Take the case of Ed Vulliamy, reporter for the Guardian and the London Observer, who chose to testify as a witness to crimes against humanity after the peace settlement in Bosnia. "We wrote about it, but it was not enough", said Mr. Vulliamy referring to his story about Serbian concentration camps in Bosnia. "We were supposed to have had such a great impact on the conduct of the war, but we did not." On the other hand, Edward Girardet, editor of Crosslines Global Report, in his paper "Strengthening Lifeline Media in Regions of Conflict," writes: "It is more important to be as accurate and honest as possible in one's assessment of a given situation than to pretend that one is being objective. Indications suggest detachment in conflicts is in practice impossible, and objectivity is an unattainable aspiration."

Each journalist defines his or her own role and responsibility. Recognizing these inconsistencies, a small number of journalists and media professionals are working through organizations, such as The International Center for Humanitarian Reporting, the Media Peace Centre and The Center for War, Peace, and the News Media, to develop standards. These organizations are developing training programmes and norms of conduct based on a standard of accuracy and the recognition that journalists are active participants in the events they cover. The usefulness of a code of conduct is limited because there is no formal process by which norms can be established and enforced.

Journalists are wary of such codes out of valid concern that they could be used to impede the freedom of the press. But the complexities of conflict situations in this post-cold-war era, the inability of journalists to be knowledgeable about every situation they cover, and the recognition of the role journalists play in conflict situations require a reconsideration of the values and norms of the professional news media.

Two fundamental points should form the basis of future discussion. First, an understanding that journalists are active participants in the events they are covering and that this participation has an impact on the reporting, as well as on the conflict itself. As participants, journalists are accountable to the subjects of their reporting, as well as the audience, and must consider seriously the long-term positive and negative impacts of their reporting. Second, journalists must make their audiences aware of restrictions on reporting, both physical and observational restrictions. "Honest journalism needs to be open about its 'observational biases' just as scientists must recognize in some way their 'observational hypotheses'," wrote ABC correspondent William Blakemore in a 1992 St. John's Law Review article. A good example of this is Martin Bell's explanation of the emotional pressures of reporting during the Bosnian conflict: "All the reporters who work regularly on the Bosnian beat are at least privately interventionist. Surrounded by so much misery and destruction, it is humanly difficult to be anything else."

Such a statement provides the audience with a refreshingly honest and human understanding of the tragic phenomenon that is war. "Moral life is a struggle to see-a struggle against the desire to deny the testimony of one's own eyes and ears. The struggle to believe one's senses is at the heart of the process of moving from voyeurism to commitment", writes Michael Ignatieff in his book, The Warrior's Honor: Ethics, War and the Modern Conscience. Journalists must come to terms with their own responsibility as the eyes and ears of their audience, providing them with the accurate and honest information that will allow them to move from being spectators to violence, to actors in the resolution and prevention of violent conflict.

Previous Page of this article

Please use this version of the article for printing.