海角大神

[MUSIC]

Samantha Laine Perfas: Welcome to 鈥淲hy We Wrote This.鈥� I鈥檓 your host, Samantha Laine Perfas.听

Today I鈥檓 joined by the Monitor鈥檚 editor, Mark Sappenfield. Mark joined the Monitor in 1996 and has since written from Boston, the San Francisco Bay area, the Pentagon, and South Asia. After returning to Boston in 2009, Mark served as both deputy national news editor and national news editor before taking on his current role. Today, he鈥檚 here to talk about a new way that the Monitor is approaching its coverage. Welcome, Mark.听

Mark Sappenfield: Hello, Sam.听

Laine Perfas: So you wrote an essay recently about how the Monitor is taking a new 鈥渧alues鈥� approach to its coverage. Can you talk about that a little bit?聽

Sappenfield: Sure. We鈥檝e been doing amazing journalism for a long time. We try to go beyond just telling you facts. We try and help people understand why something matters or what it means. We try and connect dots. We want to recognize that there are ways to do the news, whether it鈥檚 the tone that we take or whether it鈥檚 the subjects that we look at, that fundamentally try and drive society forward, that look for the good, that look for where people are trying to make a difference. What we found is if you really focus on what matters in the news, you get to this idea that values are driving the news. And what I mean by that is people are fighting for something, for justice or for equality or fairness, or there鈥檚 questions deeply about responsibility in society. When you look at humanity, you鈥檙e talking about the fundamental ideas of dignity, of compassion, of respect. All of these things are really what drive us as humans and really what drive the news. And you realize if you just get to that level, it does something almost alchemical. It brings things to the surface. It helps with readers鈥� understanding. It fundamentally makes it constructive. And it also takes news to that human level where we can all understand that common humanity that we share.听

Laine Perfas: We鈥檝e been talking about this being a new approach for the Monitor, but is it really that different than how we鈥檝e been doing journalism for the last hundred-plus years?聽

Sappenfield: The way we鈥檙e thinking about it is: It鈥檚 a sharpening. These sorts of things have been kind of latent in our journalism, as you said, for as long as we鈥檝e been. And again, in this moment of journalism, there鈥檚 so much competition that you really have to be clear about who are you and why are you different and why are you important in the news media landscape. And so this is just taking those things that we feel have always been natural to who we are, native to who we are, and just making them plain or bringing them to the surface. It鈥檚 about us, you can almost say, valuing ourselves more, saying, 鈥淗ey, this, we do do something a little bit different.鈥� Let鈥檚 lean in on that. So how do you do this? So, you know, obviously, journalism is a lot about going out and looking and seeing what you see. And so often we see in journalism what people see are the negative things. It really does come down to a question of when you go out, what do you see 鈥� these stories of values and of agency, I would say pretty categorically, are there to be found. You just have to condition yourself. You have to prepare yourself, understand how to look for them. To my knowledge, no one has ever done this approach to journalism before. So we as a newsroom are trying to figure it out. And that means all of our journalists coming together, trying to look through that lens. And then we come back to the newsroom and we talk about it. How did that go? Did that feel good? And we just keep calibrating. And it鈥檚 just a constant reinvention or reconsideration of, how do we sharpen this?聽

Laine Perfas: Why are we doing this now?聽

Sappenfield: I do think there鈥檚 a particular need to do it now. And there was an article that was written in The Washington Post not too long ago. It鈥檚 from ... her name is Amanda Ripley. And she talked about a trend that pretty much everyone in news is seeing at the moment. And you could kind of distill it as 鈥渘ews avoidance鈥� or people being news avoiders. And the point that Amanda made is that ultimately journalism right now can leave you feeling sapped of your humanity, scared, angry, frustrated, all of these things. She says, what we need is 鈥渘ews for humans.鈥� And what she鈥檚 talking about there, I think, is just this idea of: Human beings need a sense of agency, not only in their own lives, but [also] in reading about other parts of the world. We don鈥檛 want to be despondent. We don鈥檛 want to be hopeless. But news in general would seem to kindle those things. And one of the things that I hope the Monitor can do is we鈥檙e showing that news doesn鈥檛 have to be that way, is that you can look at the news and see agency.听

Laine Perfas: One thing this makes me wonder, Mark, is if there鈥檚 concern that our coverage might come off as only covering positive news and ignore some of the pretty terrible things that are happening in the world. How would you address that concern?聽

Sappenfield: You know, that鈥檚 something that has been kind of thrown at us, certainly for my entire Monitor career. You know, 鈥淥h, is this rose-colored-glasses news?鈥� And there was this wonderful quote. It鈥檚 the author of 鈥淐ry, the Beloved Country,鈥� which is a novel about apartheid in South Africa. And the author鈥檚 name is Alan Paton, and he was a big Monitor fan. And he says it is 鈥渁 paper of sober and responsible hope.鈥� There are massive challenges for us to face as humanity. But if we only focus on the negative parts of that, we鈥檙e actually missing a huge part of the story. And that鈥檚 going back to Amanda Ripley鈥檚 point. That鈥檚 our agency. Despite all of these things, we have agency to change the world. We have the ability to improve the world. Not only do we have this ability, we use it. So my sense is, this is not Pollyanna-ish. It鈥檚 just a fuller view of what the news is.听

Laine Perfas: So to now ask you a question that鈥檚 maybe a little more personal, maybe not. As the Monitor鈥檚 editor, what makes you the most excited about this new approach?聽

Sappenfield: One of the things that鈥檚 come to me is that at various times I think the Monitor has been an important voice and an important influence in helping to drive journalism toward a better sense of itself. You know, when the Monitor was first founded, you had yellow journalism and the Monitor helped overcome that. Then after that, the Monitor really pushed out and broadened its journalism to incorporate international journalism. The third wave was really about analytical journalism. It was about connecting dots. And that analytical wave, that third wave is what we鈥檙e still in now. So the question is: What is the fourth wave going to be? And to me, the next iteration is going to be journalism that is more constructive, just recognizing that the influence that we have on society matters and are we using it to uplift, using it to try and empower? Are we using it to look for solutions? Are we using it to use a tone that welcomes all and is respectful and doesn鈥檛 make enemies of people? And I feel like this values approach is our way of doing that. Mrs. Eddy said when she founded the Monitor, she said the object of the Monitor is 鈥渢o injure no man but to bless all mankind.鈥� And I feel like that鈥檚 exciting. If you can do journalism that genuinely helps society, heals society, blesses society, makes things better, that鈥檚 pretty powerful and very exciting.听

[MUSIC]

Laine Perfas: Well, thank you so much, Mark, for sharing your thoughts on this.听

Sappenfield: Thank you.听

Laine Perfas: Thanks for listening. To find a transcript of this episode and our show notes visit csmonitor.com/whywewrotethis. This episode was hosted and produced by me, Samantha Laine Perfas, edited by Clay Collins. Our sound engineers were Tim Malone and Alyssa Britton, with original music by Noel Flatt. Produced by the 海角大神 Science Monitor. Copyright 2022.听

[END]