Medi 301 Film write-up #2

Trevor Olafson

News From The Holy Land: Theory and practice of reporting conflict

The central question in regards to understanding conflicts, is how we hear of them. The news in the West usually focuses on a war and violence angle in their stories and leaves out important information as to the cause of the it. An effect in perception of news watchers towards the unrepresented side of a conflict manifests as a them and us mentality; which helps win support for military actions against the ‘enemy’ or ‘terrorists’. Most of us have been duped at one time or another by this kind of reporting, and simply gone on with our lives. While war atrocities and genocides were taking place – we slept.

News stories based on a Peace Journalism perspective would for example, be constructed differently than the traditional pieces. The order of the shots in the segment can change perception of the context, this lack of context feeds polarization; Peace Journalism is a counter to this aim. Knowledge of what created the conditions in which people feel driven to become ‘suicide bombers’ is often lacking. A culture (Palestinians) that has had to endure persecution and hardship would have much more support in the West if we were shown the checkpoints, barbwire and soldiers they contend with on a daily basis. Questions that ask why, don’t happen without wanting to know who and what. In the case of the Israel – Palestine conflict, the tradition is not to ask about this structural violence. Understanding people and the landscape in which they live is the goal of Peace Journalism. Giving a voice to those on both sides would help to end patterns of mutual mistrust and begin reshaping attitudes which dictate behaviour.

For example, stories about a peace talk or summit often include a line that there is little chance of a successful meeting. The alternate version would focus on how to create conditions for successful peace initiatives, such as empathy and understanding of those who have been affected. It is easy to turn a blind eye to something that you cannot see. Without inclusion of the facts, opinion is misshapen and contradictions are ignored, allowing the same conditions to continue.

Certainly I would have a deeper understanding of the plight of Palestinians if the major news reports included stories about how they have been displaced from their land and forced to live in a enclosure. The ‘Apartheid Wall’ symbolizes and enforces daily injustices against the Palestinian people, who are literally caged and at the mercy of their colonial masters.

Approaching these issues in the spirit of ethical journalism requires that they be brought to light by showing real instances of the frustration of Palestinians; blocked from farmlands, harassed and killed. The truth of the background issues would become transparent as previous cover-ups are exposed by journalists who are not foreign to the area.

Without a drastic change in the amount of foreign news reporting(local journalists) getting their stories out to the mainstream, they will remain ‘alternate’. At this time, viewers in North America see a small percentage of reports from journalists based in the region, and those must meet the ‘gatekeepers’ approval before being allowed to go to air.

The typology of violence in a troubled region will continue as long the attitudes and contradictions that cause and perpetuate it remain invisible to those outside the conflict. Let us all hope that those seeking to tell the truth are allowed, I for one still want answers.