GENEVA -- There is rising concern that IRIN, a unique information project of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), may be in for some serious financial cutbacks or even closure. Given estimated shortfalls of up to 30 million dollars, OCHA is currently evaluating IRIN to see whether the project should be nixed, or at least heavily slashed. When aid agencies need to save money, information initiatives are usually the first to go. Officially, OCHA knows nothing, with one representative informally commenting that it was no more than a "storm in a teacup."

According to several inside sources, however, there is a very realistic possibility that IRIN, which has been providing informed coverage and analysis by specialist reporters of humanitarian situations in Africa, parts of Asia and the Middle East for well over a decade, may have its funding curtailed.  And this despite the fact that IRIN journalists are often the only ones to be reporting on a regular basis from hazardous locations such as Somalia. IRIN, which also produces news videos, documentary films and photos, some of them of exceptional quality, has proved an increasingly utilized information resource for local and international media, the humanitarian community and the public-at-large.

Based in Nairobi, Kenya, IRIN was founded in 1995 to improve the flow of vital information to those involved in relief efforts in the Great Lakes region following the 1994 Rwandan genocide. It is currently operated by OCHA, which also runs ReliefWeb, and relies on funding provided by an array of international donors, including Britain, South Africa, Switzerland, Canada and Norway.

One reason why IRIN is in the firing line is because the production of credible quality information has always been a hard sell within the UN, particularly for the public-at-large or the so-called beneficiaries themselves, notably disaster victims, refugees, and others affected by crisis. OCHA, for example, has yet to incorporate a needs-based information component as part of its humanitarian cluster network, which includes food, medical, shelter and logistical relief. Such an information cluster would help fund within the first 24 hours emergency lifeline media projects, such as specially-tailored radio programmes, aimed at keeping populations informed – and alive - in times of crisis. It would also prove crucial for helping people make basic survival decisions, particularly during the early stages of a disaster.

For years, both humanitarian and media professionals have been urging OCHA and other UN and donor sectors to automatically incorporate credible and independent information initiatives that can save lives. In the past, the failure to support such initiatives has caused much un-necessary death and  misery among victims in disaster zones ranging from the Indian Ocean tsunami to more recent earthquakes, floods and conflict situations. Relibale information is also important for crisis victims to make informed assessments about their current predicaments and their future.

Equally crucial, such reporting is imperative for promoting more effective accountability, including vis-à-vis the very people the humanitarians are supposedly helping.

OCHA now finally seems to have got the message and may be one reason why IRIN is under threat. Last April, OCHA held a meeting in New York with various media groups and information specialists on the need to make better use of media approaches to save lives and inform victims. OCHA is believed to be exploring the possibility of developing a standing partnership with the Thomson-Reuters Foundation to have its news agency reporters provide the humanitarian information needed. The BBC World Service Trust, which is already working with other organizations such as the International Federation of Red Cross Societies, Save the Children and Oxfam, is another possible partner. Such outsourcing might then make the need for IRIN redundant.

The Thomson-Reuters initiative would be carried out by Trust.Org, which produces the Emergency Information Service (EIS) – “information to save lives” – and AlertNet, which offers the international community humanitarian information. While AlertNet does indeed provide quality information highly useful to both aid professionals and journalists, the Reuters journalists are not specialists, which is precisely the strength of IRIN.

The OCHA information project also enjoys less suspicion among UN circles than would an outside news organization such as Trust.org. The journalists IRIN deploys in the field, most of them freelance, know their subjects well, far better in fact tham someone “parachuted" in by a mainstream news organization or an agency reporter, who is also obliged to cover other issues which have nothing to do with the humanitarian sector. Many mainstream journalists may understand their metier well, but not necessarily the survial needs of victims nor the complexity of a humanitarian crisis.

However, according to some critics, one of IRIN's drawbacks is that it still has to tow the line on issues which might be considered  controversial or too sensitive to be made public. It would be hard to see IRIN alerting the public with a story on UNHCR corruption in the field or conflicts of interest within WFP. So the UN information project does not stand as entirely independent.

The problem of how to report reliable humanitarian information will be one of the issues discussed at next week’s Deutschewelle Global Media Forum in Bonn on Conflict Prevention in the Multimedia Age. According to specialized media groups, such as Internews and Media21, there is a distinct danger of having one or two organizations becoming the catch-all media umbrellas encompassing news agency reports, radio, television and new media for the international aid community.

“As with any media, it is important to have as much diversity as possible. Many organizations have their own specific niches, such as humanitarian radio programmes, which they do well,” said Internews' media coordinator Mark Frohardt in Washington.  For its part, the Geneva-based Media21 seeks to improve the awareness and contacts of experienced local and national editors, journalists and producers world-wide, including the ability to report humanitarian and conflict issues, and for whom IRIN serves as a useful information source. "Far better to have well-informed journalists rather than ones who are not informed," said Daniel Wermus of Media21. 

One suggestion, which has been floated for some time now, is to place IRIN somewhat on the outside of the UN family. Still funded by a consortium of donors, perhaps in the form of a trust fund, including financial support from the Thomson Reuters Foundation and other non-governmental organizations, such a new IRIN should become a hybrid organization which is neither UN nor NGO. This would enable the project to be far more independent but would not lose access to crucial sources. Even with the coverage or media interventions provided by Trust.org or BBC World Service Trust, IRIN would thus continue to play a vital humanitarian information role.

Such hybrids already exist in the form of the former War Torn Societies Project, now Interpeace, in Geneva, which benefits from the best of both worlds. It is neither really UN nor NGO. Some UN sources, however, maintain that such a compromise would lose IRIN its “insider” advantage as it would no longer be trusted as one of their own by UN aid representatives.

On the other hand,  well-informed and professional specialized journalists would have no problem in finding out what is going out anyway. This would make IRIN an even better and more credible information resource.

With  UN reform mindful of the need to prevent the un-necessary squandering of resources, IRIN also has the potential for serving as a pool information vehicle for all UN agencies, many of which - from UNHCR to Unicef, WFP and WHO - currently duplicate their information output and do not necesssarily do it well. A professinal online IRIN magazine and news agency representing the different interests of  international relief, refugees and disaster victims stressing cross-cutting aspects of humanitarian action might prove a far more effective outreach tool to both the media and concerned members of the public.

At a time when mainstream western media are cutting back on their global coverage, it is critical to ensure a wide diversity of quality reporting available to all. The current - if not dismal - media environment also suggests that quality information may have to rely on subsidized funding, much in the way that NPR, PBS or BBC do,  in order for such initiatives to go on serving in the public interest.

This not only includes keeping the international community and crisis-affected populations properly informed, but also providing the sort of criticaland independent reporting that will promote more  effective and real transparency in the humanitarian sector. As a journalist who has covered wars and humanitarian for three decades, I have often been critical of IRIN as a UN-run humanitarian news agency with limited editorial independence. Yet IRIN has changed much over the years, often operating under difficult constraints. It still suffers from certain weaknesses, such as too much wire service style rather than insight, which have often frustrated its reporters and editors. Nevertheless, the international community would be poorly served if it simply tossed this highly useful information project on the rubbish heap. 

Essential Edge co-editor Edward Girardet is a Geneva-based journalist and writer specializing in humanitarian, conflict and media issues. He is also a journalist advisor to the Media21 Global Journalism Network initiative. 

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment Preview