Al Jazeera Journalism Review

Hate speech 1
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN: A group of attorneys take part in a protest against cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims during a peaceful demonstration, on February 15, 2006 in Islamabad, Pakistan. Speakers, representing mostly moderate Muslims, condemned the cartoons and the western media that published them for fomenting hate between the Islamic world and the West and sparking riots across Pakistan. [John Moore/Getty Images]

How to avoid stirring up hate through your reporting

In part two of our series on how the media can propagate hate speech, we look at ways that journalists can ensure their work is balanced and objective, to avoid this.


When dealing with controversial topics, discrimination and incitement to hatred can only be avoided if journalists are careful to maintain professionalism and keep to the rules of ethical coverage. As long as they do this, journalists can be safe in the knowledge that their coverage will not cause any harm. 

“It is obvious to anyone familiar with Libyan media that outlets are biased in favour of particular parties to the conflict,” says Libyan journalist Ismail Al Giritli. “They rely on sources from their preferred party, and use language glorifying one side and demonising the other. The same applies to the lists of guests and analysts interviewed, the adverts and commercials broadcast during the breaks, the titles of news pieces, the questions asked, the issues presented and the topics discussed on discussion programmes. 

Read more

Part One - How the media can promote hate speech 
Opinion - The media must stop obsessing about 'economic migrants'


“And the correspondents of a given media outlet always operate in the areas controlled by the group their employers support. Bias also appears in how mental images are drawn for the public. Outlets neglect to define the warring parties and their geographical, ideological and political affiliations, and use images and background music promoting not just bias but broader social division. Many journalists and media officials show their bias for specific parties and use the space provided to them by social media to openly declare these biases.”

Lies and statistics

A good example of bias in the media was when a local girl was murdered in Spain by Moroccan immigrants. Ayman Al Zubeir, Madrid Correspondent for Al Jazeera, explains: “The Spanish far right was quick to exploit the crime to incite the population against the Moroccan community, using incorrect information in order to influence the electorate. One of the lies circulated by the right was a story that 70 percent of those detained in sexual harassment cases have foreign citizenship.”

But statistics from official Spanish bodies like the Instituto Nacional de Estadistica and the General Council of the Judiciary actually show the opposite. In 2017, Spanish courts handed down prison terms to 2,280 people accused of sexual assault, whose nationalities break down as follows: 1,705 were Spanish; 184 were from the Americas; 167 were from the EU; 137 from Africa; 58 from Asia; and 27 were from Eastern Europe.

Avoid hate speech 2
VALENCIA, SPAIN: Far-right wing protesters hold Spanish flags and a banner reading 'We don't want refugees' as they demonstrate against the arrival of migrants in the Aquarius ship at the port of Valencia on June 16, 2018. [Pablo Blazquez Dominguez/Getty Images]

“These numbers show that 70 percent of these crimes are committed by Spanish citizens,” says Al Zubeir. “But, despite this data, more attention is given in some media outlets to crimes committed by Moroccan immigrants. This can lead to incidents of racist violence, as in some towns in Catalonia, where refuge centers for underage migrants have been attacked.”

So how can journalists ensure they report the facts in a balanced way, which does not lead to more mis-placed resentment against migrants and refugees?

Step 1: Story planning 

Building up a base of knowledge about the incident 

Before working out sources and writing a news story, a journalist should carry out thorough research into the issue he or she will be working on and gather all available information from specialised sources (reports, statistics, academic studies etc). 

The following are some major platforms that provide journalists with reports and studies on the topics of their stories: 

Google Scholar: A search engine from Google that specialises in academic studies, making it possible to access various studies published in peer-reviewed journals as well as reports giving journalists a deeper understanding of the stories they work on. 

Microsoft Academic: A similar platform to Google Scholar containing approximately 227 thousand research papers as well as an academic CV search feature, helping journalists to identify expert sources. 

UN databases: This database includes all reports issued by the UN and its legal and human rights arms as well as all treaties, agreements and statistics released by the UN itself and by member states.

The Verification Handbook: Published by the European Journalism Center (EJC), this handbook provides tools and techniques allowing journalists to search the internet more broadly and helping them verify reports & information.

