As American journalist Clarissa Ward walks through a Yangon marketplace, a passing man briefly turns to her before walking on.
“We want democracy,” he says.
“I understand,” she replies, before addressing the camera: “a man just told me ‘we want democracy’…. but he was too scared to stop and talk.” No kidding.
Later she interviews a young woman, trembling with fear as she tells of children being shot dead by the military.
“I don’t want you to get in trouble,” Ward tells the woman, who runs away down the street at the end of the interview. “I don’t want you to get arrested, OK?”
She was arrested, along with 10 others who spoke with Ward during CNN’s junta-approved press tour last month. The report was widely criticised as unproductive, orientalist, and dangerous. But it’s nothing new.
Burmese-American journalist Aye Min Thant said the report exemplified a strain of “celebrity-driven, parachute journalism that serves no purpose other than chasing higher ratings.”
Parachute Journalism
While international reporting was formerly done by teams of expert journalists permanently embedded in foreign bureaus, it is now mostly conducted on a fly-in fly-out basis, in response to particular events. This is, often disparagingly, referred to as ‘parachute journalism’.
Oftentimes, the parachuting journalist has no particular expertise on the destination country, and the resulting coverage is superficial and based on ignorant generalisations. Lacking the know-how of a local or an old-fashioned regional expert, the parachuting journalist often relies upon the work of ‘fixers’ to produce their piece.
Often journalists themselves, fixers are locals who perform a wide range of logistical and editorial duties for the parachuting journalist, from translating to organising transport and finding sources. Although they bear the brunt of the danger posed by reporting within conflict zones and repressive regimes, their work often goes uncredited and unrecognized.
In this context, there have been increasing calls for journalists in the Global South to tell their own stories.
Are foreign correspondents obsolete?
In short, no.
It is true that international reporting is a problematic field. As journalist Priyanka Borpujari has said, the idea of the foreign correspondent “has long been synonymous with whiteness, maleness, and imperialism—journalists fly in from North America, Europe, and Australia to cover the poverty and wars of the non-Western world.”
This should change. But we shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Rightly or wrongly, mainstream audiences identify more readily with home-grown reporters. Foreign correspondents can therefore act as a vital link between different cultures and countries, a more important task than ever in our increasingly globalised and polarised world.
While Western hegemony is the root cause of many issues in international reportage (and of many of the conflicts subject to that reportage), it also means that Western journalists and news organisations tend to have more resources, larger audiences, and the freedom to report safely.
But to whom much is given, much will be required.
What is best practice in international journalism?
Australian-British journalist John Pilger, well-known for his anti-imperialist politics, actively confronts orientalist and imperialists myths in his journalism.
In his documentary on the Cambodian Genocide, Year Zero, he puts the ruin of Cambodia in the context of US military intervention in the region (“the genocide of Pol Pot…. was begun by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger,”) and communicates the loss of life in terms readily understood by a UK audience (“proportionately, it’s Birmingham, Manchester, and London – exterminated.”)
The film resulted in an upswell of support for the Cambodian people, raised 45 million dollars in spontaneous donations, and put political pressure on the British government to delegitimise the Cambodian regime.
Of course, Western coverage of foreign news often falls short of this ideal and lapses into tired and harmful Orientalist tropes.
An outside perspective can undoubtedly be useful, but not when it is the only perspective, and not where it is held up as the paragon of objectivity, to the exclusion of local perspectives.
The best solution would be for new organisations to bring local journalists into the fold and employ them directly – as journalists, not just fixers. If fixers must be used, they should receive the credit and compensation they deserve, including bylines.
The value of the local perspective must be recognized, and people must be empowered to tell their own stories. Investing in local voices is a matter of journalistic rigour and quality, not mere political correctness. As Borjupari notes, when Western writers have a monopoly over non-Western stories, “[t]he result is a glut of predictable and monotonous news pieces about rape in India and war in El Salvador.”
Bringing diverse perspectives to bear on stories can only make them better, and modern technology makes collaboration with local journalists easier than ever.
So what are we waiting for?
Featured photo: Screenshot from Ward’s misfired Myanmar visit.
Not only should we be employing and adequately compensating local fixers as journalists but we should definitely have in place processes in which we can safely and quickly get these people out of a country when their life might be endangered by collaboration with local news outlets.
Granted some fixers might not have intentions to be the face of a story so negotiations with each group of people needs to be put in place as early as possible.
Thanks for this article, Sam!
It’s still a wonder to me how journalists are being subjected to parachute journalism because it often results to inaccuracy and just like what happened in Myanmar with Ward, it has lead to an arrest of a person she interviewed.
I was talking to one of our classmates one time about how journalists must empower voices of the minorities and they responded to me with this situation. What lacked was educating one’s self as Journalists. If you were an international correspondent, it is best to learn what is the actual situation. Protecting the minorities is as important as telling their stories too.
News should coincide with the 3c’s, I believe. It should be clear, concise, and correct and I feel like these values get lost with Parachute Journalism.
