Paper prepared for the

International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention

Montreal, 16-19 March 2011

Reporting the Nation:

Understanding the Role of Foreign Correspondents
in 21st Century Public Diplomacy

Cristina Archetti
Lecturer in Politics and Media

School of English, Sociology,

Politics and Contemporary History (ESPaCH)
University of Salford
Crescent House,
Salford Manchester,
M5 4WT
UK

[email protected]

WORK IN PROGRESS
comments welcome and appreciated

The study presented in this paper would have not been possible
without the financial support of the Salford Research Innovation and Strategic Fund
and the generous time contributions made by all interviewees

1
 Reporting the Nation:
Understanding the Role of Foreign Correspondents
in 21st Century Public Diplomacy

Abstract
Foreign correspondents shape the image of a country to the eyes of foreign audiences every
day through their reporting. Despite this, their role tends to be neglected by both policy-
makers and researchers.
By focusing on the UK as a case study, this paper addresses a gap in public diplomacy
literature by illuminating the communication processes through which narratives of power
and identity are both constructed and projected to foreign publics through journalists. It is
based on interviews with foreign correspondents in London and the International Media
Officers at the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The study analyzed, on the one
hand, the impact of new media on the correspondents‘ reporting routines, particularly on
their micro-interactions with sources, editors, members of the public, and other journalists. It
also focused on the effects that such interactions—spanning face-to-face real world contacts
and virtual exchanges—have on the stories they produce. On the other hand it compared the
―theory‖ of dealing with foreign correspondents in public diplomacy official reports to the
practice of the International Media Officers.
The paper points to the benefits of developing a research agenda that brings together
international communications, news sociology, and international relations. This can help
overcome the outdated conceptualizations of public diplomacy that revolve around the idea
of ―sending a message‖ and support, instead, forms of engagement fit for the twenty-first
century.

Keywords: journalism, public diplomacy, foreign correspondents, news, international media,

news sociology, international communication, international relations.

Introduction
Foreign correspondents shape the image of a country to the eyes of foreign audiences on a
daily basis through their reporting. Not only media stories are often all foreign publics see
and hear about other countries. The image of the world foreign correspondents construct
through their reports also constitutes the common knowledge base on which government
officials and diplomats will take their decisions. In fact, foreign policies are often designed to
respond to information publicly available, even if this was not entirely accurate. In the words
of a senior German foreign diplomat based in London:

‗...if you are working in a bureaucracy, like a foreign ministry, it‘s not so much important
what is really going on. It‘s important what your superiors have read. I mean, if they are
convinced there is a war going on between Denmark and Britain and I know quite well
there is no war going on it‘s no good saying ―No, there is no war going on.‖ I have to
say ―Yes, that is a terrible thing, and we have to do the utmost to reconcile the two
countries.‖ If everybody is convinced the war is going on I can‘t come up and say ―No
it‘s not going on‖ because, you know, we have to react to the information that lands
with the perception of our government, of our superiors, and not to the world as we
personally may perceive it, as a specialist. So forget about specialist thinking. You
have to react to the world that is created by the media and the world in which our
politicians live; not the real world, ha. That‘s if it exists.‘1

1
Interview with author, 16 August 2010 (8-9).

2
Foreign journalists, indeed, figured in the very first definition of public diplomacy. They were
listed, in recognition of their essential role, alongside diplomats. Edmund Gullion, who is
credited with having used the expression for the first time in 1965,2 famously defined ―public
diplomacy‖ with the following words:

‗Public diplomacy… deals with the influence of public attitudes on the formation and
execution of foreign policies. It encompasses dimensions of international relations
beyond traditional diplomacy; the cultivation by governments of public opinion in other
countries; the interaction of private groups and interests in one country with another;
the reporting of foreign affairs and its impact on policy; communication between those
whose job is communication, as diplomats and foreign correspondents; and the
process of intercultural communications‘ (Public Diplomacy Alumni Association n.d., my
emphasis)

Despite this initial acknowledgment of the central role of foreign journalists in international
communication, correspondents appear to have been neglected over the years by both
policy-makers and researchers. References to their role in public diplomacy documents, as it
will be illustrated more in detail, are rare. Systematic research about their impact on
diplomatic practice is virtually non-existent.

This paper is part of a cross-disciplinary research agenda that aims at bridging the micro to
the macro level of analysis by looking at the way small changes in the newsgathering
routines of journalists—the way in which communication technologies constrain and enable
journalistic practices, but also the way journalists appropriate these technologies—translate
into change in international relations. The study presented here specifically examines the
political impact of foreign correspondents on public diplomatic practices within the evolving
21st century global communication context. It is a first attempt at addressing a gap in public
diplomacy literature by illuminating the communication processes through which narratives of
power and identity are both constructed and projected to foreign publics through journalists.
To do so, it concentrates on the case study of one specific media and diplomatic hub—
London.

The findings are the preliminary outcomes of a still ongoing pilot study that involved
interviews with foreign correspondents in the British capital and two International Media
Officers at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The study examines, on the one
hand, the impact of new media on foreign correspondents‘ reporting routines, particularly on
their micro-interactions with sources, editors, members of the public, and other journalists. It
also focuses on the effects that such interactions—spanning face-to-face real world contacts
and virtual exchanges—have on the stories they produce. On the other hand it compares
the ―theory‖ of dealing with foreign correspondents in public diplomacy official documents to
the practice of the International Media Officers. It points to the benefits of developing a
research programme that brings together international communications, the sociology of
journalism, and international relations. This can help overcome some of the outdated
conceptualizations of public diplomacy, especially those that revolve around the idea of
―sending a message.‖ A cross-disciplinary approach, instead, can support forms of
engagement appropriate to the twenty-first century.

The argument develops through four stages. The first section shows the general lack of
attention towards foreign correspondents in the context of public diplomacy, despite the
abundance of studies about, respectively, both public diplomacy itself and foreign
correspondence. This initial part of the paper discusses the isolated references to foreign
journalists that are made in public diplomacy official reports. As it will be illustrated, on both
2
As stated in one of the brochures of the Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy that Gullion
established.

3
sides of the Atlantic, official documents tend to acknowledge that ―something more‖ could be
done in relation to foreign correspondents. The review will concentrate on the
recommendations they give about how to successfully engage with foreign journalists.
As a second step the paper illustrates the methodology of the empirical investigation, which
mainly involved in-depth semi-structured interviews with foreign correspondents in London,
but also included interviews with officials. The findings of the study are presented in the third
and main section. The interviews, through plenty of excerpts that illustrate the points made in
the words of the correspondents themselves, particularly underline the complexity of the
information environment in which foreign correspondents operate. This is a far more
sophisticated reality than the measures advocated by public diplomacy reports to ―manage‖
the foreign correspondents can deal with. This section, beyond the correspondents‘
perspective, will also present the experience of the two International Media Officers at the
FCO. Their day-to-day practices reveal a much more nuanced approach than it is suggested
by official documents. The implications of the results are discussed in the fourth and
conclusive part of the paper. They emphasize that, given the extremely variegated nature of
current foreign correspondents‘ practices, a flexible approach to dealing with foreign
journalists is imperative. The professional practice of dealing with correspondents by
International Media Officers in London, in this respect, is ahead of the ―theory‖ contained in
official reports. A greater understanding of journalistic practices in their micro-dimension can
support a renewal of the communication paradigms that underpin public diplomacy strategy
if they want to have any real relevance in a deeply porous and interconnected global
environment.

Foreign correspondents and public diplomacy

The following review of the literature places into context the questions addressed by the
study. It first deals with the limited literature on the role of foreign correspondents in the
context of public diplomacy. In that respect it will particularly refer to official reports issued by
both the American and British governments. The section then moves on to discussing the
existing research on foreign correspondence. The analysis will point out not only how global
media are affecting journalism, but also the way in which current changes in newsgathering
practices can impact the ―management‖ of foreign journalists for public diplomacy purposes.

What role in public diplomacy for foreign correspondents?

After 9/11 there has been an explosion of interest in public diplomacy. This is partly related to
the perceived importance of public diplomacy in addressing, especially in an American
perspective, the rise of global extremism.3 Such attention has led part of the debate to focus
on the role of communication technologies and the way in which their advances can support
both new forms of international engagement and a greater effectiveness of public diplomacy
activities. Indeed, the possibility for official actors to communicate directly with international
audiences through new media and the internet has led to a re-thinking of the way influence
can be delivered to foreign audiences for mutual benefit. Public diplomacy, in the words of
Lord Triesman (2007), a former UK chair of the Public Diplomacy Board, is no longer
confined to the realm of diplomats and small elites, but it is now ‗diverse and dispersed.‘ Its
aim is not limited, as in the past, to promoting a ‗positive image‘ of the UK (Carter 2005: 72),
rather to building ‗a shared awareness, a common understanding of an issue around which
networks of state and non-state actors can coalesce‘ (Evans 2008). The focus on audiences
has led to an increasing number of references to a ‗new public diplomacy‘ (Melissen 2005;

American public diplomacy‘s outreach, according to the State Department‘s website: ‗includes
3

communications with international audiences, cultural programming, academic grants, educational

exchanges, international visitor programs, and U.S. Government efforts to confront ideological
support for terrorism‘ (US Department of State 2011, my emphasis).

4
Potter 2002). Former US Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy Glassman referred to a ‗public
diplomacy 2.0‘ (Glassman 2008). The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is
currently conducting ‗digital diplomacy.‘4

In this context several official reports on both sides of the Atlantic have pointed to the need
for governments to engage foreign journalists in order to communicate more effectively with
broader audiences. They reflect the widespread realization that foreign journalists could play
an extremely valuable role in public diplomacy—if they were only granted sufficient attention.
In fact, as I am now going to illustrate, the few references in official documents tend to stress
the ―missed opportunity‖ that underdeveloped structures for dealing with foreign
correspondents represent within a country‘s public diplomacy strategy.

Among the recommendations drawn by a task force for an urgent ‗strategy of reform‘ of
American public diplomacy in the initial context of the fight against terrorism (Peterson et al.
2002: 13), for example, is the establishment of ‗increasingly meaningful relationships
between the U.S. Government and foreign journalists.‘ According to the report, ‗too often,
foreign reporters feel they are treated as second-class citizens relegated to the fringe of U.S.
outreach efforts. To the extent that the U.S. government marginalizes foreign journalists, it
alienates a group of highly effective, highly credible messengers‘ (13). Similarly, an official
review of British public diplomacy activities (Wilton et al. 2002 report) pointed out that ‗an
article written by a foreign correspondent in London has a greater impact than any of our
other public diplomacy outputs. Feedback from Embassies, when asked to give views for this
review, overwhelmingly identified more attention to foreign correspondents in London as the
one thing that could improve our public diplomacy work‘ (20). Unfortunately, as the document
continues ‗foreign correspondents are not given the attention they warrant, either in the FCO
or in other ministries‘ (20). A later document (Carter 2005 review) again underlined the
‗multiplier effect‘ deriving from the presence of ‗over 2,000 foreign correspondents based in
London (the biggest single concentration after Washington) with the potential to reach large
numbers of the UK‘s public diplomacy audiences overseas‘ (52). It still, however, pointed out
the difficulties of foreign journalists in accessing officials by presenting an extreme example:
‗One journalist from the Arabic Media [sic] said that he had waited almost four years for an
interview with David Blunkett. It was finally granted, but Blunkett resigned as Home Secretary
before it could take place‘ (52).

