Emelia Sithole

Tomm Kristiansen

POLITICAL
REPORTING
Training manual
How this manual is organised

The manual comes into parts: the first part comprises a textbook for use by
both trainers and trainees. The textbook contains definitions and details the
different facets of political and local government reporting. The second part
of the manual comprises the teaching guide for trainers. The structure of the
guide can be adapted in a standalone political reporting course spread over
three weeks. As it is a guide, there is no fixed timetable and no fixed
examples to allow for flexibility and creativity on the part of the trainer.
Reporting on politics – A Textbook

Definitions

There are two types of political journalists. One is the investigative reporter,
digging up stories like Watergate and corruption in governments. The other is the
presidents microphone holder, a servant of the authorities writing down all that
comes from his master’s voice. Most reporters operates between them. The
newspaper’s economy, the editor’s courage and the journalist’s integrity decides to
which direction the reporter leans.

Political journalism is its own genre with a long tradition for observation and
reporting on parliaments and governments decision making. «Political reporting»
is, by definition, the journalistic monitoring and description of the use of power,
managed by the State and its offices, on behalf of the public.

Politics often seems to be leaders constantly competing, having conflicts with other parties
or own fractions. The use of power, which should be in favour of the people, often seems
to be a struggle for personal influence.
As in other parts of the society - among families as tribes - the deeper meaning of political
activity is to distribute and share the national resources and regulate the collective
behaviour in the society. The successful realisation of this depend on the existence of
sanctions, rewards and penalty. The political reporting is to describe how-when-where-
why it is done, and by whom.

Without media we would not understand the discussions and decisions taken, and the
government would not know about the reactions and the social policies.
Setting the agenda

Media tells us what to think about, and therefor setting the agenda for public discussions,
decide peoples knowledge, attitudes, opinions and behaviour. When politicians are forced
to honesty, they admit the independence of media: What on in media, is what they have to
react to. Politicians often use media as informers from the grassroots. But are media their
megaphone or loudspeaker?

Every citizen ought to have a say in the affairs of the state. Journalists are those
to do it. But not as a tool for decision makers. Journalist’s work is to set the
agenda for discussions, at home, among friends and neighbours, at work, in the
society.

Politics is a game of competing ideas and interests in which the people have to
make a choice. Media reports must therefor be fair enough to present all sides,
and provide enough education by emphasising substantive issues of social and
economic development.
The reporter’s duty is to inform about decisions of public interest, report on the
struggle of power and influence, misuse of power.

The journalist’s task is to link responsibility to those in power and behind

investigate what lies behind their decisions. It is to be done in an independent
way, but not by being a part of the opposition. They also need the press as a
watchdog!

What is «political reporting»?

Political reporting refers to reportage covering authorities’ decision and all
events related to the body politic. Democracy demands national and local
systems of government hence political reporting is an area of interest journalists
cannot afford to ignore as decisions that affect people’s lives and character of
society are being taken in those national and local systems of government.

When Zimbabwean soldiers fight in Congo, the reports from the battlefield are news story
with foreign aspects. But the involvement in the Congo-war had great influence on the
national debate. The reactions among people - the voters - had great impacts on the
political atmosphere in the country. Is can’t be excluded from the work of the political
reporters, especially because the news coverage was the only open space for different
opinions.

The breakdown on the international finance markets and crisis on stock exchanges in
Brazil, Tokyo and throughout Europe in October 1998 had consequences also for national
governments international connections, import/export, investments, budgets etc. News
from the finance markets is therefor also a vital subject for the political reporting.
The business sector has often demands to the governments and parliament
decisions. It’s impossible to set up a border between economics and politics
when it comes to journalism.
Types of reporting
Political reporting contains minutes from parliament, presidential statements,
press meetings, criticism from opposition, public debates or panel discussions.

Political reporting in Africa

The traditional political reporting is developed in USA and England. Others have
copied their style. Often we have copied too much. A major African problem is
an overall adoption of European and American ideas of style, politics and form.
During the Codesa-negotiations in South Africa (for a transitional constitution)
the journalist were looking to Washington, London and Geneva to find examples
of democratic constitutions. But did they ever look to Africa’s own traditions for
ruling a society? The African way of finding consensus, «ubuntu» and other
values should be interesting subjects for a new African journalism. Can ideas
from the extended family, from the chiefs and the elders give directions to an
African way of planing social security, power sharing, voting system, checks and
balance.
News

Definitions

Types of news
The evens itself is not «news» in our context. «News» is the journalistic
motivated report on an event. You better ask: What is journalism? News are the
events seen through the eye, the mind and of an journalist. Many lecturers have
tried to find good definitions. Here are some:

«News is any fresh or unusual event.»

“News is anything which interests a large part of the community and
which has never been brought to their attention”
“News is the difference between the world yesterday and the world
today.”
«News is something someone somewhere wants to suppress. All the rest
is advertising.»

One of the main authorities in the old world, Oxford English Dictionary,
describes news as «the report or account of recent events or occurrences,
brought to or coming to one as new information; new occurrences as a subject
of report or talk.»

News is too complex to fit into a brief definition. But three elements are essential:
INTEREST - NEWNESS - COMMUNITY

Interest: Nobody will buy a boring newspaper. The story has to be about something,
which will interest the readers. Or the story has to be written in a way that creates interest.

Newness: If the readers haven’t read about the subject it is new to them, even if the
activity the article describes is old.
Community: Who are the readers: old or young, living in towns or villages, well or poor
educated, men or women. We need to know the interests of the readers, or at least: What
is interesting for them.

