PJ, ETHICS, AND MARTYRDOM IN N.I.

(Belfast, Northern Ireland)-I’ve had some interesting discussions about whether journalists should use the term “martyr,” but none so engaging as our interchange yesterday at the US Consulate.

In previous seminars in Kashmir and Beirut, journalists told me that they labeled anyone who died fighting Israelis or Indians a martyr. I told them that, to me, using this term puts gasoline on the fire and exacerbates tensions and divisions. 

Here in Belfast, the discussion centered around those who self identify as martyrs as they commit some heinous act like blowing themselves up. Should the press call them martyrs, since that’s what they call themselves? Several attendees said yes, that it’s journalists’ obligation to use people’s self identification. I’m not so sure, I said. What if the bomber called himself a hero? Should the press repeat that label?

We also had a vibrant talk about false equivalencies, and the pitfalls they pose for journalists. This topic is especially fraught here, given Northern Ireland’s history.

My presentation introduced peace journalism and reconciliation, and showed their connection to traditional journalism ethics. One participant was skeptical, saying that peace journalism “doesn’t exist” and is merely good journalism. I replied that PJ is grounded in good journalism, but is transcendent since it includes suggestions that media give a voice to the voiceless, discuss solutions, and offer counternarrative storytelling.

My visit here this week is sponsored by the U.S. Consulate and U.S. Embassy in London. It continues with two trauma reporting workshops on Thursday in Derry and Friday in Belfast.