In order to overcome these limitations, the reports issue urgent calls for a greater
engagement with foreign correspondents. They tend to take the forms of recommendations
for regular ‗access‘ to ‗high-level‘ officials and the delivery of ‗briefings.‘ The American task
force report, for instance, recommends an increase in ‗foreign press access to high-level
American officials, insisting that senior policymakers take time to brief foreign journalists at
U.S. foreign press centers and make themselves available for one-on-one interviews. This
coordinated and consistent effort to engage foreign journalists more effectively must take
place at all times—not just in crises.‘ (Peterson et al., 13-14). The British Wilton report (2002)
also recommends the establishment of regular ‗high-level briefings‘ and ‗better access...to
ministers of all departments‘ to ‗maximise the international impact of positive stories in the
UK‘ (47).

The reasons for the unrealized implementation of greater engagement of foreign journalists
could be explained by the fact, as Morrison and Tumber already pointed out thirty years ago

According to the FCO website, ―digital diplomacy‖ is ‗solving foreign policy problems using the
4

internet [...] It's conventional diplomacy through a different medium. Through the web we can listen,
publish, engage and evaluate in new and interesting ways. Crucially, we can also widen our reach
and communicate directly with civil society as well as governments and influential individuals‘ (Foreign
and Commonwealth Office 2011).

5
in an ethnographic study of foreign correspondents in London, that there are ‗no votes
abroad‘ (1981: 23). Despite the claims that we now live in a globalized world, the importance
of the domestic political arena does not appear to have diminished over the years. Leonard
(2002), writing for the Foreign Policy Centre think tank, underlines the lack of officials‘
attention towards foreign correspondents, ‗sometimes jokingly referred to by press officers in
domestic departments as ―no votes TV‖‘ (74). Hess (2005:84), in a more recent study of
foreign journalists in Washington, similarly suggests that American politicians tend not to be
interested in foreign journalists whose countries are not a priority for the US strategic
interests. While some of the briefings advocated by the Wilton report (2002) were introduced
in Britain, as a later report observed (Carter 2005), they did not bring about ‗the increased
level of contact or access to make a significant impact‘ (11). Journalists still experienced
difficulties in accessing politicians: ‗key frustrations included difficulty navigating around
Government Departments to access information (many journalists referred to repeated calls
being unreturned)‘ (52). According to the report, Israel was mentioned by several journalists
as a model in terms of effective service for foreign correspondents: ‗providing timely and
detailed briefing and ready access to key spokespeople‘ (52). The French Foreign Ministry
was also regarded as particularly efficient, with ‗a programme of 150 slots a year for
journalists [unclear what the programme is about in the original document], a budget of
500,000 [sic] and a team of 4 people making appointments‘ (52).

It is interesting to notice that, at least on paper, the effectiveness of the measures being
advocated appears to depend on the assumption of a communication situation in which a
manageable number of journalists can be identified and contacted—perhaps foreign
correspondents are thought as the full time employees of mainstream established media
organizations—who would tend to reproduce the information they are given—possibly in a
context of limited alternative sources of information. The measures advocated by public
diplomacy reports to engage foreign correspondents appear to describe a linear
communication process between official briefers, journalists, and publics. The essential steps
of this communication relationship could be described as follows: official gives briefing;
foreign correspondent is exposed to it and incorporates it in his/her reporting; foreign public
receives it.

It is true that the mention of anything related to foreign correspondence in official reports is
so limited that perhaps such reports just lack the necessary elaboration and detail. It is
possible that the communication between officials, foreign correspondents, and foreign
publics, in the minds of the officials producing the reports, is not at all that linear. On the
other hand Corman (2009) has criticized American public diplomacy precisely for being
based on oversimplified models of communication. According to him, the current way in
which US officials attempt communicating with foreign publics is based on the notion that
‗messages‘ are transmitted by an Information Source through a Transmitter (via a Signal) to
a Receiver, which will then convey the message to the desired Destination. The implications
are that communication occurs only when messages are sent; that successful
communication can be achieved by improving the skill of the communicator; by reducing the
‗noise‘ in the system; by carefully planning the content of the message and carefully
transmitting it (ibid.). This is a model that was developed by David Berlo in the 1960s and
was based on the study of telephone communication systems. Corman explains its current
role in shaping official thinking through the fact that, having being taught across
communication and public relations courses over decades, it has become part of the way
public diplomacy practitioners in the US read the reality of international communications
(Corman 2010). This model of communication, however, as he puts it, was ‗cutting-edge at
the time of Eisenhower‘ (2009). Its continued existence is nonetheless confirmed by a whole
range of statements contained in a recent ―Report on Strategic Communications‖ issues by

6
the US Department of Defense in 2009.5 It would not be unreasonable to hypothesize that
this understanding of communication processes could also shape the way public diplomacy
officials, especially if they do not have any first-hand experience of journalism, tend to see
the interaction between briefers, foreign correspondents, and foreign publics—perhaps not
only in the US, but also in the UK.

What the study investigates is thus: What are governments doing to deal with foreign
correspondents in practice? To what degree are the measures advocated by official reports
able to deal with the current reality of a 24/7 global media environment? How could officials
engage more effectively with journalists in a context in which not only diplomacy, but also
foreign correspondence is changing? In the next section I am going to tackle the debate
about the current evolution of foreign correspondence and the way this could impact public
diplomats‘ ability to engage with foreign journalists.

A new foreign correspondence?

A review of the extensive literature on foreign correspondence far exceeds the scope of this
paper.6 The focus is here on those aspects that have the potential to affect the way in which
foreign journalists relate to officials among other sources and project the image of a country
to the eyes of foreign audiences. Advances in communication technologies, particularly the
speed and ease at which it is possible to communicate across distances, appear to have
three major and interconnected impacts on foreign correspondents‘ practices. The first is
related to a change in the identity and professional role of foreign correspondents. The
second covers their access to sources. The third concerns the correspondents‘ journalistic
output: the contents of the stories they write. They will now be illustrated in turn.

Advances in communication technologies affect the identity and the professional role of
foreign correspondents. The development of new media, by lowering the economic barriers
to publishing and broadcasting is expected to have an impact on the identity of journalists
(Hamilton and Jenner 2004: 308). Almost anybody with access to a computer can ―report‖ to
worldwide audiences. Such proliferation of sources challenges the role of the journalist as
―expert‖ in the dissemination of information and leads to a blurring between the public and
professional reporters (Tumber 2006), most noticeably in the phenomenon of citizen
journalism and blogging. In this context some talk about the disappearance of foreign
correspondents (Kalb 1990; Hiatt 2007). Others, instead, point at the ‗evolution‘ of their role
and activities (Hamilton and Jenner 2004). On the one hand this trend leads to a decline of
the traditional figure of the bureau-based foreign correspondent—what Cohen (1963: 17)
described as a ‗man [sic] in grey flannels who ranks very high in the hierarchy of reporters.‘
This kind of correspondent was normally from the country where his/her news organization
was based and was expected to report from that country‘s perspective. Editors would
periodically rotate correspondents precisely to avoid them becoming too absorbed by the
local culture (Hamilton and Jenner 2004: 306; Wu and Hamilton 2004: 518). On the other
hand global interdependence has changed the way in which foreign news is reported and
consumed (Hamilton and Jenner 2004: 302-303). The new environment is the ground for the
development of a greater variety of correspondents‘ identities and respective distinct

One of them is that the ‗strategic communication‘ that supports public diplomacy is ‗an adaptive,
5

decentralized process of trying to understand selected audiences thoroughly, hypothesizing physical

or informational signals that will have the desired cognitive effect on those audiences, testing those
hypotheses through action, monitoring the actual result through feedback, and disseminating the best
solutions quickly‘ (US Department of Defense 2009: 3).
6
Here are just a few texts the reader might want to consult. In relation to foreign correspondence in
general: Hannerz 2004; the special issue of Journalism Studies 11(5) 2010; Sambrook 2010. About
foreign correspondence in the UK: Kruglak 1954; Tunstall 1971; Morrison and Tumber 1981; Bober
1999. On foreign correspondence in the US: Lambert 1956; Mowlana 1975; Ghorpade 1984; Hess
1996, 2005; Hamilton 2009; Hamilton and Jenner 2004; Nair 1991; Wilnat and Weaver 2003.

7
professional roles: for example, among the rest, the ‗foreign foreign correspondent,‘ a hired
foreign national who is expected to report from a local angle; or the ‗foreign local
correspondent,‘ a foreign national who reports about local stories which have international
implications (ibid.: 313). The study tackles the questions: Who are the foreign
correspondents in London? What does their professional role of ―foreign correspondent‖
consist in? What do they do? What are their living and working conditions? This is an
important aspect because of the possibility that a substantial number of journalists who do
not fit the traditional role or definition of ―foreign correspondent‖—in the words of Morrison
and Tumber (1981: 16) ‗an individual who corresponds/report, regardless of nationality, full
time on a staff basis for a news organisation, whose headquarters are based outside the
United Kingdom‘—could be operating below the radar of public diplomacy officials. It also
aims to investigate the claim that foreign bureaux are being closed down by a combination of
a lack of interest in foreign news by domestic publics and the financial costs of supporting
entire offices abroad (Sambrook 2010: 11-25). Again, this is very relevant because of the
possibility that long-term correspondents are replaced by local, occasional, and unidentifiable
(to the eyes of media officers) stringers. Alternatively, correspondents might still be
operating, but perhaps in reduced numbers and, thanks to the available portable technology,
without an official address.

Advances in communication technologies affect foreign correspondents‘ access to sources.

A second major impact that advances in communication technologies are having on
journalism is related to reporters‘ access to sources. Sources journalists normally access do
not only include people, such as officials, experts, foreign diplomats, other journalists, or
members of the public, but also media sources. Foreign correspondents are no exception to
this. This is nothing new either: Morrison and Tumber, for example, wrote in 1985 that foreign
correspondents were dependent ‗on the host-country media for information and ideas‘
(Morrison and Tumber 1985: 466). The ‗host-country media‘ was then mainly constituted by
national newspapers. The extent of such dependency, however, already at that time was
defined ‗enormous‘ (ibid.). The time spent on gathering news through media sources was
considerably higher than that spent on talking to personal contacts (Morrison and Tumber
1981: 54). This trend was explained by the fact that foreign journalists tended to operate on
tight budgets, often on their own (ibid.: 23; 1985: 458; see also Wu and Hamilton 2004: 527).
Morrison and Tumber (1985: 466), indeed, concluded that a foreign correspondent was ‗as
good as the local media will allow.‘ The study examines how access to sources has changed
since with the development of a global media network, digital communication technologies,
and the advent of the internet. More specifically it addresses the questions: Which media
sources do London correspondents currently use? Are they even more reliant on media
sources, given their ubiquitous availability, at the expense of personal contacts? Or is the
greater ease with which information can be gathered from a variety of media sources making
it more convenient to pursue personal contacts? Where do London foreign correspondents
get their information from in a context characterized by a blurring between the local, the
national, and the global? To what extent do they rely on official sources and briefings? Is
physical ―access‖ to official sources really that important?

