Can conflict and war solve the problem through peace journalism?

by Daniel Syah

In my opinion, to solve conflict and war problem through peace journalism is all based on how the journalists write or show positives and negatives actions both parties and they cannot be bias. Peace journalism promises two key benefits for those concerned with objectivity in journalism, it aims to avoid and counteract the persistent bias of valuing violence and violent parties. Secondly, as all journalism must in some way appeal to the values of their audiences, for those who value the promotion of peace and social justice over violence, it provides a practical methodology. Some opponents characterise peace journalism as "activist" news writing that, while being socially engaged to promote peace, is unlike mainstream objective, or balanced, news coverage that seeks to remain impartial or above the fray.

Furthermore, many international negotiation experts and peace practitioners note the importance of non-violent confrontation and the equalisation of power, before effective negotiation and dialogue between parties can take place. Through reporting on grassroots and local voices for peace, the power of these voices is increased, as they become reality checkers for often contradictory statements from elite representatives involved in violence. Through this non-violent ideational confrontation, audiences and parties to conflict may be more able to negotiate their own meaning, outside fixed elite narratives. Peace journalism aims to retain the role of observer in reporting conflict, rather than functioning like war journalism, which intervenes in conflict to increase the influence of violent actors and violent actions. Peace journalism, by presenting "anomalous" local perspectives which contradict violence-exacerbating war journalism, may help to expose these violent group’s attempts to fix and naturalise meaning and to take advantage of this meaning to promote their violence. Indeed, exploration of new types of relationships between Afghanistan locals and the international community, contradicts assertions made at the time, with the support of war journalism, by insurgents and the US government, that the negative effects of foreign occupation could only be ended with their violent expulsion, or that 40,000 more combat troops were the most critical component for sustainable peace in Afghanistan.

Last but not least, the minimum that peace journalism offers to practitioners is an ethical framework for the production of their reports and stories. Also, not to take for granted the hope and positivity that peace journalism brings to the communities in conflict zones, where media is as polarized as the reality they live in. It is also a hope for the journalists themselves, who many of them struggled to keep the principles of journalism profession away from political and commercial agendas, and keep therefore their integrity without risking their jobs. Peace journalism reminds them that they are doing a good work, and thus playing a positive role in their societies by being ethical, responsible and unbiased.