Decolonise How? | Who gets to tell the story?

Patrick Gathara

Welcome to Decolonise How? A podcast that examines the stories we tell about humanitarian crises.

 

Ahmer Khan

When you speak with the people, when you connect with the people, it's quite important for you to understand the local nuances an outsider per se would not understand. 

 

Gathara

How we understand crises – and how we respond to them – are shaped by the stories we tell. And we tend to listen to a few people: reporters and editors; researchers and academics; aid workers and humanitarian agencies.

 

In this new podcast, we’re examining how well these communicators fulfil their role, and the ethical questions they navigate. Who controls the narrative? Whose knowledge counts? How are communities in crisis represented? What gets framed as truth? And, how can we all do better?

 

My name is Patrick Gathara and I’m an editor at The New Humanitarian. In this episode, we’re asking: Who gets to tell the story?

 

When humanitarian crises happen, it is not uncommon to see international networks send in foreign correspondents to cover them, even when skilled local journalists are already on the ground. This raises questions about trust, credibility, and control in global news, with consequences for the accuracy, ethics, and power dynamics of crisis reporting. Does it really matter whether the storyteller is local or a foreigner?

 

Ali Latifi

Of course it matters. It has to do with sort of the distinctions that the entire media landscape creates for us. It's obviously beneficial if you can get someone who understands the modes and ethics of journalism, to tell the story from their own community. I think it's always better.

 

Gathara

Joining me are Ali Latifi, the Asia editor for The New Humanitarian, an Afghan journalist whose work has appeared in Al Jazeera, CNN, and the Los Angeles Times, and Ahmer Khan, award-winning journalist and photographer reporting from South Asia for over a decade, and a Humanitarian Reporting Fellow with The New Humanitarian.

I began by asking Ali how it felt to return to Afghanistan, where he was born, after decades away.

 

Latifi

Basically, I had been living in Doha. I was working for Al Jazeera at the time, and this was in 2011. There was a visa issue, and basically they told me: you can go anywhere in the world. You just gotta get out of Doha for a while. So, when other people were going to Rome and London and so on, I used it as my first chance to come back to Afghanistan, where I was born, but I left when I was four years old, so I hadn't been back for decades, and I came back. I remember I was in Jalalabad on 9/11, 2011 and I just kind of connected with the place. There's something about growing up outside of where you're from and always hearing about a place that you're from, and never having that connection until a certain point. Once you get it, once you see it, we say ajeeb, there's something intriguing about it, and it kind of pulled me in. And after that, every single time I had time off, when I was in Doha, I would come to Kabul, and then in 2013, I moved back here full time. I've been living here full time since then. In that time, I've traveled across 20 of the 34 provinces of the country. I've covered everything from elections to the woman who became like the first publicly facing, quote, unquote, First Lady in decades. I covered all kinds of natural disasters and refugee camps and things like that. I also covered singing competitions and female Instagram and Tiktok influencers, and then obviously the coming of the Taliban and everything that came along with that. So, it's been quite a journey over the last twelve years, and it's been quite a wide spectrum of stories as well.

 

Gathara  

And Ahmer, is your story broadly similar to Ali's? How did you end up being in New Delhi rather than in Kashmir? 

 

Khan  

No, I think we are quite different in this case, because Kashmir has always been a place where reporters from around the world come and report there. But yeah, I mean, I was born and brought up in Kashmir, and I studied there, and my family is there. My primary reason to move to Delhi was to, I didn't want to be known as a Kashmiri journalist, because I had seen, like so many journalists in Kashmir covering Kashmir issue, and specifically people from outside who would come from parts of India and also around the world and report on Kashmir conflict. The primary reason for me to go out was I was quite intrigued with what was happening in South Asia, and I wouldn't see a lot of opportunities back then in Kashmir when it comes to journalism. I didn't want to be known as someone who hadn't covered Kashmir issue at all, so I did report from my own community for a while, just for international community. But, I think the primary reason for me to move to places was when I saw the kind of problems across South Asia, they would resonate me with back home. I would see distress, humanitarian crisis or conflict, or religious problems, or the military crackdown, in Afghanistan, in Bangladesh, in Sri Lanka, in Nepal, so it would resonate with me more about my home. You know, I was quite determined to do more stories from South Asia region. You know, over the last 10 to 11 years, I have covered, like Nepal earthquake, or crisis in India when it comes to Covid, or before that also the general elections, which were one of the biggest elections in the world, which India conducts every four to eight years. So, that would really give me a lot of impetus to do more journalism. And also, you have to see South Asia is one of the biggest regions to cover in the world, and more than half of the population is here. You learn the trade on the go.

