top of page
Search

Where Are We in Peace Journalism?

  • jakemlynch
  • Mar 25
  • 6 min read

Peace Journalism proposes to transform language and journalism practices by arguing that the media can also be an actor that promotes peace. Peace Journalism, which aims to make visible the paths to peace, was explained by one of the pioneers of this concept, Prof. Jake Lynch.


Peace Journalism is defined as a process where “editors and reporters create opportunities to consider and consider nonviolent responses to conflict when deciding what stories to report and how to report them.” [1]



Journalist reporting in a war zone

When I ran the first Peace Journalism Summer School in 1997, two of the participants came from the Mirror, one of the UK’s largest-selling daily newspapers. Editors and reporters were looking for new ideas as they struggled to cope with events in Northern Ireland (or the north of Ireland, depending on your point of view). The peace process was progressing rapidly at the time, and there was strong community support for the cause, to which political leaders had not contributed for years. 


This historic grassroots moment looked set to lead to a decisive “Yes” vote on the Good Friday Agreement the following year, and Peace Journalism provided journalists with a treasure trove of valuable tips and options to help them “come to their senses.” 


Peace Studies Pioneer Johan Galtung

These developments on the western coast of Europe provided just the context that the Peace Journalism program had been waiting for. The keynote speaker was Johan Galtung, the pioneer of Peace Studies who left us this year after an incredibly influential intellectual career. Years ago, Galtung published a landmark article in the Journal of Peace Research with Mari Holmboe Ruge entitled “The Structure of Foreign News.”


In this article, Galtung and Ruge wrote that mainstream news presented sudden and negative events, often reproduced official statements and claims, and often structured conflicts as a zero-sum game, ending with victory (or defeat) between two opposing sides. Galtung later defined this dominant type of journalism as “War Journalism.” According to him, this journalism did not only mean reporting wars. It was also a type of journalism that cognitively prepared societies for violence. This type of journalism needed a healing counter-strategy that could be summarized as “Peace Journalism.”


In the post-Cold War era of the 1990s, “peace” was suddenly on everyone’s lips. At the other end of Europe, Greek-Turkish relations had entered a period of warmth. Common themes of political communication included the Middle East Peace Process and the Peace Dividend after the collapse of state socialism. The wars in Yugoslavia had also been resolved by agreement.


Elsewhere, South and North Korea were basking in the peace that came with the “Sunshine Policy.” Peace was finally achieved in Mozambique, and apartheid in South Africa ended shortly thereafter. Galtung saw to it that his own proposal for a “binational park” to resolve the border dispute between Ecuador and Peru was implemented.


The Formation of Peace Journalism Literature

In short, when the idea of ​​Peace Journalism first emerged, it emerged as an idea whose time had come and whose conceptual and practical weight had been duly developed. Using Galtung’s model of creating a set of binary distinctions when reporting on conflicts, researchers conducted content analysis to understand the extent to which Peace Journalism existed. [2]


Audience monitoring studies have revealed strong interactions in this regard: if conflict events were reconstructed according to Peace Journalism criteria, readers, viewers and listeners noticed. [3] Moreover, they were significantly more sensitive to non-violent responses. These findings have been published in academic books and journals and are reflected in the content of university courses.


At the same time, people working in development turned to Peace Journalism to be effective in societies affected by violent conflict. Aid agencies began to seek journalist training through media development support. In these workshops, local news samples were often reanalysed against Peace Journalism criteria and participants were encouraged to consider how they could report the same stories differently. Some training sessions were followed by mentoring to help apply the lessons learned. [4]


The Peace Journalism literature began to emerge in this way. An example is The Peace Journalist, edited by journalist-turned-teacher Steven Youngblood. In its first decade since its launch in 2012, 47 authors from 33 countries have published 55 reports. These reports included information on Peace Journalism training courses and covered countries in various stages of conflict. [5]

The Lines That Are Clear Between Propaganda and Telling the Truth

But this post-Cold War emphasis on peace did not appeal to everyone. Operation Desert Storm, which ousted Saddam Hussein’s forces from Kuwait, reinstated the Pentagon as the enforcement arm of the international community. Neoconservatives in Washington sought to turn this success into a “New American Century” to prevent the emergence of rival elements in key regions and to prevent purely European security arrangements.