Advances in communication technologies, by affecting foreign correspondents‘

newsgathering routines, have an impact on the stories they write. On the one hand some
argue that the increasing speed of the news cycle, combined with fiercer commercial
competition over ratings, leads to lower standards of journalism that favour ―infotainment‖
over well-researched content (Neil 2007; Thussu 2007). Decreasing time for newsgathering
also appears to encourage reliance on newsagencies material, with the result that news is
becoming increasingly homogeneous on a worldwide scale (Paterson 1997; Boyd-Barrett
and Rantanen 1998). On the other hand, the possibility of accessing alternative sources
through communication technologies creates the potential for a better contextualization of
events within a greater variety of perspectives (Archetti 2008). The study assesses the effect

8
of the news cycle speed, and the sources‘ globalization (as either availability of the same
sources or multiplication of alternative sources) on foreign correspondents‘ stories by tackling
the questions: What do foreign correspondents report about? Which/how many sources do
their stories rely on?
It is important, however, to avoid technological determinism. While the speed and ease of
communication might affect the newsgathering routines of journalists, the correspondents‘
choices about what to write in their stories are ultimately going to be based on
newsworthiness considerations. In this respect the study builds on the findings of a previous
comparative investigation into what shaped the coverage of 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan
in the US, Italy, France, and Pakistan (Archetti 2010b). In that context, the variation of stories
across countries and news organizations was explained by the different selection of sources
used by journalists. While reactions to international events by a very large number of sources
were available—through the internet for example—journalists were found to be interested in
just the few they regarded as newsworthy. In the context of that study, three interrelated
variables played a role in the journalists‘ assessment of the sources‘ newsworthiness. The
first was the level of engagement of the country in which the journalist‘s news organization
was based with the rest of the world (foreign policy). Political, economic, and historical ties
(former colonies for instance) with foreign countries led to a greater reporting of foreign
sources from those countries. This affected the content of the stories. The greater the ratio
between international and national sources, the wider the range of debate within the
coverage: the more foreign sources, the more varied the perspectives from which the same
event was reported. The second variable was journalistic culture in which journalists had
been socialized. For example journalists socialized in a journalistic culture aspiring to
objectivity (as in the US), in reporting a political event, tended to rely more on official
sources. Journalists socialized in a commentary-oriented journalistic culture (as in France),
instead, on expert or academic opinion. Differences in journalistic culture therefore affected
the stories written by journalists by leading to varying proportions of factual reporting against
commentary. The third variable was editorial policy of the organization journalists worked for.
Editorial policy would further shape the stories by setting the range of topics to be covered
and the degree to which the subjective voice of the journalist would be expressed in his/her
stories. These aspects were also tied to the expected interest of target audiences, in turn
connected to the economic interests of the news organization. The study presented here
assesses to what extent these variables apply to foreign correspondence and their relevance
in combination with both the opportunities and constraints introduced by communications
technologies in journalists‘ newsgathering activities. It addresses the questions: How does a
story come about? Who initiates it? Which decisions by the journalist, editors, and news
organizations explain the contents of the story? The investigation of this aspect helps placing
into context the extent to which journalists would reproduce official briefings. In other words:
to what extent do they convey information rather than re-write it and re-interpret it? What is
their leeway for creativity and independence?

To draw together all the points that have been made so far, the study aims to investigate the
significance of micro changes in the newsgathering routines of journalists—the way in which
communication technologies both constrain and facilitate journalistic activities, but also the
way journalists appropriate these technologies for their own purposes—for the practice of
public diplomacy and, ultimately, for the explanation and understanding of international
relations. To do so, it concentrates on the case study of a specific media and diplomatic
hub—London. The details of the methodology are described next.

9
Methodology
The study is an ongoing pilot investigation that has, so far, involved semi-structured
interviews with 16 foreign correspondents in London (Nov.-Dec. 2010) and the 2
International Media Officers at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) (March 2011).
The 16 foreign correspondents7 were ten men and six women from Australia (1), Brazil (3),
Germany (4), Greece (6), and Russia (2). This study is part of a broader project. It followed a
series of interviews with foreign diplomats in London (July-Aug. 2010). The journalists were
contacted through the press offices of the embassies the researcher had established contact
with. The press offices were asked to forward an invitation to their journalists‘ mailing lists to
take part in the study. Those who were interviewed were the correspondents who voluntarily
contacted the researcher. Being able to cherry-pick the journalists according to their
nationality, role (for example journalist working for a press organization rather than a TV
channel), and employment arrangement among the other variables could have supported a
technically impeccable comparative research design. The reality of the empirical
investigation, however, meant that the sample of interviewees was ultimately shaped by the
availability of correspondents. This, although not ideal, still offers variation in terms of three
main variables that have been identified in the previous section of the paper. The
correspondents‘ nationality represents countries with different political relationship with the
UK (foreign policy variable). They include Australia, a country tied to the UK by its
membership of the Commonwealth; Brazil, a ‗major transitional‘ country and one of the
public diplomacy ‗geographical priorities‘ according to the Carter review (2005); Germany
and Greece, two EU members states with very different domestic economic situations; and
Russia, a country with which the UK has a more controversial political relationship. They
also provide variation in terms of the variable journalistic culture by spanning from the North
Atlantic or Liberal model of journalism (Australia), to the North/Central European or
Democratic Corporatist model (Germany), and the Mediterranean or Pluralist Polarized
(Greece) (Hallin and Mancini 2004). It also includes Russia, again presenting controversial
issues related to media freedom (Reporters Without Borders 2010). The inclusion of Brazil,
instead, allows covering the journalistic practices of a ‗new democracy‘ (Voltmer 2006). The
correspondents‘ sample additionally provides variation in terms of editorial policy of different
news organizations. The journalists‘ positions span those of correspondents, stringers, and
freelance. They work for a range of media organizations: newsagencies (Australian
Associated Press, Agencia Estado [Brazilian non-state agency], RIA Novosti [Russian]; radio
(ARD [German public radio broadcaster]); magazines (two German publications: Stern and
Focus); radio and TV (several Greek stations: ERT3; ANT ENA TV and Flash Radio; Net
Radio 105.8; SKAI TV and Radio); foreign publications in the UK (Brazilian News [in
Portuguese]; Angliya [in Russian]). They have also covered a variety of roles over the course
of their career, which gave them greater perspective and a reflective attitude on what
affected their activities, especially their journalistic output.

Although the number of foreign journalists is not extensive, the interviews gave the
opportunity to get into the details of the journalists‘ working routines and thinking processes
that lead to story selection and research. The interviews lasted between 18 and 70 minutes,
with an average of well above 40 minutes. The correspondents have spent between 7
months and 31 years in London, between 4 and 50 years in journalism. Most of them have
been journalists for well over a decade. Their majority has been working for media

A ―Foreign correspondent‖ in this study is not only, as mentioned earlier, ‗an individual who
7

corresponds/report, regardless of nationality, full time on a staff basis for a news organisation, whose
headquarters are based outside the United Kingdom‘ (Morrison and Tumber 1981: 16). To capture the
possible changes in both the identity and employment arrangements of the journalists, a foreign
correspondent is here ―any foreign journalist who reports from the UK for a foreign audience.‖ This
definition also includes foreign audiences within the UK, as in the case of the staff (which also
includes unpaid individuals) of the weekly publications Brazilian News and Angliya, respectively
addressing Portuguese- and Russian-speaking publics in the UK.

10
organizations in the respective home countries, often in additional countries other than the
UK. They were therefore in the position to compare newsgathering routines across different
media and information environments. They were also able to comment about the way the
advent of the internet, instantaneous communications, and social media have, over time,
affected their working routines. The questions of the semi-structured interviews are available
in the Appendix.
Although more contacts are being established at the time of writing, interviews with officials
have so far been made with the two International Media Officer of the FCO.

Findings
The possible lack of a linear communication process between political actors, journalists,
and the public is not something related to the fact that, in our age, information is ubiquitous.
It might have never really existed. Morrison and Tumber, writing in 1981, already observed
that correspondents in London overwhelmingly relied on local media (not officials!) to write
their reports. In fact, this is what Robert Vansittart, who had the responsibility of dealing with
the press during the tenure of Lord Curzon as Foreign Secretary, had to say in the 1920s:

‗Beside this Fleet Street [where the press headquarters were] leviathan I was small fry,
but Curzon expected me to influence newspaper-men to an extent impossible in the
twentieth century...He swung between thinking they knew too much and too little of his
domain...Every morning trouble arose on the telephone. ―Why did you put that in?‖ He
did not understand that the modern journalists had sources of information other than
the Foreign Office‘ (in Taylor 1981: 16)

Considering the multiplication of information channels over the last decades, together with
their ease of access and availability, it would be reasonable to expect a further proliferation
of sources. This could additionally undermine the possibility of a straightforward process of
communication between official actors, journalists and audiences. Besides, journalists have
never been purely conveyor belts of official information. Media management by political
actors can be an influence on a complex process of news selection and construction that, in
its final form, is not the product of any single hand (Archetti 2010a, 2010b). The extent to
which political actors manage to shape the news very much depends on the source
competition within an information environment in relation to a specific issue. For example, in
the context of the coverage of 9/11, political actors in the US constituted a substantial
proportion of the overall sources quoted in news reports. This did not mean that reports
simply ―reproduced‖ official briefings. On the contrary, often quotes were printed for the
purpose of criticism or were juxtaposed to opposing views. It is true, however, that they
occupied a larger proportion of the available news space for the 9/11 issue. In foreign
countries like Italy, instead, political actors were marginal sources. This is explained by the
greater newsworthiness of academic and intellectual sources in a journalistic culture that,
differently from the American anglo-saxon focus on objectivity, values opinion and
commentary (ibid.).

After having looked at the ―theory‖ of managing foreign correspondents as expressed in

official public diplomacy reports and at foreign correspondence as the object of investigation
of journalism literature, the aims of this section is placing the analytical spotlight on practice.
This part of the paper examines what shapes the reporting of foreign correspondents in
London from the perspective of the journalists‘ experience. An analysis of the identity,
newsgathering routines (especially relationships with sources), and story outputs of the
foreign journalists in the British capital, as it will be demonstrated, clearly shows that the
current reality of foreign correspondence is as far as it gets from the rather linear scenario
emerging from official reports. The way foreign journalists construct and project the image of

11
the UK by reporting about the country is actually affected by a whole set of interconnected
factors. They are going to be illustrated next. They will be followed by an analysis of the
measures that are currently adopted by the FCO to deal with foreign correspondents. The
practices of the two International Media Officers, who have worked closely to if not in
journalism before and who deal with foreign journalists‘ needs every day, interestingly—
although perhaps not surprisingly—show a much more flexible approach in delivering
influence than it emerges from the official documents.

The Foreign Correspondents in London

Who are the foreign correspondents?

The profile of foreign correspondents in London appears to be changing from what it used to
be in the past. The analysis will now first look at the foreign journalist‘ identity. It will then
challenge the claim that they are somehow ―disappearing.‖ It will later examine the political
role of foreign journalists reporting for often sizeable diasporic communities within the UK.

