Third View

Becoming a journalist

By David Brewer
I was honoured when TP Mishra invited me to write a chapter for this book about journalism and news. We have never met. Our only contact has been over the internet. Our lives couldn’t be more different. He is working, unpaid, as a reporter, editor and publisher in the Bhutanese refugee camps in Nepal, committed to informing those starved of news. I have a comfortable lifestyle in the UK thanks to a career in journalism.
When I first read the email asking me to write the introduction chapter “because you are an experienced journalist and media activist,” it made me think.
If length of service equals experience, then I guess I qualify as an experienced journalist. I started as a reporter at my home town newspaper in the 70s, moved to radio, became a TV correspondent and then a political editor, before moving to online journalism. I have worked as a journalist and manager in print, broadcast and online. However, as far as certificates go, my walls are bare. I passed a few basic exams for shorthand, typing and the essential law for journalists more than 30 years ago, but that's it.


Becoming a journalist

By David Brewer

I was honoured when TP Mishra invited me to write a chapter for this book about journalism and news. We have never met. Our only contact has been over the internet. Our lives couldn’t be more different. He is working, unpaid, as a reporter, editor and publisher in the Bhutanese refugee camps in Nepal, committed to informing those starved of news. I have a comfortable lifestyle in the UK thanks to a career in journalism.

When I first read the email asking me to write the introduction chapter “because you are an experienced journalist and media activist,” it made me think.

If length of service equals experience, then I guess I qualify as an experienced journalist. I started as a reporter at my home town newspaper in the 70s, moved to radio, became a TV correspondent and then a political editor, before moving to online journalism. I have worked as a journalist and manager in print, broadcast and online. However, as far as certificates go, my walls are bare. I passed a few basic exams for shorthand, typing and the essential law for journalists more than 30 years ago, but that's it.

I'd never thought of myself as a media activist. I have always considered an activist to be someone who pushes a cause without aiming to reflect an alternative view point. If that is the case, and if an activist makes no attempt to remain objective and impartial, how can they also be a journalist? There is a danger in becoming emotionally and politically involved in any issue. It can warp our reporting to the point where it could be damaging in terms of informing the public debate?

So, from my western perspective, I have never considered myself to be a media activist, but I think I understand what TP Mishra is referring to.

For the last eight years I have been working with journalists in transition and post-conflict countries, and countries where freedom of expression is under threat. I have been trying to help them establish strong, independent, high quality media organisations. In those conditions, I can see the term activism being used in a different way by those who don’t enjoy the levels of freedom of expression that I enjoy in the West. However, it still raises the question of whether a journalist can be an activist for freedom of expression and still remain objective and impartial.

Perhaps the phrase media activist reflects the realities of what journalists in the majority world face day to day. I come from a society where journalists are taken out and wined and dined by the powerful and influential, whereas many journalists in the majority world are simply taken out with bullets and bombs. In that atmosphere it is understandable to come across journalists who view themselves as activists.

However, if a journalist’s role is to seek out truth, reflect the voices and opinions of those who don’t usually have a say, and to represent the whole audience regardless of race, religion, political affiliation and social status, then perhaps a journalist is, essentially, an activist for freedom of expression.

Journalism basics

To make sure there is no confusion here, we need to examine what it means to be a journalist. One dictionary definition of journalism is ‘the profession of writing for newspapers, magazines, radio, TV and online’. However, I would argue that journalism, without clearly-defined journalistic ethics, can easily deteriorate into public relations (PR). In my view public relations can be for political or business gain, or activism for a cause, other than freedom of expression. None of those categories qualifies, in my view, as real journalism.

Journalism has to be accurate. It is all about clear, irrefutable facts that are tested and well set out. Journalism also needs to be well-sourced. All evidence must be checked and verified. All elements of the story need to be thoroughly tested to ensure that they are not misleading and that they don’t magnify one side at the expense of another.
We should use clear, precise wording to tell the story and avoid comment and opinion that could add confusion. We need to be open about what we know, what we think we know and what we don’t know. Rumour and unfounded speculation should never be used. If the journalist feels that the fact that rumours are circulating is important to the story, then they need to make it clear that they are unfounded rumours, where they are coming from and where they are being circulated. As a rule they should not be used.
Journalism needs to be impartial, objective, balanced and fair. We must write and broadcast to inform the whole audience regardless of religion, race, political persuasion, sexual orientation and financial status. We need to be fair and open-minded and reflect all significant opinions as we explore a wide range of disparate views.
If we decide not to use some views, we need to be clear why. We need to ask ourselves why we are omitting some information or views and including others. What effect does that have on the piece? Does it help clarify issues, or does it confuse? If it confuses, what could be the consequences of that confusion and who is likely to gain from that?
Most important of all, we need to ensure that those consuming our journalism can do so knowing that it is not influenced by political, business, or personal gain. We need to be honest with ourselves about our motives and reasons for covering a story. The key is to ask searching questions to all sides, particularly those who hold public office, and, in doing so, provide the basis for a healthy and robust public debate. All journalists will have their own political points of view, but these must never creep into our journalism and they must not have any bearing on the choice of stories we cover or the way we cover them.

Early lessons

On my first day as a local newspaper reporter, the editor took me aside and told me what was expected of me. What he said to me has stuck with me throughout my life as a journalist.

“It’s all about who, what, where, when, why and how, just give me verified and sourced facts. I want reports that are written in crisp, clean English. I don’t want waffle. I don’t want padding. I want sentences with a subject, verb and object. I want facts, facts and more facts. I don’t want your comment or opinions; your views don’t matter. Just go out there and get me facts – and be quick about it.”

I have always tried to follow that code over the past 30 years, mostly with some success, but also with some spectacular failures.