 

Gathara 

Do you consider yourself a local journalist? Would you accept that label, and what does it even mean to you?

 

Khan  

I am a local journalist. I speak the language. I speak several languages of the country. So obviously, I am a local journalist. I've traveled length and breadth of India. You know, it's such a massive country that, you know, every day there's something new happening. When you speak with the people, when you connect with the people, it's quite important for you to understand the local nuances an outsider per se would not understand. So, I think being a journalist, being a human being, and connect with the audience, with the people on the ground, is more important for you as a human being than if you want to distinguish between local and non-local.

 

Gathara  

Ali, what, what's your take on this? 

 

Latifi 

The reason I have an issue with the term is that, because it becomes a class distinction in the media world. If you are a quote, unquote local journalist, you are questioned more in terms of your reporting. You're paid less. You're given fewer opportunities. And so, it doesn't matter how I identify myself. The way the industry identifies me is a very specific thing, and it has sort of dictated the possibilities in my career, right down to how much I get paid, to the kinds of opportunities I get, for instance, there have been many times where I happen to be out of the country. Something is going on in Afghanistan. I could even be in Dubai, not far from Afghanistan. And yet, a TV station will call me up, and if I say: oh, I'm not currently in Afghanistan, I don't get that opportunity to do that live report, which is my chance to inform people, and also a chance to make some money. But you will see, for instance, when Bashar al-Assad fell, I was watching CNN and the people talking about it. One was in Simi Valley, California, in Southern California. The other was in London, and I think one was in Washington. None of whom seemed Syrian. No problem for them. I've also had, for instance, when I was in Turkey for a while, I had asked even a Pakistani paper if I could write, like an analytical piece about what was going on in Afghanistan. And it was a fight, because I didn't happen to be in the country at the moment. And yet, we have international journalists who left this country in 2013, 2014, who, all of a sudden, after the arrival of the Taliban, started to get bylines on Afghanistan, either were suddenly brought back after seven, eight years to, I don't know, do some kind of triumphant homecoming for themselves - I have no idea what - or just to, get their name again, even though they hadn't been again in this country since 2013, 2014, so to me, yes, I'm Afghan, and reporting on Afghanistan. Does that technically make me a local journalist? Sure, if you want to call me that. But as I said, the problem with it is that it's very much a class issue with the industry. Even if I don't identify as a local journalist, I am seen as a quote, unquote, local journalist by the rest of the media, just based on the way people interact with me, the questions I get asked, and the opportunities I am given or not. 

 

Gathara 

Do you think that there is any value in distinguishing between people who report from the communities where they were born or where they live, and people who come in from outside and do that. Or is it that they're all doing the same job? It's pretty much the same thing. Does it matter who's actually telling the story? 

 

Latifi  

Of course, it matters. It has to do with, sort of, the distinctions that the entire media landscape creates for us. It's obviously beneficial if you can get someone who understands the modes and ethics of journalism to tell the story from their own community. I think it's always better. If that requires a little additional training, if that requires a little additional effort, I would rather go out of my way and have that, than to have someone from Australia reporting on Kenya, or someone from Canada reporting on Afghanistan. And, I think this is one of the major issues, is that the overall global media doesn't make an investment in that. For the most part, even I, who came from the United States, who have a master's degree from a university in Washington, get put in a corner, not that dissimilar from what Ahmer gets put in, and he definitely gets put in a corner. And, we both had to fight extra hard to get to where we are, and to get the opportunities that we have been given. And that's why, for me, personally, as the Asia editor at The New Humanitarian, unless I absolutely have to, I don't like having non-Asians writing about the Asian continent, because even if that person isn't directly from the exact place, if they're at least from nearby, that to me, is more valuable than someone from France writing about Myanmar. I don't care what you think, to be quite honest.

 

Gathara  

Ahmer, are you of the same mode? What do you think of this?