BERLIN, GERMANY: Neo-Nazis and other right-wing activists march near the chancellory under the banner "We for Berlin - We for Germany" to protest against German Chancellor Angela Merkel's refugee policy on May 7, 2016. [Photo by Carsten Koall/Getty Images]

Selecting sources 

Look at all sides of the story and select people or organisations that have been affected. For example, in a story about the effect of refugees on job opportunities in a particular country, concerned parties include: refugees, local authorities, unions and workers’ associations, local residents, employers, and economic experts. The absence of any of these parties means the story will not be objective and will be biased towards one side’s narrative over the other, meaning the story is more likely to constitute bias.

This story headline attributing high rental prices to Syrian refugees published in the Jordanian newspaper, Al Ghad, used the narrative of one side of the story (property owners) as its main source without presenting the opinions of any other relevant parties, such as Syrian refugees themselves or economic experts. This means it takes a particular direction in its reporting.

Al Ghad Newspaper
The headline of this piece published in the Jordanian newspaper, Al Ghad, states "Syrian refugees doubled the prices of rental apartments."

The most important sources that a journalist should refer to when putting together a story are: 

  • Parties directly affected by and affecting the story (citizens, refugees, workers, property-owners, traders etc).
  • Official bodies relevant to the story (mayors, relevant government ministries, etc). The story has to be within their jurisdiction.
  • Experts (experts are expected to give methodical evaluations without personal opinions). 
  • NGOs or semi-governmental organisations (unions, civil society organisations, rights organisations etc). 
  • Raw data (reports, studies, statistics). 
  • User-generated content.

Verifying information 

Some sources may give mistaken or inflammatory information. Journalists should not publish this information as fact without verification, even if they state its source clearly in the story.

Professionalism requires us to cross-reference it with other sources and present all of the information together in the story. This will encourage the public to question how accurate the information provided by a particular source is and compare it with other sources appearing in the story. 

GOSLAR, GERMANY: Supporters of the far-right "Die Rechte" political party gather to protest against the welcome policy towards foreign migrants on August 29, 2015 in Goslar, Germany. [Nigel Treblin/Getty Images]

Open-source content

The vast quantities of content made available on social media sites (“user-generated content”) are an important source of information that journalists can use in parallel with traditional sources. But despite its importance, open-source content can be fabricated and used to promote lies and rumours that may constitute hate speech. 

Journalists who use information from social media have to verify and fact-check this information. We have already mentioned a few relevant sources: the News Verification Guidebook, Finding the Truth Amongst the Fakes, and the EJC’s Verification Handbook.

The Ethical Journalism Network (EJN) suggests that journalists always ask themselves the following questions when dealing with information taken from social media:

  • Have I corroborated the origin including location, date and time of images and content that I am using? 
  • Have I confirmed that this material is the original piece of content (ie not modified or abridged)?
  • Have I verified the social media profiles to avoid use of fake information? 
  • Is the account holder known, and has it been a reliable source in the past? 
  • Have I asked direct questions of the content provider to verify the provenance of the information? 
  • Are there similar posts or content elsewhere online?

For example, a clip from a video of a Friday sermon given at a Saudi mosque in January 2014, in which the speaker asks non-Saudis not to attend prayers, was shared widely on social media. The clip implied that the preacher was discriminating against non-Saudis. In this case, journalists should have watched the whole video, which shows that the clip was taken out of context and that the preacher was in fact criticising racism by acting out an example.

A clip from a video of a Friday sermon given at a Saudi mosque in January 2014. The title states: "Only for Saudis." A trimmed one-minute clip was shared widely on social media. The clip implied that the preacher was discriminating against non-Saudis but the full video shows that the clip was taken out of context and that the preacher was in fact criticising racism by acting out an example.

Important questions to ask yourself

  • Why should I cover this story? Summarise each reason then evaluate it according to its importance to the public as compared to other stories you could cover. 
  • How is this story expected to benefit the public? 
  • What aspects of the story are absent from the media? Try to find a new approach to the story. 
  • What is the worst way the story could possibly be produced? Think of an unprofessional and unobjective way the story could be approached. Why would it be unprofessional and unobjective? Analyse in order to avoid. 
  • What is the ideal way to cover the story? Think about the best form the story could possibly take, even if it would be difficult for you to achieve in reality because of limitations. Try to come as close to it as possible. 
  • What are the sources I should use to achieve balance in the story? 
  • Have I conducted enough research and informed myself sufficiently about the various aspects of the story, allowing me to understand all of its different dimensions? 
  • Have I considered the sources’ individual circumstances and peculiarities? Try to understand their circumstances in order to ask them appropriate questions while respecting the specific nature of every case. 

See our guidebook on covering refugee stories.

