During her lengthy career as a journalist Petra Tabeling has had a chance to report from zones affected by conflicts and natural disasters for both radio and print publications, including WDR and Deutsche Welle. She also used to head the American Dart Center for Trauma and Journalism’s office in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Today, she continues trying to help her colleagues manage the psychological consequences of working in the world’s hot spots through special training sessions. Below, Petra gives her take on the way media coverage influences our willingness to reach out and help the victims. 
 

Lessons in happiness 

I began my journalistic career in the 1990s by reporting from post-conflict regions like Northern Ireland. I always thought that I understood my role as a journalist who reports on social injustice, hardships or political turmoil. But one of my assignments proved especially taxing. 

In 2001 I was working on a story about HIV-infected children in Romania and Eastern Europe, having spent several weeks at different hospices. I was angry at the cruel policies of the Nicolae Ceausescu regime that resulted in so many innocent victims, angry at the media’s blindness and the astounding poverty. I believed that I had to do something, to help somehow, not just to inform people about the situation. But these children, who were facing imminent death, taught me something very important: to take pleasure in today. I called that story “Children of Happiness.” The least I could do for them, as a journalist, was to speak of their existence in these awful circumstances and to tell people how they can donate to help these kids. That was progress. 

The reporter's dilemma 

Should we help the protagonists of our stories, or is it better to continue doing our own jobs? 

It’s a deeply personal question for every journalist, but the feeling of guilt is almost inevitable no matter what we choose.

The European refugee crisis has once again brought this issue to the fore. A public forum was recently held in Berlin, and many of the speakers — German correspondents and photographers who work in Greece and Hungary — spoke openly of this dilemma. None of them valued their potential scoops over helping the people. They helped migrants get food, water and other necessities because at that point, humanitarian aid had not reached the refugee camps.

But there are journalists who think otherwise. They don’t pretend to be on the staff of humanitarian missions because they wouldn’t be able to replace them anyway. Instead, they are convinced that a reporter’s duty is to transmit information from the scene and to do it as professionally as possible. We discuss these and other difficult questions during our seminars.

Gruesome images

What effect does our work have on the world? For an average viewer, the flood of shocking images from scenes of tragedies and disasters often produces feelings of helplessness and resignation. We are often left thinking that as a whole, the world is a dangerous place, and there is nothing we can do about it. It reminds me of the Roman proverb that in times of war, “homo homini lupus est” (“a man is a wolf to man”).

There’s certainly nothing new about this, but the difference is that before, we didn’t have such easy access to so many scary images, regardless of our willingness or unwillingness to face reality. And let’s not forget that terrorists also make extensive use of social media to advance their causes.  

It’s quite possible to manage this problem as long as we recognize its importance and try to ensure that our reporting is not entirely dominated by casualties, but also incorporates stories of those who overcome tragedies and survive. 

“Bloody headlines”

Journalists save lives when they inform society about dangerous situations, but it’s also important to think about the way our reports affect those who are suffering and those whose lives will continue after the report is finished. The problem is that as journalists, we are often chasing a “bloody headline” without giving much thought to what happens to the community afterward and how lives there will change a few years later. We have to teach reporters to think empathically. My colleagues and I have been trying to do this for years. 

It’s very important to make the victim feel in control of the situation, because survivors often feel helpless. A callous and detached approach to the victim’s feelings may aggravate their condition and even lead to repeated trauma. Tell the person you’re interviewing what the story is going to be about, let him or her know which images will be broadcast. Show them how it will look and remind them that they can say “stop” at any point in the interview.

Active kindness

Many of our actions depend on our upbringing, education and the existence of positive role models. It’s important to find the right balance between delicate sympathy and what looks like pity when helping others. But don’t just limit yourself to passive compassion, that’s unlikely to change anybody’s life.

The media plays an important role here. Journalists have to report on more stories with positive role models who can convince audiences that anyone is capable of doing good deeds.

On behalf of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide and in gratitude to their saviors, the Aurora Prize for Awakening Humanity will be granted annually to an individual whose actions have had an exceptional impact on preserving human life and advancing humanitarian causes. The Aurora Prize Laureate will be honored with a $100,000 grant. In addition, that individual will have the unique opportunity to continue the cycle of giving by selecting an organization that inspired their work to receive a $1,000,000 award. The inaugural Aurora Prize ceremony will take place in Yerevan, Armenia, on April 24, 2016.