Written by Nalaka Gunawardene

Should journalists be embedded in humanitarian operations? And, if they are, can they still offer balanced, impartial, independent and accurate reporting? What if the aid agencies and governments want to keep some things quiet? As Nalaka Gunawardene reports, there is growing concern about journalists and relief aid providers working closely together.

In many disaster and conflict hot spots around the world, journalists and relief aid providers work closely together.

There are times when journalists play the good Samaritan and the aid workers dabble in reporting; in the difficult field conditions of emergencies this is understood and accepted.

But should journalists become ‘embedded’ in humanitarian operations? If so, how impartial or independent would their coverage be?

The issue came up during the Global Symposium +5 on ‘Information for Humanitarian Action’ in Geneva last month.

The majority of aid officials and the handful of journalists present didn’t always agree.

UN agencies and other humanitarian organisations increasingly recognise the power of the media, especially broadcast television, to raise public awareness on emergencies. This, in turn, influences political commitments, aid donations and the relief operations themselves.

But how close can the media get to aid agencies before they lose their sense of perspective and independent analysis?

If journalists becoming embedded with the military in conflicts is frowned upon, what about media’s de facto embedding with humanitarian missions?

There was no consensus on the issue, but a few of us stressed on the need for independent media — independent of governments, aid agencies and other vested interests — to take stock of crisis situations and report, reflect and analyse on what they find.

The presence of nosy reporters might be an occasional irritant to some aid agencies, especially if they have things to hush up, but at the big picture level, it can serve everyone’s interest — especially those of affected groups.

Alain Modoux, a former red cross official who went on to become an assistant director general of UNESCO, reminded us how governments often stand in the way of the free flow of information on emergency situations.

The reasons for such suppression vary: some don’t want to admit failures on their watch, and others fear public discussion and debate, especially at international level, on what is happening in their own country.

Governments can, and often do, bring pressure on aid agencies to fall in line (or risk being thrown out). In such situations, it’s only the independent media that can take stock of rapidly changing situations and highlight the unmet needs and any disparities in the emergency response.

Then there is the media’s traditional watchdog role. The humanitarian sector is now the world’s largest unregulated industry. Billions of dollars flow through the sector every year, most of it public funds (direct donations or taxes collected by governments).

Yes, the aid agencies all audit their accounts, and the UN has stringent regulations on how they can spend the money, but there’s nothing like a bit of media scrutiny to keep everybody clean and honest.

Follow the money. This is what journalists are taught and trained to do - and with good reason. In emergency situations following the money often brings up instances of waste, corruption and mismanagement that the aid agencies would rather not talk about.

Edward Girardet

Swiss journalist Edward Girardet, who specialises in media, humanitarian aid and conflict issues, has been making this point for a long time.

As he has written: “Humanitarianism should not ‘belong’ to any one group. What the international aid industry urgently needs is more hard-nosed and independent reporting.”

That is unlikely to happen when individual journalists are too cosy with aid workers or their bosses.

Girardet was at the Geneva Symposium making a case for a viable media watchdog capable of reporting the real causes behind humanitarian predicaments, including how the international community responds.

In one intervention, I suggested that the media can become the ‘conscience’ of the humanitarian industry - to ensure transparency and accountability of resources, decisions and conduct.

Partnerships between media and aid workers is fine, as long as the media remain somewhat aloof and detached.

And it’s not the global media who can or will stay with the stories during the months or years it takes to recover from a disaster.

We all saw in the aftermath of the Indian Ocean Tsunami how quickly the global media’s news interest moved away.

In the long term the local journalists need to be empowered to ask the right questions and go in search of answers.