海角大神

Episode transcript

Mark Sappenfield: [T]he real craft of journalism is being able to take something that might be very foreign to someone, quite literally in my case, and make it something that feels real and visceral and something that is a kind of a must read.

Clay Collins: If you are a Monitor long-timer, then you probably know that voice: That鈥檚 Mark Sappenfield. About six months ago, Mark traded his stint as the Monitor鈥檚 top editor for what would be a dream job for most journalists: He鈥檚 a senior global correspondent based in Berlin, with a portfolio that runs from broadly framed Europe stories to explorations of genuinely global issues.

I鈥檓 Clay Collins. This is 鈥淲hy We Wrote This.鈥� We are back from a show-production hiatus of several months. Mark, a return guest on this podcast, joins me today from a reporting trip in Denmark.

Hey, Mark. Really good to talk with you again.

Sappenfield: Good to be back.

Collins: So, Germany had already been your base of operations even for the last couple of years of your editorship, which put you in a position to bring a less-American-influenced perspective to bear on Monitor journalism. What鈥檚 it been like leaving a key direction-setting, management role and moving back to the front lines as a reporter again in a different part of the world?

Sappenfield: You know, it鈥檚 interesting. When I became editor, I had been doing different editing stints. I had been, for a while, the national news editor and before that the deputy national news editor. So it鈥檚鈥�. I kind of forgot; I hadn鈥檛 written significantly since 2009. So it was 15, 16 years.... You know, you become a journalist because you love the craft, because you love learning by going on these trips and it really was like a breath of pure oxygen.

It was kind of like, 鈥測es, this is what I got into this business for!鈥� And so it鈥檚 been amazing, and to be able to do it from Europe. My wife is German, so I have a connection there. I鈥檝e always, you know, really been fascinated by [Europe].

Collins: And to some degree, you鈥檙e putting your vision into practice because you鈥檝e done a lot of direction-setting editorially, and now you鈥檙e out on the execution end of that.

Sappenfield: Yes. And that鈥檚 fun, too. I mean, when you鈥檙e at the highest level, what you鈥檙e doing is you鈥檙e thinking about what you think the Monitor should do, but you know, you have columns and you have things like that, but ultimately you are trying to set a vision for other people to follow and, now you get a chance to actually do that.

And it鈥檚 just so rewarding. I mean, the Monitor journalism that we do is all about trying to be constructive. It鈥檚 all about trying to 鈥渂less all mankind,鈥� as Mary Baker Eddy said. And when you鈥檙e actually doing it, it鈥檚 a different feeling. I mean, as the editor, you know that you get letters back, which are good and bad. But you know you鈥檙e doing something important.

But when you鈥檙e actually doing the writing, there鈥檚 something very visceral about that. You鈥檙e making human connections. You鈥檙e actually learning things yourself. Every story in journalism is an education, and it鈥檚 an amazing experience.

Collins: You鈥檝e written on a lot of topics since you鈥檝e been back to writing, contributing to coverage of how the Jewish diaspora views Gaza, on the currents of thought in the Iranian diaspora. About U.S. tariffs on Brazil, about Germany鈥檚 trains 鈥� horrors! 鈥� no longer running on time about Poland鈥檚 direction, about soccer, because you love sports, and lots more鈥�.

Sappenfield: Football!

Collins: Sorry, 蹿煤迟产辞濒. There鈥檚 a really nice thread of 鈥渉ere is why...鈥� in your work. You look at what stories are really about, and of course that鈥檚 something that you also help to develop. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Sappenfield: You know, the kind of 鈥� I don鈥檛 know how well kept a secret this is or not, but a kind of a badly kept secret 鈥� is that I鈥檓 actually not a newshound. I didn鈥檛 really get into this business because I read a bunch of newspapers and because I鈥檓 [always] going home and turning on the television and checking in on the news.

I鈥檝e always loved the Monitor鈥檚 mission. I was a National Geographic freak as a kid, so the idea of being able to engage with the world鈥�. I love writing. In my own time, I鈥檒l just write my own stuff. So actually the craft of writing and storytelling, and there鈥檚 good and bad things about that. I mean, news is a news business and in some ways I鈥檓 kind of behind the curve because people have a higher kind of RPM than I do. But one of the good things, hopefully, is that I never expect anyone to either care about my story or to understand it. I hope that someone can kind of come to it plain without having read anything about it and one, understand it, and two, find it compelling.

And to me, in some ways, that鈥檚 the real craft of journalism is being able to take something that might be very foreign to someone, quite literally in my case, and make it something that feels real and visceral and something that is a kind of a must read. So that鈥檚 part of the job that I love doing.

Collins: Accessible, authoritative, and also fun to read.

