Reporting on conflict: Writers
The Second Anniversary of the Four-Day War, also called the April Clashes or the Four-Day War, which took place in Nagorny Karabakh, was celebrated in April. The outbreak of violence was the greatest since the war’s end in 1994.
The fighting is still a part of daily life for those who live close to the line of contact, a militarised zone between the opposing sides. Numerous obstacles are preventing Armenians and Azeris from establishing a rapport and finding common ground because the likelihood of further violence erupting has increased since the war began two years ago.
Through the Unheard Voices project of International Alert, journalists from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorny Karabakh can collaborate in a shared platform to contribute articles and narratives about the lives of those impacted by the conflict. It provides a voice to common people who are directly impacted by the ongoing conflict and highlights the human side of both sides of the divide. It enables readers to examine information from different perspectives to dispel preconceptions and stereotypes, as well as the true faces concealed behind the pictures of “the enemy.”
In a conflict, independent journalists are crucial and powerful. Their reports seek to cover the facts, illuminating the realities of the armed struggle and providing a voice to everyone affected by it, from the war’s forgotten victims to its heroes. This grand undertaking is not without its challenges, though. Journalists were immediately exposed to risks due to the violent character of fighting. War correspondent Marie Colvin put it this way: “Put simply, there is no way to cover war properly without risk.” Going to areas ravaged by turmoil, devastation, death, and suffering to report on a conflict entails trying to bear witness to those events.
Nonetheless, there are an increasing number of novel challenges that journalists working in a conflict face while carrying out their duties. The challenges facing journalists appear never-ending and are regrettably deeply embedded in their line of work, ranging from censorship and direct threats to a lack of funding.
These difficulties have serious ramifications for journalists’ safety and their capacity to practice their vocation without endangering their lives. Unquestionably, such significant concerns add to the already heavy burden of a career that is already regarded as exceedingly hazardous. But similar challenges also limited journalists’ capacity to report, do research and disseminate their expertise.
Security and safety
Without a doubt, one of the riskiest jobs in the world is reporting from a conflict zone. There are indeed a lot of risks, unknowns, and challenges faced by journalists covering a war area in the course of their work. Even if every war has its own set of obstacles, quirks, and dangers, media professionals face a common set of hazards and problems when carrying out their duties wherever they may be. Their involvement in combat increased their chance of suffering collateral damage and put them at serious risk.
Conflict Risk
Media professionals have faced more and more risks and have been in hazardous environments over the previous few decades. Many NGOs claim that their working circumstances are always getting worse for various reasons. One effect of social media’s introduction and technological improvement, for example, is that conflict reporting has become more and more reliant on sensationalism.
The public wants access to close-up, first-hand news stories these days. Regrettably, this kind of reporting puts reporters’ safety in jeopardy by pushing them to take greater chances than before to provide exclusive news. Furthermore, the majority of media outlets that relied on independent contractors to cover wars on a full-time basis grew too costly for their target audience. However, by forgoing security, insurance, or language services, those independent contractors assume additional dangers. All in all, everything ensures their security and safety.
Is the journalist a target?
In addition, journalists are always in danger and are the target of targeted attacks. The number of journalists who are forcefully attacked, kidnapped, harassed, threatened, unlawfully arrested, or assassinated is constantly rising, regardless of their vital function (5). A major turning point for journalist security and war reporting in general was the war in the former Yugoslavia. Wearing a blazer with the word press embroidered on it guaranteed one’s safety before the war. But following the war, journalists came to be seen as targets rather than as impartial parties.
The Committee to Protect Journalists reports that 1,404 of the 1,520 media professionals and journalists who died between 1992 and 2021 were journalists. Two-thirds of all journalists who perished in 2014 did so while they were in a conflict area. Syria and Afghanistan are the two most dangerous locations for journalists. 64 media professionals and journalists lost their lives in Afghanistan between 1992 and 2021, compared to 139 in Syria. Citizen journalists are not included in those figures, though. According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, approximately 707 citizen journalists have been killed in attacks since 2011.
Impunity
Criminals and those who physically attack journalists are not prosecuted by the legal system nine times out of ten. According to the UNESCO 2018 study on the safety of journalists and the threat of impunity, 89% of the 1,010 journalist killings that occurred between 2006 and 2017 went unsolved. However, the proportion is probably higher in nations where there is a continuing war.
