Home
> Authors > The State Of International Development Reporting
Media Criticism: The State Of International Development Reporting
By
Karen Martell
March 11, 2005
Last December’s tsunami disaster created a huge wave of
media coverage, which in turn appears to have generated new interest
in development issues generally. The number of development related
news articles since the December 26 tsunami is far greater than
the number of development related news articles written last
year over the same period of time. A Lexis Nexis search using
the terms “tsunami” and “development” reveals
that there were 809 general news stories written in major newspapers
from December 26, 2004 to March 11, 2005. Last year, during the
same time period, the number of general news articles in the
same database about development issues was 277. The
tsunami has clearly served as a “hook” for journalists
to capture their readers with a “tsunami” headline
or lead and to then explore a range of development issues, including
poverty, hunger, trade, and foreign aid.
Stories such as “Rebuilding Asia after tsunami” (Courier
Mail, Queensland, Australia, March 9, 2005 Wednesday)
served as the perfect opportunity to call upon lessons from
the past and to outline goals for the future of urban development.
Journalists also paired people’s responses to the tsunami
with ongoing development initiatives. A story titled, “Hungering
to help the needy: Forty LI teens take part in 30-hour fast and
fundraiser to benefit tsunami and famine victims” (Newsday,
New York, February 26, 2005 Saturday) illustrates how the media
was able to call attention to famine victims in addition to addressing
those effected by the tsunami.
Though
international development coverage in the wake of the tsunami
has increased this spike also serves to highlight the relative
lack of development related news coverage in U.S. press generally.
Advocates argue that the public would benefit from more coverage
that would raise public concern, encourages charitable giving,
and expands people’s awareness of the global community
in which we live.
“It’s important for the public to be reminded of
the larger global community. Just seeing what life is like for
people recovering from a war, famine, or drought is valuable,” said
Liz McBride, of the International Rescue Committee.
What is most striking is that the lack of development related
news coverage does not stem from a lack of newsworthy development
projects, theories, and innovations. In fact there is tremendous
work taking place all around the globe in the field of international
development.
For example, a river blindness control program supported by
22 donor countries prevented 600,000 cases of blindness in west
Africa and made 25 million hectares of arable land safe for resettlement.
This land then fed 17 million people.
A USAID anti-diarrheal disease program in Egypt saved the lives
of 300,000 children from 1982 to 1989. Similarly, a donor backed
campaign to eradicate guinea worm in many poor countries in Africa
cut the number of cases by 99%, from 3.5 million cases in 1980
to 35,000 in 2004.
These stories of hope offer sustainable solutions for the many
international development challenges we face today and call attention
to ongoing development needs that clearly require support from
the international community, especially the American public.
Thus, given the successes of international development projects
and considering both the magnitude of the existing needs in the
developing world and the increasing interdependence between rich
and poor, why is there not more media coverage of development
related issues?
Some blame journalists, arguing that journalists lack the knowledge
and expertise to cover international development. “A journalist’s
practice is not based on any systemic body of knowledge, they
have to work very hard to understand key issues and to gain access
to current debates and initiatives,” said Professor James
Curran, a visiting professor in the Communications department
at Stanford University. Most journalists are not schooled in
international development and therefore may hesitate to write
about such issues.
The marginalization of development related knowledge further
complicates the responsibilities of journalists. Many of the
latest development innovations, projects, and conclusions are
confined to the offices of policymakers, lost in the bureaucracies
of the UN, or left unnoticed in the field somewhere in Africa
or Latin America.
According to Dr. Suki Hoagland, the associate director and lecturer
of Stanford’s Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Environment
and Resources, “There has been a marginalization of key
knowledge. Issues, like world hunger and global warming, are
consequently hidden in the shadows.”
Others offer financial explanations. Development organizations
are typically non-profit or nongovernmental and thus have limited
budgets. Liz McBride, Director for the Post-Conflict Development
Initiative of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), said
with a pained look on her face, “I mean, we do the best
we can, but I must admit, we simply don’t have the resources
to truly publicize our work.”
The communications and public relations departments within organizations
like the IRC generally direct their news and press releases to
donors and potential lobbyist groups as opposed to the general
public. There is consequently greater coverage of development
issues in Washington, DC, home of numerous development agencies,
non-profits, and political bodies, than there is in other parts
of the country.
Still others call upon the organizational model of news as
the reason why development issues lack coverage. As Kim Chase,
a Journalism Masters student at Stanford University, commented, “We
have all learned how hard it is to get an editor to care about
public issues, they are more concerned with stories that will
get the most attention.”
Tensions clearly exist between the prerogatives of owners and
the autonomy of journalists. Even if journalists are moved by
international development and humanitarian aid, profit oriented
owners and editors may discourage such coverage.
Prior to the 1980s, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
required stations to devote 5 percent of broadcast time to news
and public affairs. When this working requirement was eliminated,
broadcasters no longer felt pressured to demonstrate that they
were serving the public. As a result, that which would yield
the most revenue would be broadcast as opposed to that which
would bring the most benefit to the public.
The blurring line between news and entertainment may also detract
from public issues reporting, including international development.
Newspaper readership is going down and people generally prefer
to watch television. Additionally, many people claim they do
not have the time or the resources to engage in the news, especially
in international affairs and politics.
“I get so busy with school. I might glance over the Stanford
Daily while walking to class or have the news on in the
background while doing homework, but by the end of the day
I just want to watch something that’s entertaining,” commented
a student from a Stanford class titled Media, Entertainment,
and Journalism from an International Perspective. The
student wished not to be identified.
The journalist’s growing uncertainty about his or her
voice may also explain the lack of development related coverage.
Beginning in the Progressive Era, journalism strayed from partisan
politics and towards conceptions of administrative rationality
and neutral expertise. Journalism came to be seen as a public
service. The ideology of public service was tied to the notion
of objectivity: the faith that it was possible to report events
from a non-political and non-sectarian standpoint, relying on
neutral criteria of newsworthiness.
The principle of objectivity has particular implications for
development issues. Understandably, people do not like reading
about poverty, hunger, and ethnic conflict. These dark stories
leave the American public feeling overwhelmed, hopeless, and
depressed, especially when such stories offer no suggestion or
opinion as to how to improve the situation.
Thus, is the principle of objectivity preventing journalists
from offering the public intelligent policy analyses and prescriptive
solutions for international development? Professor David Abernethy,
from Stanford’s political science department, answered, “Perhaps
if journalists were to offer solutions and examples of success
as a means to motivate and foster public involvement and a greater
public interest in development, there would be more development
coverage than there currently is. These are public issues and
they often require a human voice to be heard,” said Professor
David Abernethy, from Stanford’s political science department.
An earthquake and tsunami of the proportion that took place
on December 26 is likely to occur once a century. Meanwhile,
this month alone 240,000 people will die from HIV/AIDS, 136,000
from diarrhea, and thousands more from hunger. The lack of development
related news coverage reflects a failure to speak on behalf of
these victims, the victims of the silent tragedies taking place
on a daily basis.
The effects of the growing inequality around the globe and the
lack of international development are diffuse and long-term.
To news agencies there may always be something more pressing
to cover. Festering “development” problems, however,
may result in political instability, mass migration, and environmental
degradation that will in ultimately threaten the well being of
the rich and the stability of the world’s greatest superpower.
Contact Karen Martell at martelka@stanford.edu