«News» is a modern word, but the distribution of opinions, facts and rumours is
old. News have been spread with drums, through the conversation after church
and during the old men’s chat under the trees. In Ghana the bell-ringers have had
a specific job: They gathered the people in villages and small towns to proclaim
important messages from the authorities. This information was not to be
discussed. The news represented «the truth», and the information was brought in
a powerful way: the king’s men with their bells.

Authorities use to handle the newspapers as their bell-ringers. They decided

what to be reported. They have been used to talk through media without
opposition. They «used» the newspapers. Many of today’s politicians are
frustrated that this time is gone.

At their best, today’s editors ask critical questions and in that way reduce their
influence. At their worst they continue to quote them as they were appointed
“His Master’s Voice”.

The bell-ringers, the drummers of today are not sent by the presidents and kings
to proclaim the events. Today’s drummers and bell-ringers not even represent
the authorities, but the people. Their duty is to serve their readers. They select
the news that looks interesting, not the news that the authorities want to
present. They edit it in its own way and write it in their own style.

“In it’s own way”: But aren’t facts facts? Yes. The events - an accident, a
meeting, a demonstration - are the same for everybody. But the journalist is to
reflect more than that. Why did it happen? Who is behind? Are there different
opinions? Is there anybody that didn’t get the microphone? Who is paying?
Who, and what, is to be quoted? Who was not heard?

Many people, including politicians, overrate the influence of the news media and
their «news managers». Who controls the desks? Most media is a player in a
social system and shows its power by lifting items to the public debate, setting
the agenda of the day. The question is then: Who feeds the newspapers? Who
decides what’s of «public interest»? The answer can be found somewhere in the
social system where journalist, politicians, businessmen, artists and the
grassroots organisations operates.

The best news are those who both are interesting in itself, of interest for
common people and important for the society. If news don’t effect the reader,
it’s hardly can be called news. The journalist has to show that news really affects
the readers, and how.

Old news
Can old news be good news? Yes. A general criterion for the news value is that
the even just happened. By such a criterion we close our eyes for important
stories. If we just looked for the fresh stories, we would never have heard of the
brutalities during the apartheid period. Investigative journalism is often based on
digging up «old news». Often we will see that these old stories have links to
today’s political events.

Who are in the news?

The more prominent persons involved, the more interesting are the news.
Quotes of high level officials - those with power and influence - mean more than
quotes from people on a lower level. A «soft» statement from a minister can be
better news than a «hard» word from an opposition politician. But not always!
Hard-hitting critics will often give statements on subjects that the officials don’t
want to talk about. Then the media has to have its integrity to present those
stories that governments want to hide or keep in the dark.

How close?
During the so-called “Operation Restore Hope” in Somalia the international
media covered heavily the even where the bodies of two American soldiers were
dragged through Mogadishu. But few of them reported the reason: They didn’t
mention that the same soldiers opened fire at a crowded marketplace and
randomly wounded fifty people. What counts is your own, by that occasion the
Americans. With a US dominated global news system, the fate of American
soldiers, civilians or officials will have the highest news value, naturally for an
American audience.

An accident in your own town normally has a higher news «value» than a car
crash in India or London. Often, the main interest is our own kind, own group,
and own country. That is not cynical, due to our definition of news. News value
is linked to the reader’s interests but that must not lead us to a short-sighted
egocentric definition of news where every event is measures after it’s distance
from the newspapers address

How bloody?
When a plane crashes and killing one hundred people, it makes big headlines.
But car accidents - where higher numbers statistically are killed throughout the
year – the news value is small. Does the news have to be dramatic to cover it?
The dead toll caused by AIDS is well documented and covered. But malaria
takes more life than AIDS. The traditional news with a dramatic element gives
bigger headlines than others. Does that trend close our eyes for more «hidden»
news, with huge effects on ordinary people, the readers?
Development reporting*****
The Western press was the first to adopted the slogan :”Bad news are good news”.
Western journalist have grown up in a tradition where event and crises - “what has
happened?” It’s easier and more visible to destroy than build up. The most dramatic news
are those when human beings and physical things breaks down. In it’s history Western
journalist have identified themselves as “watchdogs”. It gives the profession a negative
image.

We should all create a style and a form of journalism appropriate to our own culture, our
own needs and our own time. In an African context, it is almost certain to include at least
an element of encouragement for national development by reporting stories which Western
colleagues would ignore. The so-called “development reporting” is a style where the focus
is set on issues and process more than on “what happened”.

The development reporting takes it’s aim on the country’s progress and setbacks
according to how the consequences will be for ordinary people. It’s an active form for
journalism where one tries to find the news out of the slow process: How many have got
bore holes since last year? What does a bore hole - or lack of bore hole - mean to women
and children. The journalist has to look into the consequences on the grassroots.

News priority

Who decides what’s news?

Authorities are always newsmakers. They make deceptions which have
consequences for everybody. But local initiatives, protests, alternative plans and
ideas are also worth our coverage. Alternative social actors are important, and
from a readers view: more interesting, because they act and behave in a manor
that one can identify oneself. By introducing the poor and oppressed we open up
the media for new and interesting elements in the society. Maybe the most
important of all subjects; the society seen from below. The most popular
columns in newspapers are letters from the readers, criticising everything from
late coming buses and officials behaviours to teenage fashion and begging blinds.
This grassroots journalism may go on expense of the establishment and the elite.
Maybe they will be confused by the fact that stories about women and children
are more important than the stories about themselves.

Writing for who?

