Over the last month, the media has focused on the xenophobic attacks that have spread across South Africa, which, according to Smith (2008), have claimed 43 lives and left 23, 000 displaced [1]. Many of the displaced have found temporary shelters in community halls and police stations. Sowetan’s article, “Hope beats Fear” (27/05/08, p.1 & 8) by Namhla Tshisela about children who have found refuge at Cleveland Police Station in Johannesburg and how they are coping, is one to be glad of. The article draws attention to the plight of children; it carries the message of hope; and it takes into account children’s opinions by accessing the children themselves.
The article is far cry from other articles covering the xenophobic violence and displacement. Where children have featured in media coverage of the xenophobic attacks, it is often as the voiceless “face of tragedy”. This article focuses on children themselves, rather than merely using their pictures to illustrate the bigger picture of xenophobia and displacement.
The article carries a message of hope amidst fear and uncertainty. For example, the article refers to the “chatter and laughter of children” and a “wall plastered with colourful drawings” in a room “tempered with fear and hope” (“Hope beats Fear”, Sowetan, 27/05/08, p.1 & 8).
The focus on children’s activities in the camp reminds readers that the displaced “victims” are first and foremost children, and as such have needs and rights to play and to education. This portrayal of children not only draws attention to the effects of the violence and displacement, but also to the importance of creating an environment that respects and protects children’s rights to play and develop [2].
In as much as the media exposes the plight of children caught up in circumstances beyond their control, it is important that the media considers the children’s angle when telling these stories.
The children are portrayed in the article as active individuals with their own views and able to make positive contributions.
The reporter accessed a number of children, quoting them directly throughout the article. Allowing children to tell their own stories respects children’s rights to express their views, and gives a children’s perspective to the article. Moreover, giving children the opportunity to speak for themselves can be a meaningful and effective advocacy tool for children’s rights. As UNICEF and MMA (2003) write:
“By providing children with opportunities to speak for themselves – about their hopes and fears, their hopes and fears, their achievements, and the impact of adult behaviour on their lives – media professionals can remind the public of children’s rights…..The way in which the media represents, or even ignores children, can influence decisions taken on their behalf, and how the rest of society regards them.” (UNICEF and MMA, 2003, p.50 [3])
While it is important to allow children to tell their own stories, wherever possible, the interests of the child should remain paramount. Where children may have been victims of abuse or trauma, important ethical and practical considerations need to be made. Some of these are talked about by UNICEF and Media Monitoring Africa (2003) in All Sides of the story. Reporting on children: A journalist’s handbook, p.50. The rationale behind interviewing children who have been exposed to trauma can be questioned, as retelling the events may amount to secondary trauma. However, in this case, it does not seem as if the interviews took place immediately after the event, thus giving the children some time to deal with the trauma. Moreover, from the answers that the children gave, it does not look like they were asked specific questions about the events leading up to them being displaced, but were rather asked more general questions.
Though the article is one to be glad of, largely adhering to both ethical and legal standards of journalism, it should have refrained from picturing and revealing the identities of the children. The UNICEF Guidelines (Date Unknown) Specifies that in “certain circumstances of risk or potential risk of harm or retribution”, the visual identity of a child who is “an asylum seeker, a, refugee or an internally displaced person” should be obscured and his/her name changed [4]. Concealing their identities would have protected them against any possible recrimination.
Overall, Sowetan’s article is one to be glad of. Other newspapers are urged to ensure that children are given the opportunity to speak, while adhering to ethical guidelines.
_____________________________
Footnotes
1. Smith, J. (2008) “ You could cut the atmosphere with a knife”, Saturday Star (24/06/08), p.15.
2. These rights are set out in the United Nations Convention on the Rights and Welfare of the Child(1989) , which South Africa ratified in 1995, and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1999). Also see UNICEF and Media Monitoring Project. 2003. All Sides of the story, reporting on children: A journalist’s handbook, p.62.
3. UNICEF and Media Monitoring Project. 2003. All Sides of the story, reporting on children: A journalist’s handbook, p.50.
4. Also in MMP and IAJ. 2005. A Resource Kit for Journalists: Children’s Media Monitoring Project. Media Monitoring Project: Johannesburg, p.33. MMP have removed names and obscured the child’s visual identity to protect the identity of the children.