The way media cover conflict has an impact on conflict itself.

Like everyone else, warlords in Mogadishu listen to the radio, the Pentagon watches CNN and Arab policy makers watch Al Jazeera. Newspapers in Abidjan whip up emotions in the midst of the civil war; whilst in Sri Lanka the press is as much a part of the problem as a solution. The Serbian media did much to drive home this point, as did Radio Tlvision Libre des Mille Collines in Rwanda, which is often referred to as one of the most horrific misuses of ’media’ in recent times.

A roundtable hosted by International Media Support in October 2003 assessed how conflict reporting impacts war and how it can be improved. Journalists and media trainers from around the globe participated in the roundtable, offering a variety of perspectives and ideas.

What can journalists and trainers do to improve conflict reporting?

How can a reporter remain independent, unbiased and faithful to the truth if she/he is also to promote peace, reconciliation, and other such concepts?

RAP 21 members have access to the full report from the conflict reporting roundtable. To receive a copy, email RAP 21 at rap21@wan.asso.fr

Among the comments by the participants: Lena Slachmuijlder, director of Studio Ijambo in Burundi said: "One question often raised is ’What do we do with extremist language and views, whether it comes from the government or from rebel leaders?’ The way we deal with it is to report it, with a bit of self-censorship if the language is very provocative. But we make sure to put in a context when this message is married to other voices. We try to find someone with another, more peace-building standpoint. We are not trying to black the strong message out, as it probably will come out some other way, but show other voices too."

Siddharth Varadarajan, deputy chief of the national bureau of "The Times" of India spoke about the local media during the outbreak of violence in the Indian province Gujarat in 2002. Many of them played a dubious role, circulating false information and rumours, inciting violence. "This was a violation against Indian law. If a journalist is crossing the line of law, the law has to be applied on that person. It is a little different in a war between two countries when one part is deciding which medium is propaganda."

Fiona Lloyd, a Zimbabwean journalist and media trainer based in South African spoke about how participants are chosen for conflict reporting training: "If you stop seeing yourself as a journalist, when you lose that self-respect, all sorts of horrific things might be possible. If we polarise attendance at our training and do not bring in the state media, because it is thought to be of no use, this can have negative repercussions. Last year I was working with a group of Zimbabwean journalists, both state owned media and private owned. In fact the group got on quite well. Everybody understood you don’t leave a state employment easily in the Zimbabwean situation. That is the starting point for a dialogue. What can be done from the inside? When can you say "Enough is enough, I can’t do this" and when do you have to accept things and still think it is important to be there, because it might be possible to make some change from the inside. This discussion is challenging for us as trainers."

You can participate in an online discussion about conflict reporting to debate issues such as: Should media who engage in propaganda and hate speech be consider non-journalists or even combattants? Do western media apply double standards when they criticise others for not being objective, whilst not being sufficiently critical of their own work? Log onto http://www.i-m-s.dk/ roundtable to debate these issues and more.