Public Defence: Marte Høiby

This thesis presents an inquiry into the threats and dangers facing journalists working in conflict areas. It places a particular focus on the nature and effects of antipress violence and seeks to develop knowledge that may contribute to improving the safety of journalists. 

Through interviews with more than a hundred conflict reporters and editors in seven countries – Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, the Philippines, Tunisia, Uganda, and Norway – I have built my arguments on the perceptions and experiences of individuals working in the field. Through a more in-depth investigation of the situation for conflict reporters in the Philippines, and a collaborative research project with international fellow researchers investigating similar issues in Afghanistan (Mitra, 2017) and Venezuela (Garrido, 2018), the significance of contextual factors for safety became ever more evident. My participation in the field – in seminars and discussions with journalists, and in roundtable meetings, in addition to my role as instructor in safety trainings and workshops in different countries – has also contributed to the realisation that sensitivity towards, and awareness of, contextual and local structures is fundamental.

Guided by Critical Realist philosophy and Grounded Theory methodology, I have sought to explore and explain how threats and dangers differ, how journalists and editors try to protect themselves and how safety concerns influence their journalistic practice. The methodology consisted of sequences of data gathering and analysis, and as such the articles were produced and published over the entire research period; about one or two each year. The first sequence was a general inquiry into the overarching question of the project – to explore and partly explain a phenomenon and its impact on those affected by it. 

This first set of data revealed certain patterns and concepts of interest. These were clear enough to suggest new paths forward where further research could potentially reveal more. In practical terms, these concepts were a) that journalists and editors experience reduced access to conflict hotspots; b) perceived gender differences in threats and safety measures; c) perceived differences in threats towards local and non-local journalists; and, d) differences in threats depending on context and the medium used. These leads created the foundation for the continuation of the study.

Thus, recognising that threats to journalists in conflict zones are context dependent, I have analysed a spectrum of variables across the individual, routine, organisational, extra-media and societal levels outlined in Shoemaker and Reese’s hierarchy of influences model (2014). It is the levels in this model that have been most useful for my purposes, not placing undue emphasis on any suggested (or debated) hierarchy among them. Although journalists and editors cannot always influence the context they operate within, it is vital that they are aware of the realms in which they can, in fact, make an impact with short-term interventions – which I argue is at the individual, routine practices and media-organisational levels. 

At the extra-media and social systems levels, the journalists and editors can educate themselves and get involved with organisations working to safeguard their interests. The five articles in this thesis each consider issues related to safety and threats at these different levels, in total indicating that antipress violence is a particular concern that hits broadly, across all levels of society. In Chapter 6, I present a more overarching and comprehensive discussion of the field, assessing these levels in a more cohesive system.

The theoretical contribution of the thesis as a whole is a theorisation of the phenomenon of antipress violence. This work is not exhaustive nor complete, but it offers some explanations. A theory should offer more than a presentation of a set of findings; it requires an explanation of a phenomenon and related concepts and phenomena (Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p. 22). Additionally, it should be useful. With a systematic categorisation of threats and dangers facing journalists in conflict zones, I have directed particular focus at antipress violence and hostilities facing journalists in the course of doing their job. The objective of this exercise is to illuminate the differences in threats to journalists and contribute to knowledge, so that our social understanding of antipress violence and potential intervention to improve journalist safety can benefit from this heightened awareness in the future.

On the social level, UN resolutions and an action plan on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity are already in place, while on the extra-media level NGOs are campaigning and making noise to get journalists out of captivity while relentlessly counting the deaths of others. On the media organisation level, journalists and editors increasingly acknowledge the value of training and safety equipment. However, if mission and safety conditions are so dependent on individual traits and practice, organisational routines and local variations in social systems (or lack thereof), it means more research and more intervention is still needed in order to meet the requirements and costs of safer journalism.