Need new words to tell an old tale

Sharon Mascall-Dare -Apr 24, 2012

'With the centenary of Gallipoli three years away, it is  time to question media coverage.'

'With the centenary of Gallipoli three years away, it is time to question media coverage.' Photo: Tim Wimbourne

PREPARE to grow weary of the word ''weary''. Plucked from the Ode of Remembrance, tomorrow it will join a journalistic arsenal where words are stockpiled to counter the tyranny of a difficult editor or an unrealistic deadline.

For many reporters, the Anzac spirit will be ''alive and well''. For others, the hands of veterans will ''cup'' cigarettes. As journalists seek the right words in speaking of silence, we will confront such cliches and ask, for the umpteenth time, is there nothing new to say?

I use the word ''we'' deliberately. As a radio producer, I know the drill. For the past five years, I've been recording material for a series of documentaries about Anzac Day, to be broadcast in 2014. I've also been interviewing journalists for a research study at the University of South Australia.

With the centenary of the Gallipoli landings three years away, it is the right time to question media coverage. The work of Australia's war correspondents such as Charles Bean is well documented. But the composition of more recent coverage has largely escaped scrutiny. This is problematic, given the role of the media in setting an agenda for the portrayal of Anzac Day. The journalists I have interviewed complained of cliche and repetition. They also spoke of impossible deadlines, with few resources. ''You have to go and get a bit of mud on your boots. That is just elementary reporting,'' insisted one veteran reporter. ''The internet has led to a lot of laziness.'' Is it laziness or fear? That was an alternative explanation that emerged from my study.

For younger journalists, Anzac Day is beyond question. ''You don't mess with it … you don't disturb it,'' one reporter said. Iconic and sacred, Anzac Day is considered untouchable in news terms, to be protected from the indignity of the doorstop interview or the media scrum. As one television producer said, ''Anzac Day is not a news event. It is a day of commemoration.'' If Anzac Day is not news, then how do journalists do their job?

With difficulty, is often the answer. Fearful of making mistakes, some reporters said they had resorted to ''copy and paste'', repeating coverage from previous years to reduce the risk of error. One young reporter feared losing her job, because she had asked an interviewee to correct mistakes in her copy. Her approach seemed ethical and understandable, given concern about accuracy. Her company's rules on the protection of editorial control were less accommodating.

Time and again, journalists said they needed support. Two hours was not enough time to complete background research, talk to veterans at an RSL, return to the office and file a 1000-word story. This was the task given to one cadet at a regional newspaper. Is it any surprise that the same reporter relied on the internet to conduct research?

As a teacher of journalism, as well as a producer, I wanted to help reporters find reliable information. The Anzac Day Media Style Guide is Australia's first online guide of its kind and seeks to offer impartial, independent information.

Writing some parts of the guide were challenging, requiring navigation between complexity and sensitivity in pursuit of accuracy. As a British-born Australian with a great-grandfather who fought for Britain on the Western Front, and a grandfather who was a US fighter pilot in World War II, I found the involvement of different nationalities in the Gallipoli campaign a revelation. There were Indians at Gallipoli; there were Newfoundlanders and Algerians. Simpson and his donkey camped with the Indian Mule Corps at night.

There were 8709 Australians who died in the Gallipoli campaign. Many thousands more died on the Western Front and in conflicts since then. Every family has been affected by the legacy of war in some way, whether it is through loss, grief or anger at the futility of war. Anzac Day coverage can be thoughtful, considered and balanced. It can explore new narratives that are fraught with complexity; it need not shy from stories not easily told.

Above all, Anzac Day reporting can be original. It can question, yet remain respectful. It can challenge and not judge. This is not the time for journalists to grow weary of their work. As we approach the centenary of the Gallipoli landings, there is so much more work to be done.

Sharon Mascall-Dare produces radio documentaries for the BBC World Service. She is currently investigating media coverage of Anzac Day for a PhD at the University of South Australia.

twitter Follow the National Times on Twitter: @NationalTimesAU

Follow Us on Facebook

Most Viewed