The news language is influenced by the vocabulary of bureaucrats and
politicians; it’s the elite language. The news are presented is presented in a way
that fit those already informed. The reader needs background information to
understand what f. ex. a short news bulletin contents. News is sometimes the
reality cut into small pieces. The information is a limited selection of details; the
last link in a long chain of political deceptions and events. The method of
constructing a story, developed by Anglo-American journalism, is not suited for
informing simple people in townships and villages. Who is on the journalist’s
mind, writing the story: A neighbour or a minister? If the answer is the
neighbour, we need a different language. Probably also a different type of
narrative. The reporter have to tell the news story with the same words he or she
use when talking to next-door-people. That will give us a down-to-earth news
language. We can call it «barefoot journalism».

Criteria for priority

Correctness is essential. When the president gives a speech or a statement, he
must be quoted word-by-word. But does that give the reader a «correct» picture
of the situation? And which quotes are the essential one? In Africa we have a
long - and bad - tradition for presidential journalism. The reporters follow the
head of state wherever he goes, but where are the critical questions? Where is
the critical report behind the scene? We need the quoting journalism, but we also
need the follow-up journalism, where the authorities half a year later is asked:
What happened to the promises you gave last year?

The classic ideal for journalists is objective reporting. But neutral reporting is
impossible. One might try to be balances, to give a fair chance for both parts to
loud their voices. But behind choice of angle, searches and dispositions the
reporter already have gone through many “hidden” choices, directed by personal
values and priorities. Modern journalism (Mail&Guardian, The Independent,
Washington Post etc.) focus on digging up stories where the research is based
on a suspicion of corruption, immorality or criminal behaviour; its based on an
opinion.

This journalism is dangerous for those in power, but who sets the criteria for
what news your have to dig up? Sometimes it «sits in the walls», the newspaper
have a tradition for its coverage. Such traditions have to be adjusted all the time.
Sometimes will the newspapers owner have interests, both in politics and
business. Does that give a guideline for where to look, and where to doze?

Who are the news for?

Politicians and sources want to draw the attention to or away from specific issues. Some
journalists have a tendency to take the short cut, using contacts in the government’s
information departments or other civil servants, as the only source. The result is
propaganda dressed in the news language. All sources want to set the agenda.

Governmental news is in it’s style boring to most of the public. The reason must
be the presentation, because these news often are of vital interest to everybody.
It the news presented in a wrong form? Do the readers realise that the news
from the government influence them? News about government, its agencies,
public officers and activities is one aspect of public affairs reporting which is so
important to people’s lives that it should arouse total interest. It is not so.
Journalists and governments must share the responsibility. The difficult
bureaucrat language shadows the message.

The political journalism is concentrated on reporting on the decision makers,

often in an authoritative way. The reporter becomes an obedient piece in the
master’s game. If the focus is on the decision maker’s version, the news will
serve the authorities, not the readers. If the stories focus on the practical
consequences of decisions, the news will be of better help for the readers to
understand what politics has to do with their daily life.

After independence the new black governments had the idea of a common
interest for «building the nation», everybody had the same interest. Politics was
what Kenya’s Kenyatta called it in zwahili: uhuru, lifting together. The “enemy”
was easy to identify: the past colonial powers. This concept of «nationbuilding»
as a collective project is threatening to the free press. The government want to
see the whole population as workers for the good will. But there are many ways
to that «good will», and the road is full of power struggle, competing ideas and
personal intrigues. Nationbuilding is never a harmonic game or a tea party. Not
even in Mandela’s land.

What is, then, the journalists contribution to “the new nations”? Do they do more than
playing a cynical and destructive game with lost illusions and humiliated politicians as a
result? Hopefully the effort is more talented. The ideal goal is to build a free society with
freedom of expression for everybody and less possibilities for others that want to serve
themselves, on behalf of the community.

In short: The idea of political reporting is to bring the politics to the voters, and
the voters voice to the politicians.

Genres

News, bulletins and reports

On it’s best a news story leave no essential questions unanswered. That provides
that all information is present, and you know how to compose a news bulletin, a
brief news story or a summary. We have tools to help us; the five Ws and the
one H; who, what, when, where, why and how. If those questions are answered
in the intro, you probably have got a good start on the news story.
Who refers to the person or those involved in the news. During a student
demonstration in Zimbabwe the “who” can be the demonstrating students, but
also the police, using teargas, watercanons, batons etc. Deciding who is “the
Who” is linked to your choice of angle: Who do you want to be in focus, and
for what reasons?

What refers to the present action. What is the story about? You have to analyse
the situation; Is it the student demonstration in itself or the reaction from the
police that is the most important? This shows how difficult objectivity is. Choice
of angle involves choice of values. What profile do you want to give this event?
What you you want your readers to remembered from this occation?

When did it happen? “Yesterday” is not enough. It was Tuesday. “Recently” is even
worse. Maybe you have to be even more precisely: In the morning, at daybreak, 8.00 a.m.

Where did it happen? Student demonstrations “in Harare” is not exact. We know that the
university is situated in the capital of Zimbabwe. Did they demonstrate on the campus? In
the streets? In a park? Outside a chosen building, like the parliament? Often will the exact
address give the reader information about its importance. The places for demonstration are
sometimes chosen as a demonstration in itself. It can have a symbolic meaning;
monuments, historical places etc. The place can ogso have been chosen because of it’s
sensivity; parliaments, presidents office etc.