According to CPJ’s 2019 Global Impunity Index, the first four worst nations for prosecuting journalists’ murders are Somalia, Syria, Iraq, and South Sudan. The widespread impunity of those who commit crimes threatens journalists’ ability to complete their careers and adds to the continuation of violence against them. To guarantee press and expression freedom as well as the upholding of human rights, justice for journalists is essential.
Limitations and censorship
Governmental constraints prevent journalists from obtaining the truth and carrying out their jobs effectively everywhere in the globe. It significantly restricts their capacity to exercise their rights as citizens and journalists, including freedom of expression. The government is frequently the primary mediator of media and development during crises and wars. As a result, those barriers and limitations are typically strengthened even further by a variety of methods.
On the other hand, propaganda and censorship have long been used during times of conflict. All of the major players in the First World War passed rules that forbade the media from reporting on military operations or attacking the government or the army. There were several reasons for this, including motivating troops to keep fighting, demonizing the adversary, fostering national pride, and concealing the realities of the conflict.
For the same reason, such behaviors are still in place more than a century later. In fact, during times of conflict, political power will use censorship to discredit oppositional voices and political rivals to quell any threat that might be directed towards them, such as insurrection or revolts. Therefore, its primary purpose is to prevent the state’s order from being jeopardized while ensuring its continued authority.
On the other hand, the likelihood of reaching a peaceful conclusion is diminished when alternative viewpoints are not allowed to be mediated. In addition, how information and events are framed is crucial in determining how the general public feels and how the country’s agenda is set. Thus, the government hopes to indoctrinate individuals by keeping them ignorant and promoting their politics and ideology by outlawing dissident speech. But the destructive cycle of violence common in conflict naturally repeats itself when people are kept in the dark.
Content and Reporting
For independent journalists, reporting from a conflict zone is the most ethical barrier. They are continuously compelled to scrutinize the coverage and substance of their reporting. For example, how do you present yourself as a journalist in a hostile and tense environment? When covering delicate subjects, how should one weigh ethical concerns and the idea of objectivity? Amid people’s instability, pain, and agony, is it even possible to remain impartial? How do you produce media that captures the divisions that exist in society, whether they come from political ideologies or moral organizations? However, the profession mandates that journalists adhere to a set of deontological rules and principles to assist them in navigating those inquiries and reflections.
Among their pillars are objectivity and impartiality. According to Cushion (2011), reporting on conflicts “should be unbiased, balanced, objective, open-minded, and avoid favouring one side over another.” For a variety of reasons, it can be challenging to adhere strictly to professional standards in extremely dire circumstances.
Reaching combat areas
Media organizations frequently face several obstacles while trying to enter the combat zone and the battleground. There are several reasons why these barriers appear.
The need for war correspondents to remain on the front lines has come under scrutiny recently due to deteriorating working conditions and increased exposure to violence. War correspondents work in a hostile atmosphere these days, where violent and calculated attacks are commonplace. Regretfully, editors and media organizations do not have the capacity or the means to ensure the total safety of their staff. As a result, over time, there have been fewer and fewer media correspondents who are authorized and ready to cover a conflict.
To control public opinion, suppress violations of human rights, and monopolize information, the political authorities have purposefully prohibited access to the battle zones. Many war correspondents experienced local authorities refusing their credentials and visas to enter the country. For example, global media observed Israeli authorities reject their request to enter the Gaza Strip amid the recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Palestine. As a result, it put a great deal of pressure on Palestinian reporters there, making them more vulnerable. The media’s coverage of the conflict has been characterized by a massive disinformation effort.
Final Thoughts: The Difficulties of War Reporting
Reporting from war zones poses a great deal of difficulties for journalists, ranging from dangerous situations and hostile surroundings to psychological effects. Beyond the concerns of physical safety, reporters have a great deal of pressure to fulfill media deadlines, please a variety of audiences, and maintain objectivity—even while covering delicate subjects.
In a time of misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda, their function in providing accurate, timely information is vital. The stakes are very high because a single false report can inflame conflict or mislead the public. Notwithstanding these challenges, war reporters persist in illuminating unsung tales, recording the human cost of warfare, and molding historical accounts.
They educate the public and support people impacted by war by their unwavering search for the truth. Amid the chaos of war, their work is essential in promoting global understanding and accountability because of their courage and dedication to keeping the world informed. In a world frequently dominated by conflict and misery, the dedication of war reporters remains a light of hope and perseverance as they face the many challenges of their line of work.