Thank you for this piece Sam. It does seem bizarre that news organisations still parachute in caucasian/western journalists to be the voice of issues that affect foreign cultures so far removed from their own. It is an archaic practice that really does not have a place in modern journalism anymore. I do understand that it may help white audiences to relate – but this excuse puts whiteness as the priority in telling these stories – when really the voices of the locals who call the country home should be the ones that are platformed and prioritised. Finding local journalists may involve more time and work for news organisations, but it is undoubtedly worth the effort and incredibly important, in my opinion. Journalists could still visit the country to support local journalists to produce big stories, but they should not be a feature of the story. Parachute journalism is really a disservice to the people who are being affected by the issues the journalists are reporting on and supposedly trying to help with their coverage.
Really great article, Sam! I learned a lot from reading your piece, and from listening to your talk on the topic. A really insightful look into the history and problems of foreign correspondents and parachute journalism.
I definitely agree with the need to put more support (and accreditation) to local fixers, if we are to really move forward with where we’re currently at with fly-in-fly-out journos. Whether it’s egotism or reputation that reduces the fixers’ input, who knows…but a local voice with local knowledge is so much more powerful than a PTC from a (usually blandly white) reporter.
I listened to an interview with The Age’s dep. ed. Michael Bachelard about the future of foreign correspondents, and he hinted that there may be a stronger focus on freelance foreign correspondence. A limiting and detrimental (but perhaps more financially viable) outlook?
The benefits of employing a local journalist over a parachute journalist to tell local stories not only ensures stories are told accurately with local knowledge, and is far more ethically sound, but surely it is more economically viable too? We know that news orgs are under more financial pressure than than ever – With modern technology at our disposal it makes little sense to pay for a journalist + crew to fly in and out again when you can pay local journos who are able to send information and footage so easily. So what are we waiting for? Is it trust? News orgs already use local journalists as ‘fixers’. Maybe it’s just plain arrogance – The belief that Western storytellers can do a better job. Here’s hoping there isn’t too many more CNN/Clarissa Ward episodes before that attitude is let go.
Damn insightful here Sam! As someone who would love to work overseas, it was very helpful.
I really like the idea of technology empowering local journalists/voices. Twitter probably the best current example but I reckon we can do better. Clubhouse? (lol)
There was a NYT pod the other day ‘Nine days in Gaza’ where a Palestinian woman (Rahf Hallaq) wasn’t happy about the reporting of her storytelling. I follow her on Twitter and she slammed the team at The Daily.
“As usual we have western media changing history and twisting facts,” she said.
Agree with previous comments here – if journalists are simply dropped into conflicts/events without sufficient knowledge they will surely miss important details and context when reporting.
IJNet seem to offer some cool workshops/collaborations for journalists across the world. I havent done any but I liked the look of some of the stuff they had on offer.
What a great piece Sam!!
I agree, there needs to be more support for local journalists to ensure accurate, cost effective and reliable reporting.
Journalist Clarissa Ward demonstrates a white reporter having a lack in fundamental understanding of the culture and history of the location reporting in.
Parachute journalists who do not stick around long enough to acquire the necessary background for a story or to follow up on and events repercussions can sometimes have broader consequences, like decontextualised coverage that is driven more by incidents than by a broader trend. I feel there is less pressure to consider the impact of their reporting or to correct their mistakes, as they typically return home after they finish reporting their story/stories. For American journalist, Clarissa Ward, this results in shallow stories.
I agree with Olivia’s opinion. Locals should be the main feature of the story and prioritised. Time needs to be used to find local journalists in countries for news organisations. Perhaps journalists can still visit the country to produce big stories, but they should not feature in the story.
I really enjoyed reading your article Sam, learnt a lot! I especially loved the line – “Investing in local voices is a matter of journalistic rigour and quality, not mere political correctness”.
It is such a shame that Australian and western newspapers have cut back on funding foreign correspondents over recent years, due to all the economic pressures. When correspondents can be stationed in a country for an extended period, they have time to familiarize themselves with the culture, build connections with fixers and the community, learn about differing perspectives, and maybe even start to learn the language. By doing so, correspondents can report back with stories that better reflect the realities on the ground. Importantly, in places that are more repressive, correspondents can better understand the workings of the governments and be able to set boundaries in terms of how far they can go without putting their sources at risk.
You’re so right, in this increasingly globalised and polarised world we need more correspondents to provide links between different cultures in the hope that stereotypes and barriers between societies can be broken down. For these reasons, I hope to see more investment in this field of journalism.
Such a great read, Sam. “The idea of the foreign correspondent has long been synonymous with whiteness, maleness, and imperialism.” That gave me chills! Parachute journalism is a problem, and clear, effective reporting can be blocked by imperialism and the white saviour mentality. But I hear your point on audiences connecting with local-grown reporters. Can we put more effort into getting Australians with more diverse cultural backgrounds reporting on their own countries? Elias Clure with the ABC was fantastic when reporting on Black Lives Matter – gave an insight no white reporter would have been able to. This seems to me to be the solution.