Why did they demonstrate? The answers are many, so ask the student leaders. Their
answers have to be combined with the slogans and posters in the demonstration. But we
also need the reaction from the police; their explanation for its - sometimes - brutal
reaction. Did some of the officers go too far, or where they instructed to do so? Who gave
them the orders, the police itself, or the security apparatus? Under the “Why” it’s
nessesary to make another choice: Is this ment to be a story about police brutality or about
the political message, the students demands?
At this stage, you probably already has answered the how. But there are still dozens of
questions to be answered. But the head of a story is based on these fundamental Ws and
H.

By telling a story, you start with the beginning, ending up with the conclusion. In news
coverage it’s opposite. You start with the conclusion, and from there you widen the
perspective, giving in more and more details. It has been described like a pyramid, and it’s
constructed like this:

INTRO

MORE FACTS

SUPPORTING QUOTES

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

MORE FACTS OF LESSER IMPORTANCE

MINOR DETAIL TO GIVE ADDED UNDERSTANDING

LEAST SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION OR CONCLUDING QUOTES

By starting with the most interesting aspects, the reader itself can decide how far to read,
one sentence or the whole story. Every sentence is an advertisement for the next. The
story is to be written so that the editor can cut it from behind, cause by limited space.
Since you never know if the reader follows you to the bottom on the report, the writing of
intros and brief news is an art. You have to be precisely, accurate, no names wrong
spelled, and the should be no doubt left: Was he “shot” or “killed”. Did she say exactly
what you quoted?

A journalist’s notebook is sometime a caos of isolated quotes, facts and phone numbers
when you start writing the news story. Don’t let the story look like a patchwork! Go into
the different aspects of the story, logically. The one after the other, one information leads
to the next.
Sources giving plain information don’t have to be quoted. Direct quotation are for
eyewitnesses and statements, it gives the story flavour, relevance and authenticity.
Quotations is essential when the case is controversial.

The short news bulletins and short news stories need sometimes extra information to be
understandable for more than those already informed. The background is essential when
the news has a long history. The readers need to know what happened before. Is this the
first student demonstration in Harare? What happened last time? Has there been given any
promises? How many participated last time they demonstrated?

Who are your sources? Try to find the persons in command or in charge. There must be
good reasons for quoting anonymous sources. Names have better value than “an well-
informed source”. A source should be identified exactly by name, title and other details
that can indicate why we should trust - or distrust - just him.

But who is the often mentioned “well-informed source”? The joke among journalists is
that the “well-informed source” often is a colleague, and “peoples opinion” is what the
taxi driver told you on way from the airport. “Well-informed sources” is normally a code
name for officials that asks not to be named. They are normally working in the department
which the story is about. When we use the term “authoritative source” it means a member
of the government or a high-ranking official that speaks on behalf of the minister, manager
etc. What the “authoritative source” says is often what the ministry want to be leaked to
the media.

Background box
The easiest way of giving the background for the news story are the fact boxes. Briefly
you present the facts and figures that is needed to understand the new development in the
case. The boxes contains of concentrated information with a map, the important names,
what has happened so far, the important documents and the positions of those involved.
Commentary and analysis
The news story is basically a presentation of facts. The commentary and analysis
go behind the facts. Where the news story is fresh, the commentary is based on
what’s already known. The commentary - or the political feature - is a
demanding type of journalism. The writer must have the knowledge, the
background, the analyses and the fantasy to create a reliable political scenario
from these elements.

The news story starts with the conclusion. The commentary ends with the
conclusion. But is that conclusion a authoritative one? Is it the journalist’s free
space for expression of own views? What happens then to his integrity as a
reliable balanced reporter?
When reporting, the journalist has to present other’s opinions. When writing a
commentary he is to express analyses, leading to a conclusion. But we are not
free to take side and show partisanship. A good commentary includes relevant
background and a variety of ideas. The different opinions are to be analysed with
a distance. The less the commentator is “political correct” to a certain group or
a party, the more influence he or she will get. It depends of one’s independence
towards sources and political correctness.

Any point of view must be logically presented, backed up with facts. The commentary
shall present the background and the actors, who did what when? What did they say last
year, compare to what they are saying now? In the commentary you can go behind the
rhetorical prose and see what the word of a politician is worth. That is not the same as
presenting one’s own opinion. But it’s an ethical question how you select the facts in your
article. Do you keep facts that don’t fit with your own opinion away? If so, your authority
as a commentator will be limited.

In the commentary we present the ideas. We describe the present situation, and analyse
what will happen, what is likely to happen? We explain the political process, argue for and
against a political point of view, without drawing the conclusions. Let the readers do that
themselves!
We draw a picture with all the details, but the picture is to have an idea, a theme. A
commentary must be clear about the theme. The central ideas is to be highlighted. Identify
the specific issue under the theme that should be of interest to the reader. Put yourself in
the position of the readers. Will they be interested in all the details you gather and present?

A commentary is longer than a news story. You have to catch your audience from sentence
number one. Use a striking statement, a relevant anecdote, a quotation or a description in
the lead. (Authors use much time to find the first sentence, the one that pull you through
the whole book)

3.5 Feature
The telephone rang at the Oval office. It was from the President’s
national-security adviser. All preparations for the bombing of Kosovo
where done. The adviser said: “We’re going to go, unless you say
otherwise.” The President replied: “Let’s do it.”

That is the typical start of a feature story, the background article where you get
the details the news story don’t have space for. Magazines like Time and
Newsweek have specialised on the style, but also African magazines use it with
success. Drum and Mail&Guardian are to good examples of our own feature
tradition.

