists will report on such things as the reconstruction of cities and on people’s return to everyday life, or about court proceedings following the conflict.
According to Heikki Luostarinen, professor of communications at the University of Tampere, there is still media in the world that approach wars as if they were sports events. Attention focuses on who scores a goal. Conversely, quality media try to go deeper into the causes of conflicts.
– Galtung, who instigated peace journalism, would maybe say that his programme has come to fruition or at least has gained proponents. But you could say that quality media has always tried to do this, says Luostarinen.
Each side has its own viewpoint
The attributes of peace journalism include identifying all parties to conflicts, examining the history of conflicts and political contexts, as well as presenting non-violent ideas for conflict resolution and maintaining peace.
Identifying all parties to a conflict means that you give a voice to everyone the conflict concerns: armed and political groups, states and armies, civilians and other background players, including businesses and influential people.
Journalists doing peace journalism have a clear purpose in their work: peace.
But peace journalism has been criticised concerning the status of journalists. If they have a mission, doesn’t that result in bias? Critics say that in this case journalists are more activists than journalists. Some critics have called peace journalism propaganda.
War and peace at stake
Peace journalism is shaped by its times and protagonists, and nowadays journalism generally applies its methods. Journalists are aware of the impact on society of their choices.
In Heikki Luostarinen’s view, featuring conflicts in the media can make international actors aware of their existence.
– At the same time, journalists bring matters to the international community so that they can be resolved in some way.
If the political will is found to resolve conflicts, you also start to think about the actual ways to do so. These may involve economic sanctions, or even intervention as an extreme measure.
– In such cases, the media outside conflict areas exert a clear influence, says Luostarinen.