A new generation of correspondents?

Form the point of view of the identity of the correspondents who have been interviewed,
besides the journalistic veterans, there are also relatively younger people who have become
involved in foreign correspondence than it was the case in the past (Morrison and Tumber
1981: 20). While the London posting used to be considered almost like the coronation of a
journalist‘s distinguished career due to the prestige associated with the location (ibid.: 19),
now journalists who might have had less experience in journalism are able to ―to the job.‖ In
the words of Thomas Wald, correspondent for the Australian Associated Press ‗[now] in
journalism people who are not complete experts in a field can gather information much more
quickly than in the past and get up to speed [...] it probably evens out‘ (8). In fact, another
interviewee, Raphael Honigstein, German freelance sport correspondent who also writes for
the Guardian newspaper, when he started reporting did not have a background in journalism
at all. He started writing almost by chance while he was studying for a law degree in London:

‗I moved to London in ‘93 to study law but I used to come back to Munich all the time
and tell people about London, and I was very much involved in, you know, youth
culture and fashion and music. And I would tell my friends who these mad people
[British] were, and a lot of my friends in Munich worked in the media, and one day one
of them said to me, ‗Why don‘t you write about it?‘ So that‘s what I did and I quickly
found that I really liked writing and I found that people were interested in what I wrote,
and I guess it was also at that time in the ‗90s when London was seen as very, very
important. You know, the whole sort of Brit-Pop, Cool Britannia, phase, and as I
happened to be here I did a lot of stuff on that. I started writing about football much
later. I started writing about music, fashion and that sort of stuff first‘ (1).

After his first degree he did an MA in Media and Communication at the London School of
Economics, although that was ‗more of a theoretical course. They did not really teach you
how to do things‘ (1).

Thanassis Gavos, freelance correspondent working among the rest for the Greek station
SKAI, also almost directly started reporting as a foreign correspondent. He has spent most of
his journalism career in London: he started to work for SKAI (originally a radio station) during
a placement in Greece when he was 19, then moved to Britain at 22 to work first for the BBC
Greek section, then always in London he transferred to his current company when it became
a TV station (1).

12
Foreign journalists tend to work even more in isolation than in previous years.8 Most of the
interviewees were the only correspondent in London for their respective organization. The
tendency, if any extra help is needed, is to temporarily hire professionals on the ground.
Imke Henkel, for example, is the only correspondent for the German magazine Focus and
often hires photographers locally to take pictures to accompany her pieces (5). Also
Thanassis Gavos, only London freelance correspondent for radio and TV station SKAI,
would hire a camera crew to ‗go out‘ and shoot his reports (3). The reduced numbers appear
to be related to advances in communication technology, particularly the fact that recording
equipment is portable, easily usable, and editing can be done on the spot. Isaac Karipidis
(Greek TV station ANT ENA and Flash Radio), for example, says:

‗I do all the camera coverage by myself [...] I‘m working on my own. I used to have a
cameraman, I used to have a sound recorder and everything but now I‘m going on with
my own. I have my own camera, I have my laptop. I go there, I take my pictures, I do
my stand ups, I edit the story and I send it to Greece. That makes my job a little bit
more complicated but at the same time, 300 per cent cheaper than before‘ (9)

Alexander Smotrov, correspondent for the Russian newsagency RIA Novosti, also explains
that his organization does not have ‗a big office in comparison with other organisations' (1).9
Beyond a bureau chief, he and a colleague are the main news reporters. Despite the small
number, thanks to the user friendly technology, they are still able produce ‗different types of
content including text, pictures, and video‘ (2):

‗we [...] have been trained. In Moscow we were given some new equipment. It‘s not
fully professional, but the equipment is easy to carry around in a bag: a small video
camera and a photographic camera and accessories like tripods and a small lap-top to
transmit the material back to the Moscow office. The Moscow office has been through
changes as well because they have a huge desk now which deals with multimedia (2)

Many of the interviewees did not have an office. Some worked at home. For example
Cornelia Fuchs, correspondent for the German magazine Stern works from home through
her laptop. Although the publication has offices in Paris and New York, this formula has been
adopted by her magazine for ten other locations (including Shanghai, Bangkok, South Africa,
Beirut, Kabul, Istanbul,...). Also sport correspondent Raphael Honigstein mentioned that he
tends to work from home, even if he also has a desk in a shared architects‘ office: ‗it‘s really
only a desk and a wireless internet connection. I don‘t have a phone there. I mean you
don‘t need anything else‘ (7).

In an interview with the London Foreign Press Association director Christopher Wyld it
emerged that nobody really knows how many foreign correspondents are working in the
British capital.10 As mentioned earlier, the Carter report (2005) talks of ‗over 2,000 foreign
correspondents‘ (Carter 2005, 52). It is not clear where the estimate comes from. The
International Media Officers of the FCO put the figure at ‗between 1,300-1,500‘ (Hewitt).
Even if this was correct, the FPA members are only about 500 (Wyld) (‗400‘ in the
International Media Officer‘s interview, as the FPA members would also include ‗public
relations‘ professionals). Some journalists, especially from developing countries, simply do
not register with the association because of the joining and annual fee costs (Wyld).

8
Morrison and Tumber (1981), already in the early 1980s, found that 30% of the London
correspondents they surveyed worked alone and 41% only had one or two other correspondents
alongside them (23).
9
He says that the Russian competitor ITAR-TASS has 6 members of staff, Chinese Xinhua 16, the
‗French newsagencies have several dozen people‘ (2).
10
The interview was held in autumn 2008.

13
From the point of view of officials, the fact that a possibly very high number of journalists are
not registered with any association and do not have an office—an eloquent expression used
by the Australian Thomas Wald was ‗there are correspondents who literally just work out of a
bag‘ (2)—means that there is a whole set of interactions and activities that could take place
below their radar. It does not mean that these journalists will not use official material (which
might be available through government websites) or that they will not interact with any official
(who might be contacted by phone), but it becomes difficult to identify clear boundaries in the
cohort of foreign journalists to be ―targeted‖ for public diplomacy purposes.

Are foreign correspondents disappearing?

The interviews point to mixed evidence when it comes to the argument that foreign
correspondents are somehow at risk of vanishing. This argument could suggest that the
number of foreign journalists might become more manageable for public diplomacy officials
because of their declining numbers. The conversations with the journalists suggest,
however, that cuts in foreign correspondence appear to affect mainly the newspaper
industry. Radio and magazines, again according to the experience of the interviewees, are
not really seeing financial cuts. Cornelia Fuchs of Stern, in fact, explains that her magazine
has never had so many foreign correspondents (5). Indeed, as she puts it, ‗the only reason
why someone would buy a magazine like Stern anymore is because people know that our
journalist are actually there [reporting from a foreign country]‘ (5). This is confirmed by a
recent report about the state of foreign correspondence by Sambrook (2010). He describes
how a specialist magazine like Monocle has been able to exploit precisely the ‗cuts
elsewhere in international coverage‘ to thrive (22).

The interviewees‘ experience lends support to the idea that foreign correspondence is
affected by a financial crisis (Sambrook 2010: 11-25). They, however, reveal further nuances
beyond the notion that the economic downturn simply leads to the closure of foreign
bureaux. They show that it can also affect the way journalists operate in foreign countries.
This has an impact, as it will be seen more in detail later in the section about newsgathering
routines, the amount of resources foreign journalists can devote to researching their stories
and ―going deeper‖ rather than relying on secondary sources. The foreign correspondents,
more specifically, highlight the existence of a link between the health of the media industry in
the journalists‘ home country and the quality of the correspondence journalism. This is
particularly related to the Greek media, which appears to have been most heavily hit by the
country‘s financial crisis. Two foreign correspondents openly mention that colleagues of
theirs have lost their job (Kantzavelou, 4; Lympery, 4). Viron Karidis, who was a senior
producer of the BBC Greek section in London in the past but who works now a stringer for
the Greek newspaper Kathimerini, is quite pessimistic about the situation. He comments
about the fact that many Greek foreign correspondents, being paid very little, cannot provide
good quality journalism:

‗Because if you‘re not being paid, why on earth [would you] kill yourself trying to find an
original story, if you follow me? So a lot of them [foreign correspondents] live here a bit
like public servants. They have a very small salary, and just to survive all of them do
other jobs in order to earn their daily bread and butter. They can‘t survive on the
money they get from Greece [...] They are under-used [...] and it is not their fault. It‘s
the fault of the editors and the proprietors mainly‘ (6).

On the other hand Isaac Karipidis of ANT ENA TV and Flash Radio recognizes in this
situation the opportunity for a renewal of journalism in his country: ‗this financial crisis will…
will kick out all the people that they are not really suitable for the job. The people that will
stay at the end of the crisis, they will be the top of the top. And that probably will drive
journalism to better days‘ (9). As he further explains:

14
 ‗the crisis… will clear up the mess [...] I can give you an example. In Greece, we have
more than 15 national newspapers. [...] Greece has only 12 million people. However,
Britain has 55 million people, English language is spoken much more than the Greek
one and …[as for] the English national newspapers, there are no more than seven. So
that shows [...] there are a lot of publications back in Greece. They cannot really
survive under normal circumstances. So now every day in the news, we know that
either a newspaper is closing down or they sack people there or things like that. But in
the end, we need to have some media. Those who will stay [survive] in Greece, they
will be the ones that they are really interested in journalism. The people will trust to
read them because they have the correct [good] stories‘ (9-10)

Another argument supporting the notion that foreign correspondents are somehow
disappearing is that, especially for news available in a language as widespread as English,
foreign audiences can access foreign news themselves, without the intermediary role of the
correspondents. This could lead to thinking that foreign correspondents are somehow
―redundant.‖ Alexander Smotrov (RIA Novosti), however, sees in the current developments
again an incentive for a more insightful journalism:

‗We do feel the pressure of other media [alternative sources of information for publics]
and have a general awareness of the fact that audiences can access original sources
of information and read the English language media; for example, BBC, Sky News, The
Guardian, The Times, and other websites. Of course we feel this pressure and that‘s
why we can‘t simply survive if we continue to work as our colleagues worked thirty
years ago, when they picked up stories from the local media and went with that. We
can‘t do this anymore, but have to add significant additional value to our stories [...]
special angles, maybe some opinion, multimedia and good background details. Even
our own observation sometimes helps us to find a very interesting story‘ (7).

Alternative geometries of influence

The interviews additionally reveal a dimension of cross cultural communication that is not
explicitly addressed by official reports. This is the space occupied by diasporic
communities—foreign audiences that are not technically abroad. As an example we can
look at the Brazilian community in the UK—an audience of as many as 300,000 people
(Carolina Beal, 2). There are foreign journalists in the UK that report for these foreign
audiences within the UK itself. While diasporic communities have, to an extent, always
existed and there is a substantial amount of literature on diasporic media, research tends to
focus on the cultural aspects of it. An underdeveloped side of research is the political
significance of these media, particularly when, beyond reporting about the community, they
appear to play the role of ‗filter‘ between the diaspora (Brazilians in the UK for example) and
the national British media.

