By Isabelle Devi Poirier
I chose to write my essay on Steven Youngblood’s lecture about reporting on peace. The decision was difficult, knowing another Concordia student also wanted to cover this topic and that we had only seen half of the presentation so far—since this assignment is due before the next half. However, Youngblood's presentation deeply resonated with me, prompting critical reflection on my work during my two years as a journalism student.
In summarizing Youngblood’s presentation, what stood out to me was the emphasis on treating stories, particularly those about war and conflict, with balance. However, balance doesn't mean giving equal space to both sides of a story or splitting it 50/50. It's about reporting what is accurate. For instance, Professor Salas’ documentary focused on the hydroelectric dam in Inukjuak. She mentioned working not just about, but with and for the communities, sharing their stories rather than taking them. While the community mostly supported the project, there were concerns about environmental damage and its impact on fishing, a crucial subsistence practice. Salas didn’t portray this as a 50/50 divide; she highlighted the majority support, especially from the elders who are key decision-makers, but didn’t ignore the concerns.
Youngblood discussed the impact of word choice and how peace journalism employs neutral language. This point intrigued me, as I've often been critiqued by my editors for unengaging ledes in our school paper. My intention is to write news ledes that convey the essence of the article, not to entice readers with misleading leads, which is what my editors seem to prefer. Youngblood emphasized avoiding inflammatory or suggestive language, maintaining that peace journalism doesn’t exacerbate conflicts but reports on them accurately. While not accusing my editors of using inappropriate language, I’ve noticed their tendency to use language that can be suggestive or vague.
For Youngblood, peace journalism is about accuracy and avoiding language that could be misleading. The phrase “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” mentioned in class, illustrates this. Peace journalism, as I understand it, should be accessible and comprehensible to all audiences, regardless of political stance. Interestingly, political scientist David Simon views all reporting, especially on conflicts, as a political act. This juxtaposition of perspectives between Youngblood and Simon was thought-provoking. While Youngblood stresses the importance of word choice, Simon suggests that the act of writing itself carries political motivation.
In my view, objectivity in journalism doesn't exist, but we can strive for impartiality, such as by following the protocols Youngblood shared in his handout. These guidelines can help, but the very act of deeming a story important reflects a lack of impartiality.