The language is different. We leave the strict news vocabulary. Now we can describe event
and emotions with softer word than we usually does. But the feature is not just for the soft
stories. All sorts of evens can be selected for a feature treatment.

The political feature can concentrate more on those involved than the specific case. A
feature also can illustrate how political messages are received in the communities or how
the political decisions look like from the grassroots. You have to be there! The feature
writer must go out to do the research on the spot. The reporter describing how president
Clinton took his phone in the Oval room was not there, but he talked to those present and
asked lot of “uninteresting” questions about who was there, did he take the phone
himself? What was his first reaction? Did he swear? How was he dressed? Who did what
afterwards?

By other words: Catch the atmosphere! Go to the spots. The best township feature stories
from South Africa the last years are made by journalists who didn’t go to the killing fields
during the massacres, but went there two days later and sat down with the widow and the
fatherless children. The reporters have hunted for details, curiosities and the small human
touch elements. And they have asked for the background: Why did they try to kill just
you? By using time, you build up confidence to those who have the element to your story.
Then they will tell you all those episodes that they in the first place didn’t think was
interesting for you.

But don’t forget the facts! A feature full of emotions easily becomes sentimental. A feature
full of facts is boring. The right combination of facts and feelings gives us the best feature.
The stories and details we use is to illustrate those facts we get from informed peoples like
community leaders, chiefs, mayors, political leaders and eyewitnesses.

A well-written feature story need a dramatic element to catch the attention. Often this can
be done by starting telling a story. It has a striking effect when you pick up the story again
in the end of the feature. You can let us see the political case through affected people and
let them tell their story, or present it in a fairy-tale style. The style has to fit with the angle
you have chosen for the feature.

Profiles
The profile is a specialised branch of feature journalism. A profile can be a biographical
feature based on an important person in public life, an interesting personality who hits the
headlines or an ordinary human being who is interesting for one reason or another.

Before you meet the person to portray, go through the archives of clippings to get his or
her life story, quotes and episodes to spice the story. Spend time together with the
person’s friends - and “enemies”! - to get their characteristics. Charming stories from the
privacy are sometimes just private, sometimes they say a lot about the person’s character.
Include in your research all basic knowledge. Don’t spoil the time - and your reputation! -
by asking where he was born, where he was educated or what the name of her first book
was.

Where to do the interview? Busy people often try to make an appointment at their office.
If possible, try to find a “neutral” ground, like a restaurant, a park or a place that is a part
of the story and has a symbolic meaning. The person normally will be more open when
there’s no desk to hide behind. Sometimes it’s a good idea to see the person at home. An
interview for a profile feature is very different from a hard-hitting discussion-like
conversation. We try to establish an atmosphere of confidence, a friendly environment. In
such an interview you can ask simple questions on banal subjects. You can suddenly - the
change is one to twenty - get a well-formulated answer that can colour up the profile. In
this type of interviews, with space for reflections and, we often get more honest answers
that in the daily production of statements. Even it the atmosphere is soft, don’t forget the
harsh questions. Senior politicians often like to handle tricky questions; it becomes
sometime a sport to be more ready wit that the journalist! Others who have happened to
be controversial should be told that the hard questions give them an opportunity to give a
reflected answer to questions that the man in the street would like to ask.

Features are often used as follow-up journalism; we go behind the scene on the big stories.
A feature can also serve as a curtain raiser for an event to come, giving the background in
advance. Sometimes a reflected feature can be the story that is setting the agenda, like
news stories often do.

The structures

4.1 Parliament
4.1.1 How parliaments work, formalities
4.1.2 Daily life in parliament, official meetings and informal information
4.1.3 Committees, access to information
4.1.4 Bringing “the peoples voice” to those responsible
4.1.5 Live broadcast from the parliament, debates etc.

4.2 Government and civil service

4.2.1 Routines for checking documents
4.2.2 How to “use” the spokesmen
4.2.3 When you are “not wanted”
4.2.4 Civil servants and political power
4.2.5 How to use “background information”

4.3 The executives

4.3.1 The executives and privacy
4.3.2 Respectful and critical
4.3.3 Who is responsible? About the art of blaming others

4.4 The parties

4.4.1 The structure, where is the power? Centralised, can the branch make
politics? Relationship to government and parliament.
4.4.2 The parties as political workshops
4.4.3 The oppositions right to be heard. How to agree with them without
being their tool.

4.5 Organisations
4.5.1 Types of organisations: NGOs, business foundations, information
agencies, farmers organisations, trade unions, churches, human right
organisations, environment.
4.5.2 Analysis of their influence, aid and democracy, corporate connections
between parties and trade unions, business organisations etc.

4.6 Elections
4.6.1 Covering the campagne, propaganda vs information
4.6.2 Rigging and corruption
4.6.3 Observers and monitoring groups
4.6.4 The voters voice
4.6.5 Educating the people
4.6.6 Day of election-opinion poll
4.6.7 After the election, what to happen

5. Research

5.1 Statistics and figures

5.1.1 How to understand and use figures and percentage
5.1.2 Where to get reliable statistics
5.1.3 How figures can lie. Presentation of figures at radio.

5.2 Understanding of national budget.

5.2.1 Facts about the budget, how it is organised and set up.
5.2.2 The use of budget in the political debate; the list of promises. Who
to guide you.

