 |
What is "the news" about? International conflicts and communal wars. Religious upheavals and racial disorders. Political debates and family disputes. Arrests, shootouts, strikes, layoffs, feuds, fistfights...and lawsuits (always lawsuits). From page one to the gossip column and the sports page, the news is frequently about human conflict.
Well-meaning people sometimes ask, "Why can't journalists report the good news, too?" The answer is: They do! But reports of successful peace or contract negotiations, of programs that promise to alleviate crime or racial unrest, sensible political compromises, acts af personal sacrifice, and family reconciliations are also about people in conflict. The good news simply focuses' on the conflict's settlement, prevention, or
resolution rather than on its continuance or escalation.
To be a journalist, then, is to be a conflict specialist. Many reporters and editors may be surprised to hear themselves described this way, but journalists spend much of their time and energy describing and interpreting the behavior of individuals and groups in conflict. They are expected not only to get the
facts straight -- a difficult enough project where one contestant's "facts" are another's "myths" -- but to put diverse struggles in context: to make sense of their origins, history, dynamics, and prospects for resolution. At the same time, news organizations expect their employees to write to deadline, to report on groups or situations with which they may not be very familiar, avoid bias, and make their observations clear to the
inexpert reader or viewer. Little wonder that journalists sometimes fall short of satisfying all these demands.
Teachers and practitioners in the field of conflict analysis and resolution are also conflict specialists. They devote their energies to theorizing about human conflict, analyzing specific conflict situations, and helping warring parties to resolve their differences. The academics, generally speaking, are free not only of the "negative" pressures of deadline and assignment, but of the "positive" pressure to make their ideas available and useful to the public. Little wonder that they frequently end up talking mainly to themselves.
This handbook is an attempt to bridge the gap between the academic and journalistic approaches to the interpretation of conflict. It demonstrates how significant ideas about the causes, dynamics, and termination of social conflict can improve news reporting and commentary and enrich the journalistic enterprise. It also suggests ways in which academics can learn from journalists.
Although its primary focus is theoretical, the handbook addresses many questions of practical interest to working reporters and editors. For example: How do theories of conflict influence a reporter's jUdgment about relevant sources of information? How do these theories determine the kinds of questions journalists ask? How does a reporter using a particular framework know that he or she is getting a better story than the competition? And how can a reporter's knowledge of conflict resolution processes change the way he or she covers a story? In order to discuss these questions concretely, each section of the handbook includes questions for reporters, followed by a brief illustration demonstrating how the theoretical material might be used in covering a specific conflict. In the first chapter, "Journalism and Conflict Resolution," we analyze the roles journalists play in changing people's attitudes towards conflict and, sometimes, in influencing the outcomes of disputes. Chapter II, "Thinking About Conflict," discusses how conscious and unconscious theories shape the ways we perceive and report on social conflicts. Chapters III, IV, and V, on paradigms of conflict, describe the leading theoretical frameworks used in interpreting conflict, emphasizing ideas that may help to explain major stories now in the news.
The sixth chapter, "Conflict Management and Resolution Processes," outlines the key concepts and processes now being used as alternatives to traditional methods of settling conflicts. Chapter VII, "A Concluding Note," converts some of the materials discussed earlier into a list of "do's and don't's"
for journalists. Finally, an Appendix, "Conflict Analysis and Resolution Resources," lists bibliographical and human resourcesthat are available to journalists seeking to understand specific types of conflict.
This study was inspired by a conference held in April 1990 at Airlie House outside Washington, D.C., involving some eighty print and broadcast journalists, conflict analysts and conflict resolution specialists. Called Interpreting Violent Conflict, it was co-sponsored by the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution of George Mason University, American University's School of communications, the Washington Chapter of the National Association of Journalists, the Black Press Institute, and the John T. and Catherine MacArthur Foundation. A summary of the conference proceedings is available from the George Mason University Bookstore, Fairfax, Virginia 22030.
The publication of this handbook was made possible by the generosity of the National Institute for Dispute Resolution (NIDR) in Washington, D.C., a key institution in the conflict resolution field. NIDR's patient assistance is most gratefully acknowledged. The authors also appreciate the insightful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript made by faculty members and graduate students at the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution.
Much of the Appendix to this handbook was originally prepared by Frank o. Blechman, Gretchen Reinhardt, and the late Dr. James H. Laue. We are grateful for their permission to use this material. Thanks also to Lisa Schirch-Elias for her work in supplementing the Appendix and to Jerri Shevlin for her valuable editorial assistance.
Richard E. Rubenstein
Johannes Botes
Frank Dukes
John B. Stephens