 

Khan  

I think I totally agree with Ali on this note, because living in India and Kashmir, I have seen journalists parachute to places and report on their own and thinking that they know more about the place than we do, like a story about community crisis might focus on the tragedy and the suffering of the victims, while a local journalist might focus on systematic political failures, right? Or the long-term resilience of the community or try to find solutions for the local community. But then, if a journalist wants to parachute, they do that. You know, I can give you ten examples of how journalists parachute to India,  like, let's say this airplane crash in Gujarat. I was there. I wouldn't call myself a Gujarati, but we had reporters from around the world around that place, and they just came for two days. They hired local fixers. The term fixer is a big problem, by the way here, we need to fix that for once and all, honestly. 

 

Gathara

They're all just local journalists. 

 

Khan 

They're all local journalists, exactly. So, this problem has been going on for a very long time, and I think, as Ali mentioned, the problem is at its core, and until all the media houses work together on this, I don't think this is going to ever change. Because how local reporters, you know, journalists, take high risk, how they are actually by the state or the non-state actors, they are the ones who are facing the brunt at the end of the day, because the foreign journalists, they come and go back in a couple of days, couple of weeks. So, local journalists, with fewer resources, lower pays, and less institutional protection, are the ones who are on the forefront of the reporting.

 

Latifi  

And more suspicion.

 

Gathara

Yeah.

 

Khan  

Exactly. And also you have to understand how local journalists, local reporters, have historical knowledge and cultural knowledge of the place. They are the ones who actually build the trust, the relationships with the communities, with wherever place you are reporting from. The language skills are very also important, right? Because you can actually read in between the lines when you're on the reporting trip. And also, it's safe because you have lower visibility. So, I think the international community has to understand that you have to trust your local reporters and have them on your teams as equal journalists, not as fixers term or… 

 

Latifi  

Translators.

 

 Khan  

...or translators. Exactly. So, I think this problem is an ongoing epidemic.

 

Gathara  

So, how do you respond to the arguments normally put out that, basically, local reporters are too close to the story. They are reporting on stories that directly impact them, their families, their communities, that they are biased…

 

Latifi  

Would you say that to the white guy reporting on Washington for the Washington Post?

 

Gathara  

Perhaps not, no.

 

Latifi  

Because he's just as biased about what's going on in Washington as a white American citizen. He has just as much potential to be influenced. And, I've lived in Washington, believe me, people get influenced very easily. They make friendships and all of these things. So, would you ask him that? Is it right for you as a white American from Ohio to be reporting for The Washington Post or the New York Times? And at the same time, would you ask him, Hey, you went to Brown, you went to Columbia, do you understand what life is like for someone in Mississippi, or Tennessee, or Ohio? This is the problem, is these people get the benefit of the doubt. But for us, there is this inherent suspicion, no matter what, that you're always tainted. You're too close to the story. Fine. I'm too close to the story. Guess what? You're too close to the story to Trump if you're reporting on the United States at this very moment, because he impacts every part of your life, right down to your job. It's a double standard. It's unfair.

 

Gathara  

It is a double standard. And, there is quite a lot of suspicion or a lack of credibility that is placed on local reporters. Ahmer, from your perspective, I mean, you've worked for international broadcasters, do you find that they deal with you differently?

 

Khan  

I think, yes, I do agree with Ali. The problem here lies with how people assume and actually make suspicion that local journalists are often accused of bias - from our region, specifically - but you have to understand the kind of invaluable experience they have. They live in the place. They know the people. They know the land. They can speak the languages. So, honestly, in the last couple of years, because of social media and how people are being, getting called out, yes, the things have changed, for sure. 

 

Latifi  

A little bit.

 

Khan

A little bit, yes. So, previously, a few years back, there's an example. I was in Kashmir in 2016 when, when a journalist came there from a European country, I wouldn't name the channel, and the journalist was there for a couple of days covering the protest in the Kashmir region when Kashmir was still open for foreign journalists, and she only had a reason, and only had one goal, to get women's stone-pelting on camera. She didn't care about how we do it. She didn't care about: we might have to go to their house and all that. And she didn't care about the local sensitivities. And I was basically the fixer - what you call - out there for her. It's a problem which has been going on for too long. And we have seen N-number of examples at the moment, you know how in Gaza and in Palestine, when they don't know anything about the place, people from big broadcasters are over there, and they're reporting like total nonsense.

 

Gathara 

When you say they’ve changed, in what sense? Could you give me an example? How do you think they’ve changed? 

 

Khan  

Basically, they actually now treat fixers as local reporters, at least in my region, I would say. They're also trying to give them proper credits, because people have been called out on social media, and that has created a storm for them, for the publication, for the broadcaster. So, I think a little bit of change, but yes, it requires a massive change around the world.

 

Gathara 

Ali, two years ago, you had written about this exodus of local, international media workers, when the Taliban came back to power, what's the situation like today? Is it still quite a fluid space? I think you had said at the time that there was increasingly dubious news reports and unproven claims and generalisations about the country.

 

Latifi 

Oh yeah. 

 

Gathara 

Is that still the case? Or have things changed? And if they have in what way?

 

Latifi 

It's still possible to operate as a journalist in Afghanistan, it's not easy. It's not easy at all. There is a lot of risk to it. There's a lot of potential threat to it. But people are still doing it. Private TV stations still operate. Women are still broadcasting as hosts and anchors, and you know, leading programs. They have to cover their face, but they're still doing it, and I am still able to operate. To be quite honest, I've never had my reporting interfered with. I know people who have faced some intimidation, who have faced questions and scrutiny. That's not rare in Afghanistan. That was an issue during the occupation as well. It's scarier now, obviously, just given the current government. But what I will say is that it's possible. It's not easy, but it's possible. And again, this is what I keep getting to, is because it's possible, people should take advantage of it and try and do it. The problem is that the outside perception is that Afghanistan is like Myanmar, where no reporting from within the country is possible, where there is no such thing as an active journalist, as an active media network within the country. Have they changed some of their tone? Are they less critical? Are they more conscious of toeing the line? Absolutely. But do they still operate? Yes. And I think what creates the biggest problems for those of us still living here, is that there is a lot of fake news. There's outright fake news, and down to outside, sort of diaspora media, has killed off living people. Everyone from high level officials to just average people, they've said this person is dead, and then they appear on camera the next day saying: I'm completely alive. They've mixed up the names, the ethnicities, the positions of people in power - all kinds of things that just - they've made false claims, for instance, a while ago, about a year or two ago, a foreign newspaper made a claim that contraceptives were banned in Afghanistan. I live in front of three pharmacies. My family is full of doctors. I went to each pharmacy, and I said: dDo you carry these products? They said, Yes. I called the Ministry of Public Health: no, we have given no directive. I called the Ministry of Vice and Virtue: no, we've given no directive. I called a female gynecologist, I called an internist, I called all kinds of doctors. They all said: we have no proof of this. I debunked it along with a friend of mine in the matter of an hour, and we published it for The National in the UAE. But because the paper that originally published the claim was a big British one, obviously, that got all the headlines and it was still quoted. 

 

Gathara  

Did you see any of foreign media making corrections to the story on contraception once you debunked it, and once you were able to show that it wasn't true?

 

Latifi

Nope. A big news agency misquoted a Ministry of Public Health official who had said that we've stopped vaccination programs temporarily to sort of go through the issues and reformat and everything. They made the headline, something like: The Taliban Ends Vaccination Programs. And the entire media, you know, went with that again. I had to call the Ministry of Public Health. I had to call all these places, and they're like: no, none of us said that. 

 

Gathara 

And, I think that kind of points to some of the dangers of having sort of, kind of outsiders telling stories about these spaces. I wanted to also ask you, I mean, you mentioned at the start about the dangers that exist and which are real for local journalists. I think it's the same thing in places like India, in Kashmir, you know, and pressures. Is there an argument that there are certain stories that are better covered by international journalists, if only because they get better protections than locals? 

 

Latifi

Yeah.

 

Khan  

Technically, yes, because obviously, local journalists are not paid equally as foreign journalists. That's for one big reason, because there's a massive disparity between the local journalists and foreign journalists. Whenever a local, whenever a foreign journalist is in India, the local embassy is involved in that, and they know about their whereabouts. They have the health insurance. They have the risk company taking care of all the logistics. So, obviously they do have the upper hand in this case, and in certain cases, when local journalists are involved with foreign broadcasters and with their teams, they would always get the same amount of insurance, the security, the assurance from the company that if something untoward happens, we'll take care of you. 

 

Gathara

Right. 

 

Khan

So, it does happen on broadcasting channels for sure, like I've been on one of these back in 2020 and 2019 but yes, I mean, that's the big difference people have in here between the foreign and the local journalists. Because foreigners, they usually come for a couple of weeks, not more than that. It doesn't last more than that. And then once they fly out, you're on your own. How you're in the safety-net is just for those couple of weeks, or couple of days, and it's over then. 

 

Gathara

Right.

 

Khan  

I mean, look, we don't want to stop all international reporting. The goal is to build a more respectful, equitable and ultimately, more truthful, you know, global news ecosystem. By decolonising journalism, we don't want to change the story. We change how the story is told, you know, making it more accurate, more ethical and representative of the people who actually live in that community. As a local journalist, I'm saying we're not trying to stop international reporting or foreign journalists to visit here, but they need to collaborate on equal terms, not just as fixers or translators, because the fixer model can be very exploitive and needs to reform into, you know, equal partnerships. Opportunity is important, but empathy is also essential, you know. Paying a local journalist a fraction of what a foreign correspondent earns for the same story isn't just fair. It's a form of…

 

Latifi  

Exploitation…

 

Khan  

Exactly, and colonialism, how you don't want to decolonise the story. You want to decolonise the entire newsroom.

 

Gathara  

You use the term decolonise journalism. Ali, what do you understand by that? What does it mean to you?

 

Latifi  

I don't think it exists. And I don't think it's possible for it to exist in the current system, because true decolonising whatever requires an upheaval. If it's not violence, it's a massive shift. It's a massive cataclysm that needs to happen. And I don't know of any organisation that's willing to undergo that, because of what it would mean, and it would require changing the way you talk about things. It would require changing the makeup of your newsroom, it would require changing your pay structures. It would require everything from top down would have to change. And I don't know of anywhere that's willing to do that, because of how much is at risk. 

 

Gathara 

The New Humanitarian has one of its strategic objectives: decolonising its own journalism. Are you saying that's not likely to happen?

 

Latifi  

No, of course not. No. 

 

Gathara  

Ahmer, what do you think? I mean, you've just come into TNH. Do you see changes? Do you see anything different from where you've worked before?  

 

Khan  

I do understand where Ali is coming from, so I wouldn't contest it, but I would just add that, I mean in small bits, we can try. You know, you can't just decolonise the story if you don't decolonise the newsroom. So, I think if we start in a small newsroom by commissioning the local reporters, by working them on equal terms, I think you can start slow and then give a message to the world that it is possible, but I think it would take a lot of time and effort to do this bit.

 

Gathara

So Ali, for you, you said it's not possible to do it, and even with TNH trying, it's not really going anywhere. I'm really interested in whether you think the efforts to actually decolonise themselves, even though they might not end in a big shift in how the entirety of media works, is it possible for small organisations to actually shift how they do things?

 

Latifi  

I would hope so. But again, this is the problem. This is what I mean. Is that the media has already been set up in my view, in a very colonial context. As I said, for instance, Ahmer and I are automatically seen with suspicion for reporting on where we're from, right? There's that. There's the fact that most newsrooms are still led by, if not white Westerners, by Westerners. There's the fact that there's still a pay discrepancy. There is a fact that we are still using outdated terms that don't have the meanings that people think that they do, only because they serve a political purpose: extremist, jihadist, Islamist, terrorist, or militant. All of these terms are politically loaded, and don't seem to have a clear definition other than to label a certain group of people. There's that. There's the fact that we often look the other way when people fly in or cover issues that they have absolutely no connection to, have no possibility of ever being affected by. All of these things are major issues within the media, and because the western model was so successful. I mean, if I had to think about it, I would say that a lot of independent media in Afghanistan, especially television media, has copied the format of the BBC and the CNN right down to the way they do their stand ups, to the sign offs, to the terms that they use. I mean, local media in Afghanistan uses the term migrant to describe an Afghan in Iran or Pakistan or Europe, which I think is actually rather harmful and diminutive of the issue. You know, it's making the issue smaller, not giving it the weight that it actually deserves. I mean, in my opinion, I think Pakistani and Indian media is very tabloidy. It's essentially modeled off of TMZ. But again, you know, the structures have been set in a colonial way, and people don't even think to question them, even ones with the best intentions don't realise that in the most basic ways, they're constantly failing it. So that's why I think, sure it's possible, but it will not be easy, and as I said, it requires a real upheaval, a real changing of an entire system. It's not just checking a few boxes. It's not just hiring a few Brown and Black folks. It's changing the power structure, changing the verbiage, changing the pay structure. It's a lot of things.

 

Gathara

It's changing exactly how we do journalism, and what we actually call journalism. I would imagine.

 

Latifi  

Yeah, from every level.

 

Khan  

Coming to India and South Asia region, you know, foreign reporters have come and gone, and they've been here based for years and years. You know, all the major international publications in India and across South Asia, their bureau chiefs are not even locals. Most of the reporters are also not locals, you know. They've gotten people from outside, who are pass outs from big universities, and they're heading their newsrooms here, with probably little knowledge of the area. Obviously, some have stayed for years and years, and try and find out how they are working in the region. But yes, I mean until you invest in the local people, employ them, put them in powerful positions, you can't change the newsroom culture. The primary objective for any bureau chief or any newsroom leader should be that, why don't we employ the local people instead of flying in people from outside? 

 

Latifi  

And India has no shortage of English speaking people…

 

Gathara 

Exactly.

 

Latifi  

Neither India nor Pakistan. 

 

Khan

Not at all, not at all, so. But what is more problematic here is that there's a problem of trust, which I have found with the people and the Western media, and I've worked with all the publications around the world, the biggest ones in the world, I think the first primary issue is trust that they do not trust you, and would not fly somebody from their own community. So, the trust has to be built between the newsrooms and the local journalists, and only then this sort of gap can be filled in. 

 

Gathara 

What's a space for local media in this discussion, in them becoming sort of the primary route through which everybody else starts to hear about the world. And I'm wondering whether we can have situations - or you guys can see situations - where, rather than us depending on the BBC or CNNs and stuff to know what's happening in spaces that local media could actually fill these sorts of spaces? Whether you think that's possible, that's doable? Whether there could be collaboration between, for example, journalists across regions to actually take control of the narratives that are told about that?

 

Latifi  

I don't see why not. I think, I think if, there's a willingness to have partnerships and collaboration, or if there can be sort of an effort to tell stories that for lack of a better phrase, like cross bridges, that show the similarities amongst people and communities, that even though they may be in very different contexts, the issues that they're facing are very similar. And so, if there is an interest in that from the outside media to be like: what does a housing crisis in Kabul look like? Because we have a housing crisis in New York and LA, is there one in Kabul? And what does it look like? Yes, there is, and it looks a very specific way. For instance, a friend of mine years ago, I think it was released in 2018. She made a documentary about two women in Afghanistan. One was a very famous TV journalist, and one was a parliamentarian from a province in the north. I helped her produce it, and what I found fascinating, when the final cut came through, what I loved about it is that it was actually about two women trying to figure out how to balance their career with their family lives. That's a very universal story. One had to leave the country that, you know, she loved being in the country. She loved being a journalist, but she had to leave because her kids felt unsafe after a bombing targeted the TV station she worked at. The other sent her family, including her husband, to Australia, while she stayed here, and she had to deal with that loneliness. So yes, in between, there were suicide bombings, there was a massive landslide, there were talks with local elders about the presence of the Taliban. But the heart of the story, it was about these two women, probably about ten, fifteen years apart in age, trying to figure out how to balance their career goals with their family obligations. If that was broadcast on CNN and translated properly, I think it could say so much, and hopefully create a bond with the viewer in Michigan or New York.

 

Khan  

There's always room for collaboration, you know, international media should work collaboratively with locals, not just for their access, but as equal partners, you know. Trust locals as primary sources of reporting, not as assistants or fixers. I think that becomes more important, because they can actually show you the actual story, the nuances, the way they want to tell their stories. Because when you control the storyteller, you control the story, also, you know. That means that you control what the world believes is true. A local reporter actually has decades of lived experience of the places, right? A journalist who parachutes in brings only a deadline, honestly. I would say that collaborative effort between journalists, local journalists, and also international broadcast broadcasters, is very important. You know, I am someone who has always fought for my rights, honestly. I've exchanged very heated emails with editors around the world, whenever I feel like that they're not, you know, taking my word for the story, or they're not trying to get what I see, my perspective. I do not care who the editor is. I do not care who the publisher is. I do not go with them. And I have several examples of where I've stood for myself. And you know, whenever I used to teach at a university in Delhi briefly, I used to tell them these stories that you know how you should fight for yourself. It's very important that you control your story. It's very important that you stick with your story, because if you really deeply care about your story, it will travel the world. 

 

Gathara  

Obviously, the people you're writing about will end up seeing what you write. So normally, you would have written for New York Times, and you know, a few guys in Kashmir perhaps would have ended up reading that or seeing it, but now it's all over social media etc. I'm wondering, as a local person, aren’t you more accountable to that domestic about how you portray them? Because they can come back to you. You live among them. They're your neighbours. They're your, whatever, your family, your friends. Is there a level of accountability that then leads you, when you're selecting which stories you want to tell and how you want to tell them, to be a bit more careful to actually try and portray them in ways that I guess, humanise them? 

 

Khan

I think yes, why wouldn't they call you back? Because when you live in the society among those people, they would obviously have you talk about the story they have said to you, and there are people who actually share very, very intimate details with you about their lives, about their livelihood, or about whatever happened for that story. So, but we all have this unconscious bias in us, you know, as a human being, we all have that in us, right? So, I would say: yes, there is some sense of accountability as a reporter, and if you are from certain community, then you do have to think about your community in some ways. So, I think yes, accountability is there, for sure. It is across the world.

 

Latifi  

To me, I always say it doesn't matter if someone's name is Ahmad or Mahmoud, what matters is their story. So, if they don't want to tell me their name, it's not a big deal to me. If they only want to give me their first name, or if they only have a first name, I don't really care. What I care about is their story, and how much they're willing to tell me of it. And if there are parts that they're not willing to tell me about, you can fill in with context, and you can try and explain why they don't want to talk about those things to you. So, that's always been my approach. I don't think my audience is really domestic, because most of them say, we know this story? Why are you telling it again? So…

 

Khan

Same, same.

 

Latifi  

I actually hope that my story reaches you in Kenya, and Freddie in Saudi, more than it does my neighbour in Kabul, because my neighbour in Kabul is going to be like, okay, cool. You told the same story. What do I care? You know? And hopefully, because then when you read it, or when someone in Ireland reads it, they start to think: oh, wow, this is not that different from people in this place, or not that different from what I'm going through. 

 

Gathara  

Ali Latifi. Ahmer Khan. Thanks a lot for joining us for this. I really appreciate you taking the time. 

 

Latifi

Thank you. 

 

Khan

Thank you.

 

Gathara 

Thank you for listening to Decolonise How? A podcast from The New Humanitarian that examines the stories we tell about humanitarian crises.

 

This episode was produced and edited by Freddie Boswell and Levi Sharpe.

 

Coming up on Decolonise How?

 

Warungu

It's an issue, and it's an issue of trust. It's also an issue of: you say you want these people to be experienced, but you don't give them the opportunity to get experience, so as editors, we are guilty of these sins of omission and commission. 

 

Gully

I think it's a starting point on a journey, really, to not just change practices, to make the journalism better and improve it, but to actually then take that and make a positive change in the world.

 

Gathara 

And join the conversation - email us your thoughts to podcast@thenewhumanitarian dot org. Who knows, you could inspire an episode. 

 

If you’d like to go further, you can join us as a member. With membership, you get access to the Decolonise How? Digest, a bi-weekly newsletter examining how humanitarian crises are being covered and presented, as well two semi-annual reports on long term narrative trends. This is in addition to accessing more insights, events, and newsletters from across The New Humanitarian.

 

Becoming a member doesn’t just give you more – it helps support our independent reporting and keeps this work going.

 

And of course, make sure you’re subscribed to the podcast so you don’t miss what’s next.

 

I’m Patrick Gathara. Thanks for listening.