5.3 Public archives and documents

5.3.1 Press laws and access to archives.
5.3.2 How to find and use documents

5.4 Editorial archives

5.4.1 How to build up editorial clipping archives
5.4.2 Dairy of events to come
5.4.3 Checklists on old stories; new development?
5.4.4 Organising notes for later use
5.4.5 List of contact/sources

5.5 Preparations
5.5.1 Develop routines for checking and preparations
5.5.2 What to “dig up” before debates, interviews, portraits, speeches
5.5.3 The confrontation, how to present sensible information for those
involved
5.5.4 Where to find background information

5.6 Observation
5.6.1 Go and see for yourself! Check statement about “the present
situation”. Talk to those infected; de they recognise the minister’s
version?
5.6.2 Official functions, who’s talking to who
5.6.3 “Meeting the people”, who do the dignitaries talk to?
5.6.4 Grassroots reporting, the society according to the beerhalls

5.7 Investigative journalism

5.7.1 Investigative methods, elements for basic investigative journalism.

5.8 “The context”

5.8.1 Setting the news in broader perspective
5.8.2 Use of background material, additional information
5.8.3 Analysis of statements and speeches: what was not said, what did
s/he say last time, what was suspected to be said etc.

5.9 Sources
5.9.1 Types of sources: politicians, businessmen, NGOs, pressure groups,
civil servants, labourers, man in the street, women, children.
Eyewitnesses, infected.
5.9.2 The element of interest, checking of information, analyse and find
the opposite, conflicting source. Why do they leek information?
5.9.3 Map of sources, conflicts and interests
5.9.4 Relationship to sources. One time-sources, deep throat, don’t make
friends, but keep in touch. Confrontation of information.
 Follow up-system (checklists)
5.9.5 Confidential sources, result of good or bad work?
5.9.6 Press releases and press meetings, information departments
5.9.7 Handbooks, internet, electronic networks
5.9.8 News agencies and international press
5.9.9 Information and desinformation

Professionalism

The minefields
Journalists, using their press freedom are not free to write whatever they want. There are
strictly regulated ethical guidelines, modelled by the journalist’s own organisations, to rule
out how this freedom is to be practised. Press freedom can also be limited by the nature of
the sources, deadlines, editorial policies and political considerations.

Politician considerations is a well known limitation to many African journalist. Sometimes

it make problems, sometimes trouble. It differs from country to country, but these are the
journalistic mine fields:

a. Indications on corruption or bad management on a high level. The closer to the

head of state, the more delicate.

b. Stories that question the nation’s governance.

c. When critical voices of the establishment get their opinions covered.

d. News stories that the government can define as “destabilising” the nation or
affects “the security” of the country.

This is not a list of journalistic “no go-area”. Reports within these sensitive areas
might be the most important news story we publish. Calculate the risk together
with the editor and your senior colleagues. Be sure the story is correct, and all
details are within the limits of legal considerations when it come to libel etc.

Integrity
Newspapers can at it’s most critical stage look like a part of the political
opposition. But the duty is different. There is a distinction between been I
“opposition” and behaving “independent”. Free newspapers therefor often call
them independent. But the establishment don’t accept that difference. They call
critical newspapers for “the opposition press”. Through the eighties the South
African Weekly Mail (today Mail&Guardian) looked like an newspaper for the
opposition newspaper. It identified itself totally with the struggle against
apartheid. It was in opposition to the regime. Many ANC-members had the
feeling that Weekly Mail was “their” press organ. But it’s popularity changed
when the democratic government was in position. The newspaper then put the
focus on unfortunate elements in the movement, power struggle, corruption and
bad management. Suddenly Mail&Guardian became the enemy. But the paper
didn’t - as many thought - change it policy. It kept the same line”: Follow
closely those in power.

The reporter is to be the critical observer, also those one agree with. To be
independent is not just a word on a sticker to decorate the office. It’s a way of
living as a journalist. The independence occur in contact with sources,
politicians, businessmen and other who show themselves on the public stage.
The independent behaviour is a guard for the credibility of the press, and for the
reporter.

As we have seen, many have the assumption that journalist should aim to be impartial.
There is a widespread demand among readers to get news “free of the journalists
opinions”. They want objective journalism. As we have seen: It don’t exist. The idea of
journalistic objectivity opens for an ice-cold, cynical lack of engagement. Good journalism
should not just describe how and why an event took place but seek to show it’s true
nature. Sometimes - in wars, during catastrophes - the truly evil and horrific nature of
what has been perpetrated must be reflected through a beating heart, not an analysing
brain. The journalist is not free to edit the reality after own sympathy. But he or she will
do a bad ad uninspired job if journalism is reduced to statistics of death and blankets. It is
through the symbiotic process of reflective equilibrium, rationally considering none’s
judgements in regard to the basic principles of interpretation and evaluation, that
objectivity can be achieved. If not all journalism is falsely reduced t the status of
propaganda. Journalist have indeed a duty to strive for impartiality and objectivity. But the
possession of values does not prevent one from seeing and telling the truth.

But what is “truth”? A British tv-producer edited a picture of a woman together with a
picture of a bowl of soup and showed it to some media students. Another group got a
version of the same woman, cut together with a picture of a laughing child. The first group
said she looked hungry, the second could clearly see how the mother’s love for the child
filled the screen. The woman was neither hungry or fond of children. She was a actor.

The edited version tells a selected part of the truth. The journalists profession is to select
the most important pieces to the picture. A journalist can be sure that each of the reports
not bring the truth. In the long term a newspaper can give a true version of the events.
Because “news” are not the same as “truth”. The real, reliable truth contains of a lot of
elements. Hopefully are some of them are news stories. During the Gulf war was the
media’s access to cover limited. The generals selected the information. Newspapers where
full of sophisticated pictures of spectacular explosions. We could see bridges in ruins and
blown-up arm stores. But none of the generals showed us the dead civilians, even if they
were counted in ten thousands. The Gulf war remains in our image as a “clean” war , even
if we know better.