Sappenfield: My joke is that, you know, when do I care about news? I always say, well, tell me when the history books change. Sometimes, you know, when you read news it feels very drop, drop, and feels kind of narrow. And I, I love it when you can give it that largeness and give a sense of how this is shaping history.

Collins: You鈥檙e in Denmark as we speak, and we鈥檒l talk a little bit more about that in a bit, but the Nordics have been good for you. Your piece from Finland on agency and vigilance at the citizen level around national security was quite a talker at the Monitor 鈥� and among readers that we heard from. Nicely written too, I will say.

You鈥檝e said that the genesis for that Finland story came from an editorial you wrote during your transition period that was about watchfulness and preparation, and I think it says a lot about institutional voice and institutional approach that you forged it in an editorial mindframe and then [built] it out. Can you sort of take us through that?

Sappenfield: Yeah, I think we鈥檙e doing this all throughout the Monitor, but when you鈥檙e doing an editorial, the way that we work on the editorial page 鈥� and the chief editorial writer worked with me a lot on this 鈥� what he really focuses on is trying to [do] some of these things I was just talking about: going beneath just the who, what, when, where, into the ideas behind the news, getting into things where stories really become universal. It isn鈥檛 about Finland, it isn鈥檛 about Denmark, it isn鈥檛 about Germany. It鈥檚 about ideas and themes that we see running through human activity, and we raise those in a way that hopefully feels universal.

And that was exactly what I did with the Finland editorial, and what I think really inspired me to go deeper, once I became a writer is that it was, you can think of defense as being in one context. You know, how many bombs do you have? How many soldiers do you have? How can you deploy them? The logistics involved and [all of] that.

I worked at the Pentagon for a year, so I鈥檓 well versed in all that, and I鈥檓 not dismissing that. But I think in that sense of the Monitor, trying to look beneath the surface, beyond just the who, what, when, where, to this deeper sense of what鈥檚 really driving it. You saw in Finland, and that鈥檚 the word that we used in the headline, this watchfulness, this vigilance, and in doing so, in kind of going beyond just that sense of defenses bombs and airplanes and things like that, they came to this much deeper realization about true preparedness.

In some sense, it was about unity. It was about purpose. It was about coming together and having this society-wide sense of responsibility that it wasn鈥檛, you know, sometimes we see in America with fewer and fewer people going into the military, there can be a sense, oh, you know, defending America is their job. You know, 鈥淚鈥檓 going to outsource it to these people who choose to put on camouflage uniforms and go up in the airplanes.鈥�

But in Finland, it鈥檚 not that at all. There鈥檚 this sense that, because they鈥檙e sitting next to Russia and because they know ... specifically they knew, they鈥檝e known it forever. But, you know, since Ukraine, they don鈥檛 know if they鈥檙e next [to face invasion].

And so each person in Finland takes a responsibility for that. And I mean, to me, for anyone who saw the story, the image of that to me was the first thing I saw when I was in Finland is 鈥� I went out and there were these middle-aged women, 40, 50, 60 years old, who are learning to fire semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles and sniper rifles.

And these sniper rifles are serious business like when you shoot them, like you move, it pushes you back. And I tried to describe it in the story. There鈥檚 just this concussive sound that happens with [them]. So this is serious military hardware, but it was never a sense of being militaristic. It was never a sense of, you know, playing-with-guns sort of thing. These women were just like, 鈥渋f something happens, I wanna be ready.鈥� And it was very much a sense of, it sounds strange to say it, but kind of caring for your neighbor. It鈥檚 like, 鈥渋f this happens, I need to know I can handle it and I need to know that my neighbor can handle it, too.鈥�

And it created this incredibly strong, interconnected web [and a] sense of trust and security. And I remember there was one person who said to me, 鈥渋f Russia attacks, we don鈥檛 doubt that we can defend the country.鈥� That was not some like, kind of chest-thumping, like, 鈥渨e can do this.鈥� It was [genuinely] 鈥渘o, we can do this.鈥�

And having been there for a week. I think they can, and it wasn鈥檛 because of this sense of we need more guns, we need more bullets, we need more soldiers. It was almost this sense of, you know, you talk about a security web. This was a defense web where the whole society was interconnected in a way that made it incredibly resilient.

Collins: Hmm. So, like security, immigration is a huge, international story right now. You鈥檙e in Denmark now. How did you prepare for the Denmark trip looking at immigration policy relative to the policy in Sweden? You鈥檝e said you鈥檝e been sort of doing some shuttle reporting between Copenhagen and Malm枚. What has reporting been like? You鈥檙e working with our director of photography, Alfredo Sosa, at least part of the time. Just take us through some of the dynamics of the reporting.