Avoid hate speech 3
Members of the media are seen in Cellardyke Harbour on April 6, 2006 in Cellardyke, Scotland. [Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images]

Step 2: Producing the story 

Always make sure you ask questions appropriate to each source or side. When interviewing or following up authoritative personal accounts that may have a real influence, think about whether these statements constitute incitement or discrimination or encourage hatred or violence. 

Only use them if there is a clear editorial justification, and make sure you contextualise them and include responses from other affected parties. Do not produce your piece from behind a desk. Go down to the scene of the events to see what is going on for yourself. Do not rely only on your sources’ accounts. 

Look at existing news pieces on the topic you want to write about. Work out what aspects of the story have been ignored or given incomplete or unprofessional coverage, and try to draw them out in your own story. Make sure to evaluate content, whether statements, pictures or video clips. Think about the possible consequences of using it. Make sure that you understand the local society and the cultural, social and religious context. 

Important questions to ask yourself

  • Have I informed sources of the nature of the story? Have they given their consent to be quoted or to appear?
  • Have I been balanced in the sources that I have chosen? Have I given them the right to comment on information concerning them?
  • Were the questions I prepared appropriate to the topic? If the answer is “no”, then come up with more relevant questions and return to the sources. 
  • Did I obtain the information in the story from a range of different sources? Some sources may give you incorrect information or figures in order to serve a particular agenda. Try and cross-reference information as much as possible.

Avoid hate speech 4
ZAATARI, JORDAN: Refugee children surround a journalist at the Zaatari camp for Syrian refugees on January 28, 2018 in Zaatari, Jordan. [Salah Malkawi/ Getty Images]

Step 3: Writing the story 

Having completed steps one and two and started writing your story, you should arrange the different narratives by importance, ensuring an equal distribution of opinions. In some cases the opinion of one party will be based on inaccurate information, and may constitute a kind of incitement against a particular individual or group. Here it is the journalist’s role to respond to these inaccuracies by providing correct information.

Advice for writing an objective story

  • Avoid generalisations and language implying value judgements or stereotyping communities or individuals. 
  • Do not treat information given in official or unofficial reports as unquestioned fact (for journalists, any report should simply be one source among many)
  • Do not draw personal conclusions in your story. 
  • Put your expectations to one side, and avoid stereotypes and prejudices. 
  • Make sure you use objective and value-free language. 
  • Provide minorities with a voice equal to that of the majority. 

Balance information gathered from sources and divide it across the themes of the story without giving one side a louder voice. Some media outlets adopt the perspective of one party, provide no space for those with dissenting opinions to lay out their own position and do not consult experts in order to verify the information given by sources. 

Make sure that the information attributed to different sources lines up with what they have said. Put quotation marks around any expressions that express a value judgement. 

Assess the sensitivity of pictures and information appearing in the story. Make sure they do not contradict professional standards or infringe on the rights of particular individuals or groups. 

Meet with editors to evaluate your story if you feel that there might be an ethical dilemma in its current form, or if it contains information that may be sensitive for some members of the public. 

Avoid hate speech 5
KUZNICE, POLAND: A television journalist reports from a police checkpoint on a road leading to the border to Belarus on November 15, 2021 near Kuznice, Poland, where a migrant crisis has mounted in recent months. [Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images]

Important questions to ask yourself

  • Have I formulated the story objectively? Have I presented different sources’ narratives faithfully?
  • Have I put quotation marks around expressions that express a value judgment and attributed them to the source? 
  • Have I given all sources’ statements similar weight in the story and provided important information from all sides?
  • Have I assessed the statements appearing in the story and the risks associated with publishing them? 
  • Have I used language that may be harmful to a particular community or described them negatively? 
  • Have I avoided any unobjective conclusions or value judgments concerning the story?
  • Have I excluded my personal opinions from the story and distanced myself equally from all parties? 
  • Have I made sure not to include any information that might harm sources or the public? In cases where journalists face the ethical dilemma of deciding which is more important, the publication of the information or the risks associated with it, go back to one of the ethical evaluation models given above.
  • Have I only included important information in my story? Not everything sources say is actually important. Make sure you only include information relevant to the story and its context.
  • Have I only included information that sources have given me permission to use in the story?
  • Have I protected the anonymity of sources who have asked me to do so?

