Getting Involved with the Story

Many of these conflicts hinge on the question of whether journalists are simply observers or whether it’s OK for them to become participants in stories they cover. As a general rule, intervention by a journalist is discouraged for two reasons:

• It can change the nature of the event, rendering it no longer authentic.
• It can lead the audience to perceive bias on the part of the journalist.

Notice we are not saying a journalist should never intervene. When there is a clear, imminent danger (perhaps even the threat of death) and no one else is available, we can agree that intervention is warranted. Ditto if the journalist possesses special skills the situation requires.

Before acting, however, journalists should make sure they are not manufacturing the “danger” or getting involved simply to advance their own self-interests. Intervention can create the risk of backlash. Or, even worse, a journalist’s participation could prevent qualified individuals from providing needed assistance and possibly jeopardize others.

Case Study

Be sure you have read the case study in the textbook called For Journalists, a Clash of Moral Duties: Responsibilities as professionals and as human beings can conflict.

Let’s use two examples to explore the question of intervention.

Journalist Wolfgang Bauer and photojournalist Stanislav Krupaf were undercover for two months travelling with Syrian refugees in 2015. Their cover story was that they were English teachers and they faced the same events experienced by the Syrians they were travelling with, including being arrested twice, being kidnapped, and being thrown overboard from a ship taken over by smugglers.

Their journey is chronicled in a book, Crossing the Sea: With Syrians on the Exodus to Europe, and they serve as an excellent example of fly-on-the-wall reporting.

They were there observing (and experiencing first-hand) the hardships and abuses the Syrians suffered. Unlike Nazario and Williams, Bauer and Krupaf did not intervene even when they might have. Instead, the journalists chose to place the spotlight on ordinary individuals because they believe them to be part of a newsworthy topic. They simply let life unfold and recorded what happened. Newsweek did an interesting profile of the two journalists which includes some photos and additional stories. 

Also in 2015, Egyptian journalist Magdy Samaan was also travelling with Syrian refugees. Unlike Bauer and Krupof, however, Samaan identified himself as a reporter. Though he also reported on what he saw and heard first-hand, Samaan did intervene during his 15-day journey. In several instances, he acted as a translator. In another, he gave a portable charger to a man who needed to charge his phone so he could contact his family.

Did these interventions change reality? Of course. If no one else was present who could translate, what would have happened? You can read Samaan’s entire story on The Telegraph.

While it’s natural to have an emotional reaction to those in need, journalists would do well to consider which accomplishes more: