Newsrooms are (slowly) learning to make the most of their reporters’ lived experiences

Not all journalists are created equal. Some are just better than others of course, but it’s more nuanced than that. Some are better at thumb-sucking thinkpieces, some better at the real-time scramble for breaking stories, others have more contacts and less style, or vice versa. Journalists and writers also have a variety of identities and lived experiences, and increasingly this is becoming more relevant in most newsrooms.

We all approach things differently. And it is valuable to readers if there are occassions when a story is brought to them by someone with unique and relevant insights into the issue at hand. There was a time when the consensus would have been to send off reliable, experienced writers to cover a story without necessarily considering whether they could bring a personal angle to the job that can sharpen and enliven the copy.

You could make the argument that we don’t need to have a certain background or identity to report the news or present an argument on any given topic, but the truth is that examples demonstrating the opposite pop up almost every week.

On the Voices desk, we are always looking for that nugget of insight that presents a news story or grand theme in a fresh light. It is often these that best engage our readers’ attention.

Earlier this month, when the recently announced 2020 candidate Kamala Harris was on a promotional tour for her memoir, the Washington Post and a reporter called Chelsea James were criticised for apparently being unfamiliar with the African American culture of historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) during their coverage of the event.

When Harris, a Howard University alumnus and Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated (AKA) member, shouted out her Howard sorority, the audience at the event were reported as having “screeched when she mentioned her time there”.

“Did not expect to hear screeches here”, James tweeted, before being informed that those “screeches” were actually what is known as a “skee wee” call – the AKA signature sound.

The incident transformed into a useful lesson about how editors can improve coverage when they give more consideration to a writer’s background. To how cultural touchstones should shape who goes on which assignments.

As a commissioning editor, I’m glad that it did. Because it gives people in positions like mine more licence to look for the personal spark that can give a story greater heft. We’re being held to a higher standard – one that forces us to take more than a writer’s talent or profile into account when it comes to shaping the best content possible.

Are there occasions where writers should be allowed to write about experiences they don’t have? Of course. But gone are the days of when anyone has an excuse for risking accuracy in this way, or for bringing nonsensical articles into the world because of decisions like these.

Yours,

Kuba Shand-Baptiste

Voices commissioning editor