Michael Ellinas, who works for the London Greek newspaper (published weekly in Greek)
Eleftheria, in fact, describes the content of his media outlet as: ‗Community news is fifty
percent, twenty percent about Cyprus and Greece, and the rest [30%] is British news‘ (2). Ilja
Gonciarov, editor in chief of Angliya, also explains that the purpose of his publication is ‗to
inform our readers about British events, not only about the community‘ (4). The weekly
publication in Russian actually addresses an extensive audience:

‗The Russian language is the lingua franca of a large region. Russian-speaking people
aren‘t only native to Russia, but to Lithuania and many other countries. So in Latvia for
example, seventy-five percent of people are native Russians. And the same for
Estonia, the same for the Ukraine, the same for Belarus; it might not be quite such a
big percentage but Russians are a considerable proportion of the population of these
ex-USSR countries. We also have many immigrants here in London from Kazakhstan

15
 and from the Ukraine and all these countries, and they speak Russian. So our readers
don‘t only come from the Russian Federation but from this entire Russian-speaking
region‘ (3)

Carolina Beal, editor of Brazilian News, a community newspaper style (published weekly in
Portuguese) that, in her words, is ‗read both at the embassy and by people waiting to have
their hair done at the hairdresser‘s‘ (2) describes the contents of her publication. She says
that, while relating to the Brazilian audience, the newspaper‘s news also strongly refers to
the community‘s place in British society and the way in which events in the country affect the
life of the community members. As an illustration, here is her reply to the question of what
kind of stories her newspaper would normally cover:

‗If there is a very important thing about Brazil that will be the cover story. So this year
we had the elections, and that was the cover story even though it was a bit boring for
some people. The problem was that most people here who are here irregularly weren‘t
going to vote, and neither did the students, but in Brazil voting is obligatory. But you
can‘t transfer your documents over here if you‘re only staying for a while. You won‘t
get 300,000 people voting anyway and even if 3,000 people were eligible to vote here it
doesn‘t mean that they would have voted. But our last cover story was about Prince
William‘s engagement, with a kind of analysis about the impact on tourism and that sort
of thing because I think that‘s interesting even to people who live here. And we had the
Brazilian Festival in June on the South Bank, so that was quite interesting. We had the
World Cup, as well. And before I worked here we had the case of Jean Charles de
Menezes, the guy who was killed by the Police. When this kind of thing happens it
really, really moves the community. For example we had a case of a family, where the
mother and children died in a fire, which we ran one week. People were really moved
by that. The father wanted to repatriate their bodies to Brazil but he didn‘t have the
money, so we ran an appeal. Then we had a case of a woman who had a money
transfer business that transferred money to Brazil, which she operated from her house,
and she just disappeared and took everyone‘s money. The British Police worked on
the case in conjunction with the Brazilian Police. So we ran this story for a long time,
because a lot of people lost a lot of money. So it‘s all interesting, and helps me to
understand the community more. Then we also cover current affairs both here and in
Brazil. So the newspaper is a kind of filter‘ (4, my emphasis)

More specifically, in the case of Brazilian News and Angliya, the publications are seen as a
tool for a greater integration of the foreign community into British society. As Carolina Beal
puts it, the publication tries to ‗bridge the English media and the Brazilian community‘ (5). Ilja
Gonciarov, editor in chief of Angliya, confirms the point by stating that that beyond ‗things
happening in the community‘ his newspaper also publishes ‗stories about living in Britain: we
have a page called ―Learn your Island‖ where we write about England and include
educational things about Britain for our readers where we write about British culture, history,
geography and tourism [...] we would like to offer our readers more information, not only
news but general information. For example about different towns in the UK and the different
traditions maintained here in this country, just so that people can take a bigger part in British
life (4-5).

To further elaborate on the role of bridge between British society and the foreign community,
when asked about which stories Brazilian News has recently published that were mostly
related to the UK, Carolina Beal replied:

‗Halloween for example; I try to run stories about these sorts of things because I want
Brazilians here to be aware of them and take part as well, and so I explain events to
them. For example, [British] people wearing poppies [small poppy-shaped badges] for

16
 Armistice Day. Brazilians here sometimes don‘t have much contact with English
people and they‘re sometimes too shy to ask what something means. Brazilians are not
known for being shy, but sometimes they don‘t understand things!

Q: So did you run a story explaining what the poppy is about?

Yes, what it is, what it means, why people wear them, that sort of thing. And also Guy
Fawkes – what the hell is that about?11 People don‘t know. There are some people
[Brazilians] who come here just to make money, and they don‘t really get involved with
the English community and it‘s quite sad. Last week we had a meeting with the
Olympic Committee and they are going to try and involve lots of Brazilians because
there will be a huge contingent coming here. So they will probably need a lot of
volunteer helpers and there may be other vacancies, which is very important for the
Brazilian community, and the newspaper will be able to help‘ (6-7)

Sources and newsgathering routines

The advent of instantaneous communications, the internet, and social media offers a huge
amount of sources of information to journalists. They all mention that these developments
make their work easier, even if it is problematic to sift through the information tide to check
its accuracy. A Brazilian newsagency correspondent who wished to remain anonymous, on
this point said that: ‗it‘s much easier now to get information although at the same time you
have access to thousands and thousands of different bits of information and it‘s more difficult
to select which one is really relevant or not. I think it‘s a daily challenge.‘ I will now discuss
more in detail what drives journalists‘ selection of sources and the way they fit within a very
dynamic newsgathering process that appears to be collaborative in nature—involving
interaction with sources, editors, other media professionals and audiences across borders—
in all of its stages.

Sources‘ proliferation
Even if an extensive range of sources is available, correspondents do select those that
better fit with their needs depending on the issue they need to cover, the nature (factual or
analysis) of the report the need to produce, its scope and, connected to the last point, the
amount of time they have at their disposal for researching a story. Some spend more time
talking to sources rather than online. Here is, as an illustration, the example of Sebastian
Hesse-Kastein, a correspondent working for ARD, a German public radio broadcaster:

‗Q: And what would you say is the proportion of time that you spend talking to people
versus collecting information from other media?

That really depends on what kind of story I‘m doing. If it‘s a news story, like when
Rolls-Royce issued a press statement this morning about their engines and how to
repair them, of course you don‘t give Rolls-Royce a call and ask for further information,
you use their press statement. But I‘m working on a piece right now, a longer one, on
the Druid movement in Great Britain, something which fascinates the Germans. Druids
were officially recognised as a church in Britain a couple of weeks ago, which was my
reason for looking again at the Druid movement. I could find nothing useful on the
web, so I have to go there and talk to people, experience it, smell, feel, hear, see for
myself. And because everybody in Germany can now log onto the web and look at the

Guy Fawkes was involved in the 1605 ―gunpowder plot.‖ Together with a group of English Catholics
11

he had planned to kill the Protestant king by making explode gunpowder barrels they had hidden in a
cellar under the Parliament. The plot was foiled and he was executed. The king‘s escape from the
assassination attempt is still celebrated across Britain through bonfires and fireworks (5 November,
Bonfire Night).

17
 BBC website, they don‘t need me to read back to them what‘s on the BBC website.
What they need me for is to explain things, you know? That‘s the key thing: to tell
people why things are the way they are. I mean a classic example of this was when I
was posted to the US and there was all this debate about going to war in Iraq, and how
the Bush administration handled 9/11 and the aftermath. There was so much
misunderstanding between Europe and America, and so many things that people in
Europe just did not understand because the cultural gap is so big. So the key thing
there for the foreign correspondent posted in America was to explain exactly that, why,
which you would have been unable to find on a news wire or the on-line New York
Times‘ (6)

Thanassis Gavos‘s reply to the question of where he gets the material for his radio and TV
reports (Greek station SKAI) showed how sources are cherry-picked depending on the
specific needs of the moment:

‗The most important sources for me are my contacts. First of all, if it‘s a big story about
the government, then of course the press offices of the particular ministry concerned is
my first point of reference. Apart from that I have quite an extensive list of personal
contacts that I collected when I was working for the BBC. Sometimes I go back to
them and the list includes politicians, financial analysts, and even more importantly,
academics. Academics always have something interesting to say, or they can just
guide you through and maybe introduce you to someone else who knows more about
the story. There is of course the internet: you can find almost anything on the internet
now. But since the internet is accessible to everyone, if I go on the BBC website then
my colleagues in Athens could do that just as well, so I try and find things which I know
are not very commonly known or accessible in Athens: articles in particular magazines
or newspapers, or official reports, which give my stories something a little bit extra. For
me personally, one of the most important sources for a story and for describing the
atmosphere or the feeling of the story is the radio. That‘s why I always listen to the
radio. Here in the UK what I love is that people and analysts call in to a programme
and express their opinions. You can really get a sense of what the country is feeling
about anything from that, I think, and I use that. And of course there is the TV as well,
and with all the 24/7 news bulletins it‘s hard to miss a story‘ (3-4).

As another Greek journalist, Evdoxia Lympery (ERT3 TV), puts it: ‗I call press offices or
government departments, or call people I know. It depends on what I need. I use everything
[...] sometimes I may Google some key words and whatever comes up, I use everything.
From Reuters or whatever, it [information] comes from everywhere‘ (2).

Other journalists, instead, mainly use other media sources. Jader De Oliveira, for example,
works for the Brazilian TV channel Globo News and reports about current affairs and the
economy. As he puts it ‗I‘m not an analyst, I just report [the facts]‘ (1). He doesn‘t travel as
much as he used to do. He mainly works from home: ‗The news agencies and the people in
Rio [Brazil] provide me with a lot of information, and also reading newspapers and listening
to the news on the television‘ (2). Then his office in Rio de Janeiro combines his reports
(either recorded over the phone or live) ‗with images they get from news agencies‘ (1).

Some correspondents make use of social media, particularly Twitter for the links it provides
to further sources of information. For instance, this is the experience of an anonymous
Brazilian correspondent who reports about financial news:

‗...Twitter I‘ve been using more and more and I‘ve been surprised by that. Because in
the beginning I was sceptical and thought I was a bit old to use that kind of thing, but
then I was surprised to realise that I can use it for my job because it‘s very easy to

18
 access, to organise and to make a list, and to organise myself. You can organise the
sources you like to follow and reach the stories in a very fast way [...] I‘ve created a list
of these financial sources and even news wires and everything, newspapers, financial
newspapers, financial news wires, financial institutions and economists, and [inaudible
00:21:42] who is a very important economist, he tweets. So surprisingly I‘ve realised
that Twitter can be a primary source of information, a very good source, not only of
information but also you can organise your lists in a way for you to be able to read
everything. For example, before Twitter what I used to do, I‘d wake up every morning
and I‘d read all the newspapers; so I‘d enter the Financial Times website, and then I‘d
look at The New York Times website and so on. With Twitter I have this one list and I
just have to follow the tweets, and it‘s very simple‘ (5)

News as the outcome of a collective, collaborative, non-linear process

Overall producing news appears a highly collaborative process across all of its development
stages: selection, research, and production. In the stage of selection, for example, there
could be a negotiation with editors, who might make requests about what they would like to
see stories about. Public radio German correspondent Sebastian Hesse-Kastein says this
happens, in his case, in roughly a third of the cases (3). Overall, however, the interviewees
appeared rather free to use their own judgement in selecting the issues and topics that
would most interest their respective national audiences.