Three criteria for what makes for truth in news reporting may be suggested:
Accuracy - the facts should be based on solid evidence.
Understanding - the story should contain relevant information to put the event in an
understandable context.
Fairness - the reports should be balanced, so the readers themselves can draw the
conclusions.
Self-confidence
Many African societies are characterised by a authoritarian style. It might be a
heritage from the colonial days. But it’s also a result of poor education among
journalists. The officials always know best. A reporter who fears authorities,
becomes “a useful idiot”, as the party bosses in old communist-Soviet
characterised some of their supporters. It takes time to build up one’s self-
confidence. Basic elements for this self-independence is an independent working
style, knowledge about the subject to handle and a personal feeling of being a
respected human being. Lack of self-confidence often leads to self-censorship
and a “political correctness”.

Though newspapers are owned by governments the fear of reprisals is not always the
reason for self censorship. Reporters often “think” that the limitations are more stringent
what they really are. Self-censorship is an easy way out of the dilemmas actually raised by
modern hard hitting critical journalism. It is not the restrictions from the political powers
that drive the journalists back to the “ministerial speech reporting”, a style the late
Zimbabwean journalist Willie Musarurwa called “minister- and sunshine journalism”. A
journalist has not done the job by quoting the speaker accurately. Was the assertions in the
speech checked? It is rather internalised assumptions of what is expected of the media. It
is a far simpler form of journalism to practice than investigative reporting. This is linked to
the poor training many journalists have got, and their low social standing. The result of
this self made limitation for the freedom of expression creates an atmosphere in the
newsroom, specially in the “official media”.

Code of conduct
Press organisations with a will to practice independent journalism, often set up
their own code of ethics. This is not done to limit the freedom of press, but to
discipline it’s own members to basic regulations, a code of conduct. They have
been developed as part of the professionalization of journalism, as part of an
increasing self-awareness by journalists that they belong to a particular
profession with it’s own set of rules. The formulation and adoption of ethical
codes now takes place in both African and Asian countries, and not to forget the
new democracies in Eastern Europe, often as an important element in the
struggle for democratic media structures. In these codes of conducts are the
journalist’s accountability and integrity basic words. According to the press
conducts, responsible and professional journalism must be based on ...
- Truthfulness in gathering and reporting information;
-Freedom of expression and comment; and defence of these rights;
-Equality by not discriminating against anyone on the basis of his/her gender, race,
ethnicity or religion, social class, profession, handicap or any other personal
characteristics;
-Fairness by using only straightforward means in the gathering of information;
-Respect for the sources and referents and their integrity; including respect for
copyright laws;
-Duty not to divulge confidential sources;
-Duty not to prejudge the guilt of an accused;
-Independence/integrity by refusing bribes and by resisting any other form of
outside influence on the work.

Many countries have integrated freedom of press and freedom of expression in their
constitutions. But the freedom of press can be limited despite on the constitution.
Freedom of press is not the freedom to abuse. And all nations have theirs laws against
libel. The reporter can prove that a minister is lying, but no journalist has the right to call
anybody a liar. It’s a bad manner to characterise somebody in abusive terms. But
sometimes it seems that some journalist think that press freedom is the same as the right
to abuse those in power.

Public Interest and Private Life

Media coverage affect the life of politicians. As public figures they seek the
limelight of the press. But more often they want to shut the door. Do a
prominent politician, a minister, have the right to privacy? The traditions differ
from country to country. The tabloid journalism has made it a way of living,
exposing the private life of celebrities, with or without their will. But prominent
people have a natural right to be by their own. Even head of states have an oasis
of privacy. One of the functions for the media is to find the truth in matters of
public interest. But to maintain the principles of public concern may often come
into conflict with and disrupt the privacy of an individual. For to make things
public implies interrupting privacy. The border between the private and public
sphere changes with history and culture. A minister risk full coverage if involved
with a mistress. No detail will remain untouched. In African tradition this
belongs to the privacy. But if the minister has a political profile, dedicated to
high moral, traditional family values and with a fierce critic of moral slackness;
shall he then be protected? Revealing a genuine hypocrite is definitely of public
interest. And it has relevance for the voters ability to evaluate his moral
credibility.

A newspaper reveals that a minister has been on holiday abroad, on the expenses of an
international company in return for contracts that they have been awarded. The holiday
offer was never mentioned in advance, the minister was not even involved in the planning,
and he followed the recommendation his ministry presented for him. By other words: He
didn’t commit any corrupt act. But it looked like, and he got involved with them in a way
that leads us to a dangerous question: Has he shown a proper political judgement. The
foreign trip was private and during his holiday. But highly of public interest, even if the
arrangement was private.

What constitutes “the public interest”? There is a difference between what is in the interest
of the public and what the public is interested to know. The last is a mix of relevant
information and gossip. The first invites the press to be almighty father of the readers, he
who knows his client’s best.

The methods
To reveal corruption or discover illegal political activity the reporter need to use
untraditional methods. Some have used hidden camera, others false identity and
provocation’s. One may except unethical practices if the result is a disclosure of public
interest. But there is every reason to discuss the consequences. Is the condition that the
immoral act to reveal is bigger than the immoral methods used to reveal it? The loser can
be the ethical journalism, and the credibility of the press. Journalists who involve lies and
deception in his or hers methods risk to make these “shortcuts” a relevant way of carrying
out the research. A reporter, using disputed methods to discover other’s immorality, will
experience that those revealed will turn the weapons on the journalistic cowboy. But there
are ethical borderlines where the answer sometimes is go on.

