The concept of “embedded journalism” existed in the media for years in one form or another under different names until the 2003 Gulf War when the US invaded Iraq and it was clearly defined as we know it today.
In current parlance, “embedded journalism” refers to news reporters being attached to military units involved in armed conflicts. While the term could be applied to many historical interactions between journalists and military personnel, it first came to be used in the media coverage of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.”
The concept comes from the word “embed” that means “[of an object] fixed firmly and deeply inside a surrounding mass; implanted.” Embedded journalism was able to bring us perhaps the first “live” television war as we watched in our living rooms armoured personnel carriers roll into the Iraqi desert, fighter jets scramble off warships and soldiers dodge bullets while jumping over dead bodies, etc.
Beyond the military, however, the concept has also come to be applied in elections whereby reporters are attached to leading political parties or candidates so as to get readers and viewers the “inside” story. Reporters indeed do pull off exclusive stories that could only have been possible because he/she is implanted in the camp and breathes the same air with the candidates.
But like it showed during the US-Iraq war, embedded journalism is a double-edged sword. While reporters get access to exclusive footage, interviews and breaking news that they bring to audiences in real time, their direct association with news sources and news subjects tends to blunt their objectivity with the result that stories tend to be one-sided and lacking in many basics. This is only a natural outcome of the camaraderie that comes with sharing spaces, fears, light moments, etc. Advertisement
Exclusive story, ‘Bobi Wine explains queries on age, academic papers’ published on August 31. The exclusivity ahead of a press conference the next day was a winner! While the story brought out hitherto unknown information about the politician from “the horse’s own mouth”, it did not ask questions about some of the claims in light of the controversy surrounding his age and education by way of double checking with alternative authority, schools attended or debunking generalities.
The story also did not attempt to reach out to his challenger, lawyer Male Mabirizi, to respond in real time – even if it is just to say “we shall meet in court”.
In the end, the story turned out to be a monologue, just like the one-sided cameras in the Gulf War showing US troops winning battles without firing a shot!
The debate within the industry is how to reap the benefits of “embedded journalism” while protecting the integrity and professionalism of the embedded journalists and media platforms. Many will argue that this is a classic case of having your cake and eating it too! Perhaps!
But this is where the editor comes in. From his or her vantage point away from the frontline, the editor “mediates” the content before sharing it with the audience. The editor should, therefore, fix the gaps, ask questions, bring on board another reporter if need be to shield the original author, etc. Most important for NMG editors is to refer to the editorial policy guidelines that say, inter alia:
“News stories which come from sources outside the Group will not be accepted at their face value. Background information, names, ages, titles, contrary points of view (if appropriate) will be thoroughly ascertained before a story is submitted for publication. Where further depth is required – either explanation or history – this will always be provided so that news coverage is never untruthful, willfully misleading, superficial, unbalanced or incomplete…”
Do you have a hot story or scandal you would like us to publish, please reach us through [email protected] Videos and pictures can be sent to +256 726071828 on WhatsApp.