A very good example of the collaborative newsgathering in the stage of research of a story is
provided by German sport correspondent Raphael Honigstein. The following interview
transcript excerpt shows not only the collaboration between journalists, but also the
facilitating role of social media in sharing and exchanging information, beyond the sheer
speed at which news is produced:

‗Only two days ago there was a story about FIFA [International Football Federation]
and it was in a Swiss paper. I read it in the morning, I posted a link about it on Twitter
because it was really, really interesting, and a lot of English journalists looked at it and
didn‘t quite know what to do with it but a guy from the Press Association also saw it.
He had the contacts and the resources to follow it up, researched it himself, and then
he published his own story based on it. We were in contact through Twitter, and these
kinds of things happen more and more I find. I see these guys when I‘m out in the
field, I see the wire guys as well as the other guys, and sometimes it is a collaborative
process. I guess I rely less on them, because as soon as there is a wire story The
Guardian will ask somebody on their staff to write it up, and then you‘ll read The
Guardian story the next day, which will be more enhanced and more contextual so I‘ll
rely more on them. I would say that the reason why I don‘t rely on the wires that much
is just because the media here, especially for me, is so highly evolved they immediately
soak up news from the wires and make it their own story so that you kind of don‘t need
them as much‘
[...]
Q: So it‘s a really collaborative process. It looks as though different journalists keep an
eye on each other‘s output for leads...?

Yes, that‘s definitely happening; and it‘s happening more and more. And because I‘m
a foreigner people trust me or they know that I‘m not in competition with them too
much. So it‘s easier for them to say to me, ‗Look, I‘m doing this piece, what do you
know?‘ And football is a great example of how international everything has become‘
(6)

19
Thomas Wald of the Australian Associated Press offers another example when he describes
how he sometimes interacts with the journalists of the British newspaper Daily Telegraph, in
whose building he has an office:

‗For instance, recently there was a big story back in Australia when the Australian
dollar reached parity with the US dollar, so it was one-to-one for the first time since the
Australian dollar was floated back in 1983. That worked out very well because I could
go to the finance desk and have a chat to them [Daily Telegraph journalists] about it all,
and that obviously helped. I think it [having an office in the same building] does have
its benefits. I wouldn‘t say that I have a massive amount of interaction because of the
section I‘m in, but I think it has its benefits definitely. There are other journalists there I
can have a chat to, and the nature of journalism is that there are always a few
journalists wherever you go that you run into or have contact with at some sporting
event or news event that you can then call upon. So if it‘s about something about the
past I need to find out about, they‘re useful‘ (3).

The collaboration also involves journalists of the same organization working in the office
back home. Alexander Smotrov, for instance, describes how the newsgathering of RIA
Novosti continues on a 24 hours cycle thanks to the overnight contribution of his colleagues
in Moscow:

‗in the morning you check the news wire and see what they [office in Moscow] have
done overnight and follow it up if necessary. Because they can‘t specialise in the story,
sometimes they only report the essence of the story and you have to develop it during
the day. For example, today it was reported late last night that Julian Assange is going
to be arrested by the UK Police and will have to go to Court. It was picked up by our
colleagues but in the morning we took charge of the story and developed it from here.
(3).

An instance of collaboration in the output stage of the news production is that of Cornelia
Fuchs, correspondent for the German magazine Stern, contributing to a colleague‘s piece:
‗The other thing I‘m working on is that I am just helping a colleague who is doing a big story
on the Euro crisis, and I‘m researching the situation in Ireland. But I won‘t write the whole
story; I‘ll just give him some bits and pieces he‘s requested for his story. So that‘s the other
thing that I need to do this week (4).

It could be argued that there is a collaborative process taking place between audiences and
journalists in the post-production stage, too. Some of the interviewed journalists tended to
receive feedback from audiences. Again in the words of Cornelia Fuchs: ‗We get letters, via
e-mail obviously, and via Facebook. Our Stern on-line site has a very big site on Facebook
where a lot of readers post their thoughts about stories. If these reactions concern my
stories, obviously they are forwarded to me [...] I always respond. I try to answer questions
and to answer criticism‘ (4).

This might feed back into the selection of future stories by contributing to the journalists‘
awareness of what their audience is interested and appreciates (or does not) in their
reports.

Stories’ output
News is always a constructed product (Archetti 2010a&b; Schlesinger 1978), but news
produced by foreign correspondents is even more so. After examining which selection
criteria are used by the foreign journalists to establish what is ―newsworthy,‖ the analysis will
focus on the potential further transformations that affect the pieces produced by the

20
correspondents when they are further edited and re-used in their home countries. It will also
reflect on the foreign correspondents‘ greater professional interest in creative reporting than
it is the case for domestic journalists.

What is ―news‖ to the eyes of each correspondent?

What ultimately becomes ―news‖ varies widely. News is not just politics or foreign policy.
What is newsworthy depends on several factors: the country for which a reporter is writing,
particularly, in this case, on its relationship with the UK; on the editorial needs of the media
outlet for which the journalist reports; but it can also vary depending on the short-term
developments within the domestic situation of the journalist‘s home country. Additionally, if a
foreign journalist addresses a diasporic audience, s/he tends to cover those issues that have
the greatest relevance and impact on that community. These aspects will now be illustrated
in turn.

Hesse-Kastein (ARD), in describing how a story comes about, explains that there is ‗obvious‘
breaking news (what Honigstein also calls ‗self evident‘), then there are stories requested by
editors and pieces that are pitched by the journalist him/herself. However, this proportion
was different in the US, where he had been previously posted. This is because ‗breaking
news‘ there was more important due to a higher interest of German audiences in American
politics:

‗Q: So how would a story come about? You mentioned the differences between an
emerging story or breaking news and an editor requesting something or you pitching a
story, but what would you say is the proportion between them?

One third each roughly.

Q: So it‘s quite balanced?

Yes, it‘s quite balanced I think here in London. I mean, in the US it was different. The
news factor was a lot higher, and in America there are a lot of things going on that you
have to cover as a foreign correspondent, and American politics are a lot more
important for Germans than British politics is. Here, the election was a big thing and
now there is the whole debate about cutting benefits, which is of course a big story but
it‘s not as dominant in the German news as say what‘s going on in Washington DC or
in Brussels. So here it‘s really quite balanced I would say‘ (4)

As he later expands on this point:

‗When I was in America or in Berlin a lot of the stuff we covered was purely political,
about policy issues, and obviously there were some issues where you got a lot of angry
reactions. For example, writing a pro-George Bush commentary in 2003 was
something that definitely generated a huge wave of anger and reaction. British politics
is not that interesting to European audiences, so here it‘s more the sort of entertaining
stories that we do. So the Royals, the eccentric British, funny things, and of course the
Druid story [mentioned earlier, see page 17] would be a perfect example‘ (7)

The interview with the Brazilian correspondent for TV Globo Jader De Oliveira shows that
the main focus of interest for his home audiences is the economy: ‗Well, world economic
interdependence is so great that any story on the economy is good. You know, such as the
banks near to collapse. Everybody knows that if another big bank goes bankrupt the world
will be in deep trouble, because the banks are interdependent. They have made a lot of
mistakes, and now they are starting to pay, and the state is taking more and more control of
the financial system‘ (3). This is underlined by the fact that the very mention of Brazil as an

21
emergent economy made a good story: ‗Anything that has some relation with South
America is a good story, and if it has anything to do with Brazil, even better. The other day,
for instance, George Osborne [Chancellor of the Exchequer] said in Parliament that British
exports to Ireland are bigger than exports to Brazil, China, Russia and India put together, the
four big emergent economies‘ (3).

The Australian correspondent Thomas Wald (AAP), when asked about what he normally
reports about, says that he covers ‗whatever news is around‘ (p. 1) but ‗obviously anything
with an Australian angle.‘ This, in his specific case, often translates in focusing on sport and
entertainment:

‗At the moment it‘s only myself but normally we have two people based here in
London. One I guess primarily covers the news, with a little bit of sports and
entertainment, whereas the other person does any news that pops up, and obviously
anything with an Australian angle. That‘s basically how it‘s run. I guess sports news
just travels a bit easier than current affairs news sometimes as well, and more
Australians are interested in it. I guess in terms of general news we‘ve got people like
Kylie Minogue and Rolf Harris to report about, but there are not quite so many
Australian entertainers, and so entertainment stories don‘t resonate quite as easily as
sports stories. But obviously we cover any sort of news that happens that is of
Australian interest‘ (1)

As he further elaborates in describing his daily routine, after having scanned e-mails, the
internet and newspapers to identify the news of the day, he explains that ‗it‘s more about just
picking up little odds and ends that might be buried in a British newspaper story that will
really sort of catch the audience eye in Australia. There has obviously always been quite a
lot of interest in Australia in the Royals, because of being in the Commonwealth, so those
sorts of stories always sell. Next year with the Royal Wedding that will be massive and
they‘ll want reams and reams of copy on that‘ (6).

The Greek correspondent Thanassis Gavos suggests that Greek audiences are particularly
interested in financial and society news:

‗Q: Are there any topics which you feel Greek audiences are interested in typically?

They‘ve been very interested in all things financial for the last couple of years. Even if
there is a story about something happening in the City that has nothing to do with
Greece they find it interesting, or at least SKAI [his news organisation] does. Apart
from that they‘re really interested in the Cyprus problem as well, because the UK is one
of the great powers, so there are many stories in that respect. And apart from that, we
find things about showbiz and music that are interesting just to keep our younger
audience happy as well. And some of the smaller stories, like the one I mentioned
about local government or for instance about how the immigration system works here,
how foreign communities have been absorbed by the UK. Greece has recently had a
huge wave of immigrants, so this comparison is always interesting. And what is
interesting is that whatever happens in Greece happens almost a decade after it has
happened in the UK. So the example from a more developed country is really
interesting and in some cases provides a lesson on how to react to specific problems‘
(3)

The selection of news, however, is also affected by the editorial needs of the media outlet.
The following examples particularly underline the importance of pictures‘ availability for
magazine publications. This leads to selecting stories and topics that can provide good

22
visuals. This is, as an illustration, the interview exchange with Stern German correspondent
Cornelia Fuchs:

‗Q: What do you report about normally?

Well, that‘s a bit difficult because Stern covers such a wide variety of topics.
Obviously, everything that‘s interesting in politics, you know? For example, the Irish
recession and the Irish crisis would be a big topic now. Not internal politics though,
since the English Government is not really interested in Germany. I always have to
look at everything from a German perspective, and see whether it might be interesting
in Germany. I also report on Royalty and things that happen in the Royal family, which
is of big interest in Germany. And then I‘ll also do stories such as a feature on The
National Trust, and I did a story on narrow boats. But that‘s specific to Stern, because
Stern has a big section of the magazine that is very pictorial, so The National Trust
story was mainly about the great landscapes of England which we could photograph.
Stern is different to other magazines because it‘s not only news-driven it‘s also driven
by great photo reportage‘ (2)

This also applies to another German magazine based in London, Focus. When the
publication‘s correspondent Imke Henkel was asked whether the availability of pictures to
accompany the stories in the magazine affected the selection of stories she said:

‗Yes, absolutely. For stories where we really need great pictures then you would
probably decide against doing them if you didn‘t have great pictures. But again it very
much depends on the story. For a story about the Royals, for example, pictures might
be decisive, but obviously for a story about the [EU?] Commission you just look for
good pictures on the net and find some, and for a story about how the [British
Conservative-Liberal Democrat] coalition works you just want to report it and you don‘t
decide against it because you don‘t have a nice picture of Nick Clegg or David
Cameron‘ (4-5)

Developments in the correspondent‘s home country can be an additional factor that affects
the newsworthiness of events in the UK. This is suggested, for instance, by the Greek
correspondent Isaac Karipidis (ANT ENA TV and Flash Radio):

‗Q: What makes a good story? I mean, how would you select your stories? I‘m sure
there are several things that happen, especially if you cover everything.