Sappenfield: Well, the first thing I would say is that everyone in Europe would say you can鈥檛 do any reporting during the summer because all of Europe takes off the summer. And I was kind of like, 鈥渙h yeah, you know, they鈥檙e just not trying hard enough.鈥� Well, I started reporting this at the end of July, and it鈥檚 like there was no one there. It was crickets.

So this story has taken a lot longer than I thought it would. And I have a new appreciation for the fact that when summer comes around in Europe you should take vacation because there鈥檚 no one to talk to. I have been able to find people and talk to people. And really it鈥檚 been about, without trying to get too much into the story 鈥� what it really is, is that in 2015 when we knew there was this large group of people that were leaving the Middle East, specifically Syria. Denmark and Sweden chose to take diametrically opposed ways of addressing that. Sweden was very, very open and accepted the most amount of people per capita of anywhere in Europe. And Denmark was very, very closed and was very much like, you know, 鈥渨e will do the minimum that we need to do because in some ways we鈥檙e protecting our society from these influences.鈥�

The conversations that we have in Germany, in the United States, in Britain around immigration are so toxic and tend to just fall into people taking sides; [they鈥檙e] very polarized conversations. I thought this was an opportunity to really take a look and say, here are two totally different examples of how to handle the situation.

What do they tell us? And as you might imagine, in Denmark, in Sweden, they have become very politicized. And so the reporting has really been about trying to really, really get beneath the surface, get beneath the narratives and say, 鈥渨hat is going on here, and what lessons can we draw from it?鈥� Because in particular, Malm枚 has had a really big problem with organized crime and with gun violence. And so it, it then becomes, you know, Malm枚 is the cautionary tale against allowing in migrants sort of thing. And what you do when you go and you are in the city, you talk to migrants, you talk to people who live in Malm枚, there鈥檚 always truth in everything. But usually there鈥檚 more nuance to it than that. And that鈥檚 the joke 鈥� my favorite word is nuance鈥�

Collins: Yes it is.

Sappenfield: But it鈥檚 true. I find it fascinating to find out, you know, truth is a big word these days, but to find out all the different perspectives and how they contribute to a different picture in the sum than is what we often hear in kind of very oftentimes shallow news reporting.

Collins: And these are 鈥減ictures鈥� around policies and politics. But I鈥檇 like to draw you out a little more on process and about how you watch for and listen for, in particular, what makes a story鈥檚 lede compelling? Painting a picture. For another story on a landmine treaty, you started with a harried, Finnish parliamentarian grabbing a piece of fruit on her way into a press conference. It was very humanizing, and I assume that鈥檚 all part of making stories relatable.

Sappenfield: I鈥檓 a strong believer that our 鈥� not [in] every story, there are some times when you just need to, just the facts ma鈥檃m, sort of thing 鈥�. But I鈥檓 a strong believer that we do need to be storytellers. Our job as journalists is not merely to convey information, but to do it in a way that鈥檚 compelling, not just from an entertainment perspective, but because the world is a drama in itself.

And you know, these things matter to people and you want to convey that in a way that the reader feels it. Because, and that lead you鈥檙e specifically talking about, I was just struck here, was this woman who frankly was totally being, isolated, politically鈥�to be very quick about it is because of the threat of Russia, Finland was going to leave a landmine treaty so that it could use landmines, and this woman was just very adamant that that was the wrong step to take on humanitarian grounds. On rule of law grounds. But she was just totally flustered. And that moment showed how much she had invested in this and how much, to her, the country had changed.

It was like, 鈥渨hat happened to my Finland?鈥� You know, it鈥檚 like, 鈥渢he Finland I know would never have done this.鈥� And I just wanted to convey that because it speaks to the depth of emotion around the issue, and I hope I did it well. I had to take a little risk when she picked me up at the Finnish parliament. She was vulnerable because she had just come out of a committee meeting and she was pretty gobsmacked. And, you know, I hope that I did it in a way that felt respectful and didn鈥檛 feel like she was being violated in some way. For me, it was a very compelling moment and I鈥檓 glad it came across, at least to you!

Collins: In that piece on Finland and self-defense we were talking about earlier, you also did a remarkable job conveying a sense of place, even when you were describing stories from the field [where you weren鈥檛 present yourself]. There was a man who was so good at being stealthy that he found he had an unfair advantage as a hunter. He could sneak up on the lynx, which to me was pretty remarkable.

And so he gave up hunting, and like [you鈥檙e] retelling 鈥�

Sappenfield: Yes. 鈥淭oo easy,鈥� he said.

Collins: 鈥�So retelling and relaying is a slightly different art than witnessing something yourself. So how do you approach that? Finding the story once-removed?

Sappenfield: So first, here鈥檚 a little bit of trivia. The one animal he could not sneak up on is a wolverine.