Avoid hate speech 3
Egyptian protesters are pictured on a tablet device during a protest in Tahrir Square in Cairo October 11, 2012. [REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh]

Step four: Ethical evaluation of the story 

Sticking to the principles of objective journalism is not enough to ensure that a journalist does not accidentally engage in discrimination in a story. He or she has ethical responsibilities that must be carefully considered before deciding to publish. 

Journalists often produce stories that seem to conform generally to the rules of journalistic professionalism and objectivity but whose general orientation helps to reinforce speech promoting discrimination or hatred. This might be because of the nature of the sources chosen or the language used, or because of other decisions that give one side a louder voice than others. 

Journalists may reinforce speech promoting discrimination or hatred without meaning to or without realising the consequences of this speech and its effects on the reader. 

A group of European journalists’ associations in Europe called The Ethical Journalism Initiative has made a number of general recommendations relevant to this topic. 

These recommendations are summarised in a list of questions that journalists can ask themselves to help ensure diversity in their stories:

  • What are my own personal assumptions about the people I am reporting on?
  • Am I open to accepting ideas for stories that go beyond my own cultural standpoint?
  • Have I any prejudicial attitude to the issue that might negatively affect the subject of the story? 
  • Are any references to colour, race, or physical appearance in the story relevant to the topic?
  • Have I used correct terminology to describe individuals and their culture?
  • Have I discussed the topic with experienced colleagues familiar with the subject?
  • Have I used different opinions and sources in the story, including those of minorities?
  • Does the story simply follow prevailing attitudes? Have I questioned these attitudes?
  • Have I made sure that the story does not reflect stereotypes?
  • Have I directly considered the needs of those involved in the story?
  • Have I taken into account the effect of the story or the images used on the lives of others?

Journalists document a group of migrants packed tightly onto a small inflatable boat attempting to cross the English Channel near the Dover Strait, the world's busiest shipping lane in September 2020. [Photo by Luke Dray/Getty Images]


Models for ethical evaluation 

There are various different models that can help journalists to make ethical decisions using moral reasoning. Journalists can apply these models to news stories in order to make sure that they are both ethical and professional: 

The SAD formula (situational definition, analysis, decision) 

This model can be subdivided into three stages: 

Situational definition 
  • Describe the facts appearing in the story.
  • Establish the conflicting values and principles in the story – for example, conflicting figures for the same topic or conflicting values.
  • Try to formulate a single ethical question that sums up the ethical dilemma presented by the story.
  • Try to create a discussion with your colleagues concerning the conflicting facts and values within the story.
  • Take account of external factors that might affect the story.
  • Look at what your organisation normally does in similar cases or make use of similar experiences.
  • Establish the parties affected by this ethical decision (you, your colleagues, your sources, society, etc).
  • Take into consideration your own emotional attitude to the decision as opposed to your rational attitude. 
  • Make a final decision.
  • Justify that decision logically in response to possible criticisms.

THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS: A Serbian journalist interviews a supporter of war criminal Ratko Mladic outside the United Nations of International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals building on June 8, 2021 in The Hague, Netherlands. the appeal of former Bosnian Serb military leader Ratko Mladic, sentenced to life for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during the 1992 Bosnian war to 1995 was being heard. (Photo by Pierre Crom/Getty Images)

The Dilemma Method 

This model is based on the creation of a dialogue within the newsroom. A journalist dealing with an ethical dilemma concerning an aspect of a story works with his or her colleagues to produce a consensus decision: 

  1. Introduction: A general introduction is given to familiarise the journalists with the ethical sensitivity of the story and demonstrate the importance of the decision they are going to make. 
  2. Presenting the issue: The journalist presents the facts that he or she has collected (facts only, with no influence from his or her opinion). 
  3. Formulating the ethical question and defining the dilemma: The ethical question that the journalist who has prepared the story wants colleagues to help him or her to answer is laid out in the following form: “Should I [first suggestion], [second suggestion] or [third suggestion]…?” 
  4. Brainstorming: The journalists ask questions about the story and its different aspects and then discuss some general questions, citing previous experiences and similar stories. 
  5. Analysing the dilemma: We begin to analyse the dilemma by comparing it with professional and societal values, the possible response on publication and the parties that may be harmed by each suggestion. 
  6. Beginning to search for alternatives: Here the journalist asks colleagues to think about alternatives to the suggestions he or she initially presented. 
  7. Individual decisions by each journalist: Colleagues submit their individual decisions using pen and paper by answering as follows: a) I believe that the best decision is to (one of the suggestions), because (giving a professional justification of the decision). b) Although this choice may lead to (the potential negative effects), c) this can be avoided by… d) And so (the decision he or she has chosen) is the ethical option that should be taken, given… (professional justifications). 
  8. Opening up discussion: The answers are then collected and colleagues discuss them, with the aim of expanding discussion points in order to look at all aspects of the dilemma and weigh them up against one another in order to reach a consensus decision. 
  9. Summarising conclusions: At the end of the discussion, the team takes a single ethical decision by majority vote. 
  10. Assessing the dilemma: After an ethical decision is made and the story is published in a particular form, the effects of the decision are assessed (positives and negatives) in order to benefit from the experience.