A good story definitely is a story that has an interest back in Greece, it‘s a very good
story. It‘s only good to relate it Greece, directly or indirectly. Now the riots in London
[violent student protest against tuition fees], there wasn‘t a direct connection with
Greece but because Greece has been on the spotlight for the riots [related to economic
crisis] and unrest there, you know, the Greek people, they saw similarities in what
happened here. It was also an interesting story for them‘ (5-6)

Also Alexander Smotrov, working for Russian newsagency RIA Novosti makes a similar
point:

‗Q: You mentioned that today‘s two big stories are the one about Julian Assange and
the one about the Russian girl who was working in Parliament.12 How did you research
these stories, and how did you give them a Russian angle?

12
See more about this story here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/05/mp-denies-russian-
aide-spy.

23
 ‗It was more difficult to put a Russian angle on the Julian Assange story, but the whole
WikiLeaks affair also involved Russia and last week The Guardian reported it
extensively from different sides, the story about Julian Assange‘s extradition and Police
involvement. There is maybe not so much a Russian angle but a Russian parallel,
because last year there was a case in the same City of Westminster Court about a
Russian businessman, Yevgeny Chichvarkin, who was wanted in Russia on criminal
charges. He was in the UK at the time and there was also a warrant issued against
him through Interpol and the British Police were hesitating whether to arrest him or not.
He was subsequently arrested and appeared in Court and then extradition proceedings
began. So we had this precedent in terms of procedure, not in terms of the public‘s
reaction or the size of the story but in terms of procedure it was exactly the same story.
So it was the same scenario with Chichvarkin last year, and Julian Assange appeared
at the same Court, and so this was useful to explain the procedure, because many
people in Russia wouldn‘t understand how extradition and Court proceedings work
here. So it was a good thing to point out and to remember‘ (4)

Diasporic publications, while reporting about what happens in the UK, also select topics that
are of interest to their respective communities. In relation to the Brazilian audience Carolina
Beal points out that: ‗...there are lot of things that Brazilians are not really engaged with, like
for example the war [in Iraq and in Afghanistan] and these kinds of things. It‘s quite weird
but we don‘t feel involved [...] it [reporting] is mainly about immigration or new policies. A
huge part of the community pays attention to these subjects‗ (6).

Where do the correspondents‘ reports go?

Other aspects that emerged from the interviews and that run against the idea of ―using‖
correspondents as transmitters of a message are the fact that not only the amount of
material they produce varies greatly, but they often also loose control of both the content of
their reports and where they get circulated.

As for the amount of reporting some correspondents might produce one or less pieces a
week. In the case of German correspondent Cornelia Fuchs: ‗Well, I can‘t really say how
many stories I produce in a week because Stern is a weekly and I don‘t produce a story for
every issue. But over the year I produce around 40 stories. Very seldom are there two of
my stories in one magazine. Normally I will have two or three stories a month or something
like that (p. 2). Others, instead, might be under ‗increasing pressure to produce plenty of
fresh copy each day‘ (Wald, 1). Australian correspondent Thomas Wald (AAP), in fact,
explains:

‗It varies quite a bit. There might be some days where I might only file one story
because there‘s not a lot going on; or for instance yesterday I was installing computers
because basically as you‘re a one-person show you‘ve got to do everything. I might
only do one story a day, but at the recent World Cup announcement in Zurich –
obviously Australia bid for the 2022 World Cup and either way it was going to be a big
story - so maybe that day I might have filed, with running copy and obviously updating
copy with fresh quotes and stuff like that, ten to twelve stories. That‘s as much as I‘d
be able to write but they‘re not all completely fresh stories. Maybe out of ten to twelve,
about three or four are updated stories, so a similar story but with fresh quotes and
fresh information. Yes, it was as big a day as you‘d ever want‘ (1)

Thanassis gavos, Greek correspondent for radio and TV station SKAI, also describes a
hectic daily routine:

‗I am rather busy because I work for both radio and TV. For TV I participate in three or
four news programmes every day, and for the radio it‘s five programmes a day.

24
 Depending on the news it might be that all those nine programmes are on the same
subject. But there have been days where it‘s been nine different programmes on nine
different subjects, so it depends on the day. On average I would say that I cover about
three different subjects a day‘ (2)

The pieces produced by the correspondents might be circulated widely, confirming that they
indeed have an ‗multiplier effect‘ as mentioned by the Carter report (2005: 52). For example
Raphael Honigstein syndicates to 19 German speaking newspapers (2). ‗150 or 200
newspapers in Brazil‘ subscribe to the newsagency that specializes in financial news an
anonymous Brazilian correspondent works for. As she said: ‗when I send something from
here it spreads all over the country [Brazil] really quickly‘ (2)

However, it is not always possible for the correspondents to follow what happens to the
original piece. Indeed, in Raphael Honigstein‘s words:

‗The disadvantage of being a freelance is that you have less control because you‘re not
in an office and if someone takes out a line or doesn‘t like one or two things you write,
then you have no way to come back because you‘re only going to see it the next day
when it‘s printed. In the beginning it was a little bit difficult because I was very
protective of my copy. Over time I‘ve found myself just developing a much thicker skin
and thinking it‘s not worth getting upset about. But perhaps I‘m a specific case
because my football stuff in German gets syndicated to nineteen German-speaking
papers. When I write something, I‘ll sell it to all these papers, and they can decide if
they run it or not: so I‘m like my own mini-agency. But keeping track on what they do
and what they don‘t do, and how they change things or take things out would just take
too much time, too much effort and be so emotionally draining that I kind of stopped
doing it. It depends. When you write a big magazine piece or something that‘s a little
bit more thoughtful, and you‘ve taken more time with it, then the editor will send it back
to you and if there are any problems then you can talk about it, but on an everyday
day-to-day basis I have little control and I‘ve stopped worrying about it‘ (2-3)

Editorial judgement of the home organization can always lead to the editing of a piece, if not
the decision not to run it. Evdoxia Lympery (ERT3 TV), for example, when asked about
which stories she was reporting about replied:

‗Today‘s big story is the weather here, and WikiLeaks. Those are the two big stories,
but I didn‘t need to report on either of them.

Q: Why? Are they considered not relevant?

Yes, and the WikiLeaks story is also being covered from the USA and the Arab world,
so they [ERT 3 TV] will do a general report, with just one sentence about Prince
Andrew [about his engagement], for example. They‘re not interested in focusing on the
English reaction to WikiLeaks‘ (3)

Thomas Wald (AAP) further points out:

‗Sometimes I‘ve had a very busy day and then something pops up and I do a quick
story on it and every paper in Australia runs it, and then the next day I put my heart and
soul into an analytical piece and really think I‘ve done something magical, but because
something big happens in Australia during the daytime after I‘ve gone to bed it doesn‘t
get used. So I think it‘s one of those things that you learn to roll with a bit‘ (7)

25
In this respect, Isaac Karipidis, working for the Greek ANT ENA TV and Flash Radio,
comments about the practical meaning of journalistic objectivity: ‗it‘s very good to say you
have to be objective [...] but if you have your editor who wants to give another angle from a
particular news story, obviously you have to follow the assignment, even if you disagree with
that; because basically it is [...] your employer‘ (2).

He tells an anecdote to explains how, sometimes, not only the content, but also the angle
from which a story is reported, is the result of a compromise with the editor back home:

‗for the TV I have to say that often they have told me to be more ―theatrical.‖ [...] I can
give you an example. Like the last demonstration in London [again students‘ protest
about tuition fees], [...] I mean, it was okay, some thousand, you know…, or whatever,
all of the people they were, they were going to the centre of London. They vandalise
just one police car and they burn a couple of things, they make a bit of a mess in the
centre of London. But it wasn‘t like something like a revolution [...] So this particular
event [...] it was a major event but it wasn‘t a revolution. They asked me to make it like
it was in the events of May ‘68 in France, you know what I mean. Well there it was a
revolution, it was something unique. But I‘m glad to say that the May ‘68, everyone‘s
going to remember it. It‘s been written in history. In a couple of months, we will forget
about what happened two days ago in London.

Q: So what was your reaction? Did you comply with the request?

Yeah you have to do that. But if you want to give the balance, you add a couple of
words which, er, in a way you [...] describe the story close to the reality.

Q: How did you do this?

I mean if he [editor] told you to say that London is like in Paris in May of ‘68, you say
London seems like in Paris of ‘68 but obviously is not. You know, you use the word
that they ask you to use but you put a couple [...] of other words to be more objective‘
(3-4)

The correspondent‘s value

While all journalists need information to feed into their reports, the interviews suggest that
there is possibly a high degree of reinterpretation of the material journalists get from their
sources. This happens to a greater extent than in domestic journalism and is related to the
very nature of the foreign correspondent‘s assignment.

Several of the correspondents see their role in explaining what events in a foreign country
actually mean. Cornelia Fuchs (Stern) for examples says that: ‗...you can read American
newspapers from Germany but that doesn‘t mean that you understand what the Tea Party is
all about, you know? Because the newspapers in New York or Washington write for
American audiences, and American audiences know about a lot of things that German
audiences have never heard about‘ (5).

Imke Henkel (Focus) further elaborates on this point:

‗I mean obviously you can write short stories just using internet sources, but I think the
main service that foreign journalists offer is to fill out stories behind what is relevant and
most important. No-one really has the time after they‘ve done their day job, and after
reading through all the primary sources or all the stuff that is on the internet, to find out
what really happened. They could access other media who will have done the work for
them, but the average German audience if they read British papers probably don‘t

26
 understand most of it, or miss relevant points because they don‘t really know the
country, or in what context the story has arisen. So therefore what a foreign
correspondent really does is to interpret the story for a home audience and make it
relevant to them, and make it understandable to them‘ (6)

Australian Thomas Wald (AAP) particularly highlights the need to explain and provide more
background than a domestic journalist would otherwise do:

‗Q: You say that you try to write the stories from an Australian angle – what does that
mean in practice?

