In These Times's The ITT List was recently named one of the top 5 campaign blogs for its coverage of the Democratic National Convention. Check out our current blogging of the Republican National Convention.

Reporting on Americas Most Unwanted

Immersion journalists Sasha Abramsky and Steve Bogira bring the lives of the impoverished, adjudicated and disenfranchised to life.

By Silja J.A. Talvi

From the car seat of his 1998 Nissan Altima, journalist Sasha Abramsky views the American landscape through a multifocal lens. So too does journalist Steve Bogira, from the purview of an uncomfortable courtroom bench. But wherever they are, each spends his time documenting the nation’s most unwanted citizens: the impoverished, adjudicated, imprisoned, and disenfranchised. Neither Abramsky nor Bogira come across… return to article

  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Zoom OutZoom In Reader Comments (2)

    Page 1 of 1 pages

    Urban anthropology anyone? 

    The approach used in this article sounds quite similiar to the qualitative methodes we use in anthropology.  So few people know about (socio) cultural anthropology and the usefulness and value of our techniques. 

    I hale these authors for utilizing the approach that they have, as it emphasizes an empethy with the subjects studied.  HOwever, I must wonder to what extent these jounalists further marginalized their informants, with their “academic” look, and possibly mannerisms.  This possible marginalization would only further perpetuate that the interview subject was incapable of taking action alone and is need of a white academic to speak for them.

    Additionally, the mention of informants expecting to get paid make me wonder if there was any informed consent when approaching the interviewees.  If the person does not have a clear idea of what the results of their participation in an interview will involve or how what they say will be used, they are not making an informed decision.  I find this unethical.

    Canada Posted by eka99 on May 1, 2006 at 8:26 AM

    The ethics of our profession are clear on this: informed consent for someone’s words to be published isn’t an afterthought, it is an absolute must. Both Abramsky and Bogira are very rigorous in this regard, and will often repeat the question that I, too, will ask repeatedly, esp. when dealing with people not usually quoted in the press: “Are you aware and comfortable that you will be quoted?” “Is this on the record,” and so forth. Both authors discussed this with me at length, and it is par for the course for anyone disciplined in and committed to this profession.

    For more on some of the ethical guidelines of the profession--and yes, it is one distinct from urban anthropology, although there are some worthwhile comparisons to be drawn--see, for instance, the SPJ’s site. Poynter is another great resource. You’ll see the kinds of things we’re arguing about, debating, and how the field is evolving and growing. There are many, many other sites: too numerous to list here.

    As journalists engaged in this kind of work--esp. as immersion journalists with the passion of bringing the voices of the unheard to the fore--we do not (and could not possibly) think that our subjects are “incapable.” What *is* true is that America’s poor and disenfranchised often do not have the avenues or experience working with the press to be able to communicate, in turn, with the greater public. The wealthy, the privileged, the lobbyists, well-funded organizations and agencies, etc., have long since figured out how to maximize and even abuse those tools ... so much so, that American mainstream news is completely *dominated* by their perspectives.

    As both Abramsky and Bogira point out--and as many of their contemporaries will echo--it is therefore incumbent on those of us committed to real journalism to seek out the voices that deserve to be heard. Katherine Boo’s work in The New Yorker involving diverse groups of low-income mothers, for instance, is exemplary and fits right into this tradition of immersion reportage that seeks to bring unheard voices to the fore. Modern-day muckrakers and investigative reporters like Eric Schlosser, Jennifer Gonnerman, and many of my fellow editors here at ITT are committed to the same, and I have no doubt in my mind that American journalism is the better for it.

    What *is* also true is that our field needs to grow and nurture journalists of color; Native journalists,; women in investigative reporting (hard news: the perception I’ve often encountered and run up against is that women can’t handle it or are too emotional for the work, which is another interesting discussion); and journalists who actually themselves come from working-class and low-income backgrounds. This is what we see the *least* of in this profession today: where journalists, themselves, have been exposed to the very issues that they are writing about--not in the abstract or in the theoretical, but in the day-to-day. This is something I work, personally, to encourage by going out to schools, to juvie, to inner-city youth, and encouraging young adults to consider pursuing journalism for all the aforementioned reasons.

    And it’s this kind of genuine diversity that will keep the profession as dynamic as it needs to be: free, independent, of and *for* the people, and unbeholden to any pressure group. It’s this kind of journalism that this magazine supports and fosters. That’s something I’m proud to be affiliated with, and believe in wholeheartedly.

    United States Posted by Silja J.A. Talvi on May 1, 2006 at 2:07 PM
    Page 1 of 1 pages

  • register a new account »Posting Security

    To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.
     

    Retreive lost password »

Also by Silja J.A. Talvi
Popular Discussions