STEPANAKERT, NAGORNO-KARABAKH: Journalists take pictures and video of a crater left by a bomb that fell outside a fire station on October 2, 2020 in Stepanakert, Nagorno-Karabakh. A decades-old conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has reignited in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh, recognized by most countries as part of Azerbaijan, but controlled by ethnic Armenians since a 1994 ceasefire. [Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images]

Important questions to ask yourself

  • If you can’t answer a question decisively, go back to the ethical evaluation methods.
  • What are the possible risks associated with publishing the story? What are the possible benefits?
  • Do I have sufficient professional justification to publish the story? Can I avoid any possible risk?
  • Was serving the public interest my only criterion in assessing the story? If not, what were my other criteria, and did this affect the balance of the story?
  • What is the worst that could happen if this story is published? What is the best that could happen? List the possible negative and then the possible positive outcomes of publishing the story. Try and find ways to forestall the negatives as much as possible. 
  • Will this story lead the target demographic to feel hatred towards a person or group on the basis of their identity?
  • Will the general context in which the story or the headline is being published lead to the creation of an atmosphere of hatred or discrimination towards a given person or group of people on the basis of their identity?
  • Does the story stereotype or misrepresent a person or group based on their identity





An earlier version of this article first appeared in the AJMI publication, Avoiding Discrimination and Hate Speech in Media


More Articles

Reporter’s notebook - analysing the video of a brutal murder

I spent a week watching a sickening video of the Jordanian pilot, Muath al-Kasasbeh, being burned alive by ISIL. Here’s how I set about verifying its contents and how I coped

Jody Fish
Jody Fish Published on: 25 May, 2022
‘Like walking on a tightrope’ - navigating a career as a journalist in Vietnam

THE LONG READ: Through a series of in-depth interviews with journalists in Vietnam, our writer - who remains anonymous for security reasons - paints a picture of censorship and journalists facing fines and even prison for mentioning ‘toxic’ subjects

Al Jazeera Journalism Review Correspondent Published on: 12 May, 2022
‘It takes courage to be a journalist in India’ - charting the collapse of press autonomy

THE LONG READ: With a rising number of journalists in India receiving ‘summons’ from the police and even finding themselves in prison just for doing their jobs, we ask - why has the profession come under so much pressure in recent years?

Abeer Khan Published on: 21 Apr, 2022
Beyond bystanders: Citizen journalism during the Egyptian revolution

A journalist looks back at the founding of RASSD News Network during the Egyptian revolution, which trained and supported ordinary citizens to become journalists

Khaled Faheem
Khaled Faheem Published on: 14 Apr, 2022
How smartphones are changing the face of news journalism

The telegraph transformed the way that newspapers could report the news more than 150 years ago. Now, smartphones are doing the same for TV news organisations

Rokeya Lita Published on: 5 Apr, 2022
‘Not an easy ride’ - the long and winding road to digital journalism in Cameroon

How do you mark yourself as a professional reporter in Cameroon when everyone has a Facebook page and claims to be a ‘journalist’?

Akem Nkwain Published on: 23 Mar, 2022
Examining the imagery of women during wartime

ANALYSIS: Some images of women in Ukraine have gone viral in the past week. But what do these specific images add to the narrative surrounding the Russian invasion and what of the women who don’t fit the media image of the “ideal” female?