The countries of Eastern Europe, despite being free of the new Soviet Pact, were reluctant to adapt their military forces to join NATO, so U.S. arms companies persuaded Congress to pay the cost, perpetuating the binary division of the Eurasian landmass.

The 9/11 attacks provided a justification for regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq, which was accused of harboring “weapons of mass destruction.” Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead” in 2008-2009 became a template for genocide in Gaza.


These developments have sharpened the lines between propaganda and truth-telling. Peace Journalism has migrated from the realm of legitimate debate to the realm of perversion. The insistence on showing the backgrounds and contexts of conflicts – not just the events but also the processes that led to them – has become a burden for authorities who are inclined to respond to events with violence. The criticisms, including many journalists, of reporting the story of Gaza as if it began on October 7, 2023, when this is not the case, can also be considered in this context. [6]


The Balance Between Dominant Structures and Free Will

In this period, which we can now define as the “post-Cold War era,” media continued to transform itself. It went online. It diversified as transmission costs disappeared. News began to be provided in streams personalized to algorithm preferences. 


Today, we can revisit Mark Twain’s distinction between ignorance and misinformation. Those who don’t see the news are uninformed. Those who rely solely on commercial and institutional sources are misinformed.


So how do we get information? A good place to start would be to support independent media that are not dependent on commercial revenue streams or government-related bureaucracies. These media operate on the margins, but the same is true of any new idea or insight. Their impact can be much broader than their own circulation.


Of course, there are daily struggles at every news desk. Good editors and reporters are constantly testing the boundaries of what is possible and acceptable, as I have done in my own career in UK television and newspapers. In many other areas, the challenges are much more acute. My colleagues in Pakistan – ranked 152 out of 180 countries in Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index – call for Peace Journalism to be practiced within a framework of “critical pragmatism”. This allows journalists working on sensitive stories about conflict to operate within a limited space. But everywhere, the balance between the structure and the individual’s own free will in influencing the content of the news is negotiated hourly.


Peace Journalism and Being the Voice of the Voiceless


Research has shown that of the main distinctions in the Peace Journalism model, the most easily implemented distinction is “people-centeredness.” [7] To quote Galtung: “Highlighting the violence of all and the suffering of all sides; women, the elderly, children [not just healthy adult males]; naming all evildoers [not just the “other” side]; focusing on peacebuilding; and giving voice to the voiceless.”

Various studies have shown that, when carefully selected, stories of struggle and initiative by non-elite subjects can expose entrenched conflict discourses to new perspectives, reveal new causal relationships, and inspire hope and understanding in the masses that will prompt them to consider nonviolent responses and solutions. [8]

For this reason alone, the concept of Peace Journalism remains fresh, as it offers journalists the freedom to show the process leading up to an event and thus a range of opportunities to enable the necessary interventions to avoid violence. As such, it continues to attract and reciprocate both academic and practical interest.


 

Footnotes

[1] Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick, Peace Journalism. Hawthorn Press: 2005, p 6.

[2] Seow Ting Lee & Crispin Maslog, 2005: 'War or Peace journalism in Asian newspapers', Journal of Communication, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 311–329.

[3] Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick, 2016: 'Audience responses to Peace Journalism: Merging results from a four-country research study', Journalism Studies, Vol 17, Issue 5, pp 628-646.

[4] Jake Lynch and Matt Freear, 2024 'Peace Journalism training for journalists as a contribution to PVE in the new Afghanistan'. Journalism and Media 5(1), 397-411.  https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5172/5/1/26

[5] Jake Lynch and Giuliana Tiripelli, 2022: 'Constructive Information Practices after Training: feasibility, aspects, and effects in Peace Journalism media production'. In (Eds) Jake Lynch and Charis Rice, Responsible journalism in conflicted societies: trust and public service across new and old divides. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis, pp. 77-92.

[6] Letter from journalists to Australian media outlets, 2023: https://www.jotform.com/form/233177455020046

[7] Jake Lynch and Giuliana Tiripelli, 2022: 'Overcoming the Peace Journalism paradox: a case study in journalist training as media development aid'. Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies, Special Edition, 'What's next for Media Development?', Vol 11, No 2, pp 211-226.

[9] Jake Lynch, 2014: A Global Standard for Reporting Conflict. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.

Comments

bottom of page