Collins: Oh, wow.

Sappenfield: He said they were too canny. They would always figure him out before he figured them out. So I just thought that was interesting. He鈥檚 tracked everything down, but he couldn鈥檛 track down a wolverine.

Collins: You know, additionally, I think a wolverine is probably the last animal you鈥檇 want to sneak up on.

Sappenfield: He, I tell you, these Finns are amazing. And their connection to nature, they are not scared of anything. I鈥檝e always had a passion for people with passion. You mentioned earlier that I鈥檓 a fan of soccer. I became a fan of soccer because I did a term abroad in college in Ireland, and I would watch them watch soccer. And, you know, they weren鈥檛 in the stadium, but they would have their scarves and they would have them over their heads and they would be singing, and that was amazing. I have covered a lot of Olympic games and you see the same thing.

The passion that these athletes compete with just to me, is so infectious in a good way. And to me, in a lot of ways, that鈥檚 what I鈥檓 looking for in stories is that, you know, news happens because people are passionate about something. You can turn that into a negative thing and turn it into a thing that makes us all hate each other because your passion is something that goes against my passion.

My job is, I feel, more to show the humanity of it. And 鈥� not always, but most of the time 鈥� there isn鈥檛 malign intent, even if some bad things happen. And it鈥檚 kind of getting back to that motive and revealing to the reader what the motivation is and what the passion is. And then to me that kind of hopefully lowers the temperature and lowers the bar a little bit and allows us to see each other as humans and also just see how amazing we are and what cool things we can do.

And that guy was just, I remember I didn鈥檛 know if I was gonna be able to quote him because he was in the military. And I remember being on the edge of my seat asking the guy I was working with in the Finnish army. I was like, 鈥渃an I please quote him?鈥� And he said, 鈥測es.鈥� And I was like, 鈥渙kay, phew.鈥� Because you could go out camping with him and sit around a fire and he could just talk all night and you鈥檇 be spellbound. He was amazing.

Collins: Yeah.

I want to get a little altitude before we let you go. You touched on this some already, but when you were last on this podcast we talked about 鈥� and other times 鈥� we鈥檝e talked about what you think undergirds all Monitor storytelling. As a writer, then editor, now, writer again. In what ways would you say the Monitor mission consistently runs through the work without regard for what specific position, at the Monitor someone is in.

Sappenfield: I think that the tendency, the temptation with news is to be persuasive toward the opinion that I have as the writer, and that鈥檚 very hard to overcome, especially right now when we鈥檙e at such a polarized moment. And, you know, whichever side we鈥檙e on, the values we hold dear seem to be under such threat. The tendency is to bunker down and then use journalism to justify our worldview.

On some level, I feel like the job of the journalist is to show the humanity of everyone so that you get a sense of what the motivation is, so that then you can have some good connection with others through the news that allows you the space to make up your own mind without being subject or hostage to fear, or hatred, or frustration. You have to go deeper than the facts into motivations, into ideas. And, you know, not always 鈥� not always 鈥� but I think oftentimes more than we might imagine, there is some spark of light behind it. And when you look for that, and when you find it, and when you鈥檙e willing to embrace it, even if it isn鈥檛 necessarily what you think.

I think you kind of give your readers more of a fighting chance, 鈥檆ause otherwise, if you鈥檙e just using journalism kind of as a therapy session to make you feel better, I think you鈥檙e, you鈥檙e not letting your readers have a chance of seeing the world in the dynamic, amazing way that not only helps them understand better what鈥檚 going on, but also allows them to do it in a way without being incited.

Collins: Hmm.

Sappenfield: We talked often 鈥� [and] sometimes it didn鈥檛 quite work, but when I was editor, we talked about could we do a play on words about insightful and insightful in the sense of, you know, we wanna be insightful 鈥� S-I-G-H-T 鈥� without being inciting 鈥� I-N-C-I-T-I-N-G. And you know, to me, that鈥檚 the goal.

Collins: Watch out, Mark. They鈥檙e gonna bring you back and put you on the marketing team for your next stint. Thank you so much for your nuanced approach, for finding those sparks, and for really exhibiting the passion that you have for the work that you鈥檙e doing now.

Sappenfield: It鈥檚 fun. It鈥檚 fun to talk about it, so thanks for bringing me on.

Collins: And thanks to our listeners, you can find show notes with links to the stories we just discussed, and to all of Mark鈥檚 work, including his past appearances on this podcast at . This episode was hosted by me, Clay Collins, and produced by Mackenzie Farkus. Jingnan Peng is also a producer on the show. Our sound engineers were Ian Case and Alyssa Britton. Original music by Noel Flatt. Produced by 海角大神. Copyright 2025.