Relationship to sources
Favours
Journalists live in a constant conflict of interests, even if we don’t think of it on daily basis;
personal relationships, use of favours to influence reporting and political pressure.
How free is a newspaper? Commercial companies often offer journalists a free trip to
destinations that will result in reports of their favour. In many African countries it’s
common for political journalists to jet around with the president on his state visits. It gives
the newspapers an opportunity to cover essential evens, but gives at the same time the
government an opportunity to feed the press with news that often goes in their way. This
affects not even the independent reporting, but also the image of an independent press.

Personal favours is more tricky. It may have the form on a better dinner paid by a news
source, in other cases cheep access to goods and trips. It might be innocent enough, and
often not involve any promise of any kind. But it is a behaviour close to a conflict of
interests. One day there is a hot story on one of these dinner hosts. How is the critical
distance to the former dinner host? A relevant problem in poor newspaper with underpaid
journalists is that small journalistic duties, paid in cash or goods or dinners, is a
temptation. But watchdogs grabbing the thief’s bones never remain long.

Participation
Should a journalist be involved in public organisations and, in particular, in politics? By
participating in organisational life of a community the journalist keep in touch with the
society they cover, and may give them access to useful and relevant news sources. At the
other hand many maintain a position in a system they the next day might cover critically.
They also get involved in the interests of these organisations, and will face problems to
cover evens, connected to the particular part of the community, in a balanced way.

For reporters the atmosphere in the corridors of power is fascinating. And it’s important to
be there! The problem is when the politicians and their officers becomes one’s main
reference group. Keep a distance to prevent thinking like them! It’s not the journalist’s
duty to be a part of the system. Some journalist keep out of the official environment to
establish a visible and real independence. It’s not a good idea. It’s in the corridors that the
sources are. Adopt a confrontational posture instead of being a paranoid “minus reporter”
in constant search for the crocks.

Confidentiality
The issue of confidentiality is at the centre of journalistic ethics. In some countries the
right to
protect the source’s anonymity is guarded by law. Journalist believe in the need for
confidentiality for sources for several reasons and it’s difficult to underestimate the
importance for a journalist of being able to obtain information in confidence from a private
source and then being allowed to protect the confidentiality of that source. But should he,
in the first place, promise anonymity? Confidentiality might be the only way of getting the
story. But we shall remember that most sources - specially the anonymous ones - have
their reasons for keeping in the dark. Their motives is not necessarily of a high standard.
During the last years, may media consultant companies hire ex-journalists to leak sensitive
information to the press, as a part of a wider - and hidden - agenda for political purposes.
Both ministers and political parties and interest groups has their lobby system, where
journalists are among those to affect. Parts of this activity is a systematically
desinformation drive. Therefor it’s a good reason for being strict on when to promise
confidentiality.

RADIO RADIO RADIO RADIO RADIO

radio: The stand up

6.4.1 When to do a stand-up; live and recorded
6.4.2 Preparations and “the stunt”
6.4.3 Combined forms; stand up and interviews, stand up and studio

8. Editorial process

8.1 Presentation
8.1.1 Headlines, introes
8.1.2 How to write a story
8.1.3 Use of cuttings
8.1.4 Radio: Use of contentum in news stories and features
8.1.5 Composition, dramaturgy
8.1.6 Montage
8.1.7 Live report, stand up

8.2 News language

8.2.1 Word to be understood, talk/write to your grandmother!
8.2.2 Language for illiterate people, radio
8.2.3 How to build up a sentence for radio, different to newspapers
8.2.4 Use of figures, theoretical analysis in radio
8.2.5 The verbs - use active, not passive verbs
8.2.6 Manipulations: the use of friendly and unfriendly words
8.2.7 The dialect from the bureaucracies

8.4 From idea to story

8.4.1 Directing a story, angling, what style
8.4.2 Gathering of information, “map” of information
8.4.3 Ingredients

.3 Debate
3.3.1 Type of debates: Political struggle, intellectual exchange of
opinions, “a critic conversation”, shouting or decant talk?
3.3.2 Discussion about who-did-wrong or what-is-right? (It was correct,
but was it morally right?)
3.3.3 The set up. How many to discuss? Who to participate. Analyse of
conflict.
3.3.4 The host’s role: On the underdog’s side? Critical just to one side?
Independent behaviour. Be a good listener.
3.3.5 Preparations. Who will say what? Manuscript?
3.3.6 Progress, timing, when to change the subject. When to stop
3.3.7 Producers job

3.7 Call-in-programmes
3.7.1 Producers job: to select interesting questions and remarks
3.7.2 In the studio: politicians? experts? a personality? the host only?
3.7.3 Open subject or directed by the host.

3.8 Entertainment vs journalism

3.8.1 Chose the participants to the debate or interview. Celebrity-factor vs
intellectual capacity.
3.8.2 High temperature and poor information, but good rating and
entertainment vs decent behaviour, much information, but low rating
and bad entertainment.

In radio the news comes every hour. It is repeated time and again, but nothing new
happens. Its normal to twist the story round, to lift up a new element in the headlines. The
problem with this is that the listener can get the idea that the story is new, there is a
development in the news. What was “the most important” one hour ago has changes.
What has happened? Nothing has happened, else than the reporters rewriting.

Consultants:
Emelia Sithole
Tomm Kristiansen
e-mail:
emelia@reuters.co.za
tomm.kristiansen@nrk.no