Aleeha Zahra Ali Published on: 3 Mar, 2022
‘Heroes’ and ‘worthy’ refugees - the hypocrisy of Western media over Ukraine

While news anchors marvel at how refugees from Ukraine are ‘just like us’ and glorify women taking up Kalashnikovs against Russian invaders, we compare their treatment with that of Syrian and Afghan refugees, and Palestinian resistors

Azraa Muthy Published on: 28 Feb, 2022
Avoiding mistakes in the newsroom - verifying video from external sources

When video of Osama Bin Laden surfaced around the time of the September 11 attacks on New York in 2001, many people questioned its credibility. We examine how Al Jazeera verifies the authenticity of outside materials, much of it produced by 'citizen journalists' 

A picture of the author, Montaser Marai.
Montaser Marai Published on: 15 Feb, 2022
Deploying news teams to dangerous places - what media organisations need to know

Reporting from the heat of battle or covering the tragedy and desolation of a humanitarian disaster can be perilous, but the risks are less if media professionals are prepared for the task. 

Aidan White Published on: 27 Jan, 2022
Can you spot the fake news? Steering clear of conspiracies in science journalism

The world is full of fake news, nowhere more so than when it comes to scientific issues, so science journalists must develop a keen sense of scepticism. We look at why it’s so important to keep a clear head and search out the facts.

Ali Shehab Published on: 12 Jan, 2022
How to do science journalism - and do it right

THE LONG READ: With a new variant of COVID-19 sweeping the world, putting healthcare systems under strain, good science journalism has never been more important. This is our guide to how to report responsibly, accurately and ethically on scientific issues.

Ali Shehab Published on: 9 Jan, 2022
‘Kill the rented journalists’ - the reality of life for local journalists and fixers left behind in Afghanistan

THE LONG READ: The recent takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban shines a light on the often exploitative relationship between Western foreign correspondents and the Afghan ‘fixers’ they leave behind.

Sayed Jalal
Sayed Jalal Shajjan Published on: 4 Jan, 2022
Investigative journalism in the digital age

Data-driven journalism is an increasingly integral part of investigative reporting. We look at the ways to put it to best use. 

Malak Khalil Published on: 21 Dec, 2021
The problem with hate speech: How the media has fuelled its rise

Across the world, media organisations are guilty of misrepresenting the stories of refugees and other vulnerable minorities, stirring up panic and outrage within their respective countries. We look at some examples.

Muhammad Khamaiseh Published on: 9 Dec, 2021
Why language matters when we report refugee stories

As tragedy strikes in the English Channel and the refugee crisis mounts at the Polish border, we examine why it is so important to use the correct language when covering refugee stories. Part two of our series.

Kareem Shaheen Published on: 25 Nov, 2021
How to cover refugee stories ethically 

As Poland grapples with a migrant and refugee crisis at its borders, we examine best practice for journalists covering refugee stories. Part one of our series.

Kareem Shaheen Published on: 23 Nov, 2021
Verifying video - how to spot the fakes

It's often seemingly impossible to tell what's fake and what's not on social media. We look at the tools journalists can use to verify video sourced online. How can you spot fake videos from hate groups to terrorist organisations on social media? Is it even possible? What tools can you use to verify the authenticity of these videos?

Mahmoud Ghazayel Published on: 15 Nov, 2021
Is slow journalism the cure for fast-food thinking?

ANALYSIS: Journalists require time and space to provide the depth readers need to make sense of an endless stream of instant news.

Muhammad Khamaiseh Published on: 10 Nov, 2021
Digital Sherlocks: Open-source investigation and news verification during wartime

THE LONG READ: From proving the existence of a seven-year-old girl in Syria to fact-checking locations of aerial bombings, how do you verify ‘open-source’ information in a war zone?

Christiaan Triebert
Christiaan Triebert Published on: 1 Nov, 2021
Coronavirus conversations - revealing a world of difference 

Who or what are driving news and discussions about COVID-19 on social media? It all depends on where you are in the world.

Randy Covington
Randy Covington Published on: 7 Oct, 2021
How to use social media for newsgathering

Social media platforms are too easily dismissed as ‘not serious’ when it comes to newsgathering. But you can use them as you would the news wires - here’s how.

Majd Khalifeh Published on: 28 Sep, 2021
Leaks - a badly behaved guest in the newsroom

The recent 'Facebook Files' - revelations about the inner workings of the tech giant published by the Wall Street Journal - were based on leaked internal information. But while leaks can be a valuable source of information for journalists, they can also be used to manipulate them.

A picture of the author, Ayuob Errimi.
Ayoub Errimi Published on: 21 Sep, 2021
Have you been hacked? - What Pegasus spyware revelations mean for journalists

How to protect yourself following the news that sophisticated spyware has been used to hack the smartphones of journalists, activists and politicians around the world.

Mei Shigenobu
Mei Shigenobu Published on: 19 Sep, 2021