Well, I guess, number one, if there‘s an Australian involved, obviously that‘s the focus.
So if there were twenty-five people involved in a train accident in Yorkshire and two
were Australians, then obviously they‘re going to be the main focus of the story
because that‘s going to have the most interest back in Australia. At another level, I did
a story about David and Ed Miliband when they were having their leadership battle
[within the Labour party] and obviously there were quite a lot of stories coming out of
England, with the English newspapers, and the world agencies as well, but I sort of did
my own piece which was more breaking down the intense sort of fibre of their
relationship and what it was all about and explaining who they were. Because
obviously in England and in certain parts of the world they would have had a good
awareness of who David and Ed Miliband are, whereas to a lot of people in Australia
David Miliband would just have been known for being Foreign Secretary under Tony
Blair and Gordon Brown. They would have remembered that, but they wouldn‘t have
known who his brother was, and they wouldn‘t have had an idea of the history, or of the
fact that Ed Miliband was obviously linked to Brown and David with Blair, and those
sorts of things. So you really have to explain all of that. Do you know what I mean?
You have to take a step back and really go into a bit more detail about it all, whereas
for a British audience it‘s accepted that they already have some sort of information,
foundation and basis for an interest in the story. It‘s just that little bit more of an
explanation that you have to give, because the average person in the back of
Queensland or Western Australia or New South Wales aren‘t going to be cognisant
with British Labour Party politics, so you have to inform them a little more than you
otherwise would here‘ (3-4)

Viron Karidis, who worked for 24 years at the BBC Greek section and is now a stringer for a
Greek daily (Kathimerini), provides a good example of the distinctive way in which a Greek
journalist would cover an issue, in contrast to the report by a newsagency:

‗one of the recent Nobel Prize winners in Economics was a Greek Cypriot. He
therefore had an indirect connection with Greece and the Greek people, being a Greek
Cypriot, although he was born in Cyprus and was educated here. Now if you relied on
the Associated Press or on Reuters, the way they covered this story and this event was
going to be quite different from the way that a Greek person would cover it, if he or she
were here and could meet the Nobel Prize winner and interview him and sends the
interview to a Greek newspaper. So the newspapers have priorities now and they
make their minds up after they have received dispatches from the different agencies,
much later.

So what would be the Greek angle, for example, in that kind of story?

The Greek angle in that story would be what is going to happen with the Greek
economy. He‘s an Economist, who has just won the Nobel Prize, so the first questions
would be: ‗What do you think is going to happen in Greece? Is it going to remain with

27
 the Euro? Are we going to get out of Europe or are they going to throw us out?‘ This
would be the Greek angle. ‗And how long will the austerity measures that have been
imposed in Greece through the European Union and through the IMF remain there?
What do you think? Is there any hope for the Greek economy?‘ This would be the
Greek angle, you see?‘

Yes, whereas normal news agencies would just...?

Yes, they wouldn‘t do that. They would talk about unemployment, because this chap
got the Nobel Prize because of a book he wrote about labour issues. So they would
concentrate their attention on this subject probably, not on the Greek economy. Can
you see the difference?‘ (4-5)

For most of the interviewees foreign correspondence goes beyond reporting what is
happening and is related to what Sambrook (2010) calls the ‗witness‘ function of journalism.
In Greek correspondent‘s Thanassis Gavos‘s words the role of the correspondent:

‗it‘s not only having someone there for when the big story breaks - you know, a huge
international conference or something and breaking the news. For me, the important
thing about my role is being here every day and every day finding something to say
that will give a picture about what the UK is all about, and what the UK‘s role is in
Europe or even in relation to Greece‘ (7)

To an extent perhaps this role will never be in crisis because of the need to understand how
the politics of one country affects the other. As Gavos continues: ‗Because the world has
become commonplace for everyone, not only because of the internet but also in politics,
whatever happens here [London] usually has some kind of small or large influence on
Greece as well. And that‘s what I try to make people understand by continuing to report on
various things‘ (7-8).

The bottom line, as Thomas Wald (AAP) puts it, is that as a foreign journalists you cannot
simply translate press briefings:

‗You know, I can‘t for instance reel out a Scotland Yard statement saying Julian
Assange has been arrested. I‘ve got to talk to his barrister and find out other things
and get a fresh angle on it to make it worth their while; because if I just stick to those
very basic ways of getting the story, I might as well be back in Australia on the night
shift getting information together. [....] the one thing that I think that a foreign
correspondent can always do is that someone like myself who is Australian will always
be able to explain better to an Australian audience something that is going on in Britain,
and why they should care and why they should have an interest in it because I live
here. I‘ll see it as something a bit different and unusual as well, so I think that there is
no doubt that that perspective is always valuable (9).

Finding ―a different angle‖ and news differentiation

This does not mean that the trend of ―copying and pasting‖ journalism—also referred to as
‗churnalism‘ (Atkins 2011)—does not exist, but that it perhaps affects domestic journalism to
a greater extent than foreign correspondence, as this anecdote narrated by Ilja Gonciarov
eloquently suggests. When asked whether his publication would rely on material provided by
other media sources he replied that, rather than being applicable to foreign journalists, ‗this
[relying on other media sources for newsgathering] is how British papers work now‘ (5):
‗One of my friends went to The Times office and spent a day there recently, and he was
amused because hardly anyone was coming in or going out, they just worked in the office

28
like office clerks. Because they get everything from news agencies; well, it looked like that
to him‘ (5).

While the points that have been made about the mission of the foreign correspondent apply
broadly to all interviewees , it is also true that the degree to which individual journalists might
stick to factual information rather than analysis also depends on their specific role within a
news organization. Some journalists are required to provide dryer and shorter reports.
Alexander Smotrov, for example, says that:

‗being a newsagency we don‘t need extensive coverage or lots of opinions from other
people, unlike our colleagues in the newspapers and television where they always want
someone to talk about the news or problem and provide a comment. We usually try to
gather the information first and report it, and try and find a Russian angle just to make it
more interesting and appealing to a Russian audience‘ (3).

Others, instead, are sent abroad specifically to produce analysis. A Brazilian newsagency
correspondent who specifically reports about financial news for example, says:

‗the idea is not only to report what is going on here but to discover what the investors
and what the financial community are thinking about the commercial markets and also
what they‘re thinking about Brazil. Also to see what kind of impact European prices
might have on Brazil and have on their commercial markets. I don‘t have to report all
what‘s going on here because the news wires do that. What they ask me to do is to
produce more analytical stories and to try and anticipate any financial movements that
might impact on Brazil [...] I am a news agency reporter but in practical terms the news
is done. I don‘t have to write the news. I have to go deeper‘ (2-3)

Diametrically opposing the general claim that news is becoming homogenized on a global
scale due to the dominance of newsagencies—particularly the tendency for journalists to
endlessly recycle newsagency material—the interviews suggested a pressure across the
board on differentiating news reports. This even applied to the very newsgencies that are
accused of homogenizing news. Particularly significant is this exchange with Thomas Wald
of the Australian Associated Press:

‗Q: Do you also look at other [competitor] news agencies when you do research for your
stories?

Yes, our company has an agreement with Associated Press and Agence France-Presse,
and so when Julian Assange recently handed himself in they were covering the back of it
whilst it was breaking and we can pick up that sort of service. I can do things like that as
well but what I try to do is to get something which is a bit different from what they‘re
running. We used to have an agreement with Reuters, but Agence France-Presse is the
main international agency that we use now. Normally they‘re quite good' (4).
[...]

‗Q: What is your story for today, if you have one?

Well, I‘ve done one about the English press, because obviously with the English winning
the Ashes [cricket tournament] there‘s obviously a lot of interest in Australia about what
the English press are saying about it. But the main story will be Julian Assange, with him
being Australian, WikiLeaks and him being arrested. That‘s obviously quite a big story in
terms of him denying the charges and there are hundreds of documents and there‘s lots
of attention on him, but like anything else it‘s just finding a way to make it a bit different.
Obviously, we have Associated Press and Agence France-Presse so I‘ll have to a find an

29
 angle that‘s different and interesting for Australian audiences that separates itself from
other agencies.

Q: Have you already got an idea how this is going to shape up? What is the particular
Australian angle that you‘re going to highlight?

To be honest it‘s just past deadline Australian time, so I‘m just pulling my thoughts
together now because I have a bit of time. So say at about six o‘clock this afternoon in
London it‘ll still be five o‘clock in the morning Australian time, so I‘ve got a bit of time to
formulate which sort of way I‘m going to go with it. And another idea that I‘m going to try
and check up on is that the Qatar World Cup [2022] decision was quite unpopular in
Australia, because obviously we didn‘t win it, and also because it‘s a small country. So I
was going to try and get in contact with some Australian businessmen who might profit
from the World Cup going to Qatar and try and get a bit of a different angle in terms of
what that means. So that‘s another story I‘m trying to work on, if my children will let me‘
(8)

Alexander Smotrov provides a good example of the way his newsagency tries to differentiate
the kind of news it produces (‗we combine our field gathering of information with some back
office research‘ [3]) from the content of another Russian newsagency also operating in
London, ITAR-TASS (focusing instead on doing ‗lots of other media pick-ups‘ [4]). As he
underlines, the need to differentiate is also related to the interests of the specific target
audiences:

‗perhaps they [ITAR-TASS] are more of a traditional news wire because they don‘t do
any multimedia reporting, they concentrate solely on text and write short, plain news
stories purely for information purposes. It‘s useful for radio and for those who just want
the essence of the story. But we try to do more. We don‘t simply report the main story
but try to add some background details and multimedia, to make it a more rounded
piece for our readers or subscribers. Our audience consists of two main parts: the first
is our professional subscribers, like other media, or organisations and companies,
state agencies and so on. And the other big part of our audience is just made up of
normal people who look at the [RIA Novosti] website and want to read, see and hear
about what‘s happened‘ (5)

Because journalists often work for more than one news organization, they also change the
tone, content, and depth of their reports. For example Raphael Honigstein differentiates
between ‗everyday‘ material and ‗a big magazine piece or something that‘s a little bit more
thoughtful‘ (2). He also says that, in the context of his personal blog, a journalist is allowed to
express a personal opinion. This would not be (necessarily) the case when writing for a
newspaper. As he describes it, when writing a blog ‗I can say ―this is bad‖ without having to
show why it might also be good‘ (2). Alexander Smotrov, on this aspect, points out that,
especially when there has been ‗a big story which we‘ve reported during the day,‘ ‗in the
evening I sometimes put forward some of my own views and opinions on this story on
Twitter or my blog, just to try and tell people something that was left out when we wrote the
news story and giving some interesting details‘ (7).

The style of reporting also changes across time: Brazilian correspondent for TV Globo Jader
de Oliveira now tends to writes ‗objective‘ reports. He mentions, however, how years ago, in
order to cover some miners‘ strikes, he travelled to Wales ‗to stay with the miners‘: ‗I spent
two days with them, and it was one of the best stories I ever wrote in my life,‘ ‗I lived with
them‘ (4).

30
A view from the field: dealing with foreign correspondents at the FCO

Two International Media Officers (IMO) within the Press Office of the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office (FCO)—John Hewitt and Davina Crole—cover the task of dealing with
foreign correspondents. They share the post and work on a part-time basis. They deal with
‗probably anything from 1,300 to 1,500‘ journalists (Hewitt, 1). John Hewitt, a retired BBC
journalist, has been in the post for 10 years (6). His colleague has been International Media
Officer for 8 years and she previously worked for the London Foreign Press Association.
They work within the Press Office of the FCO Communication Directorate.

The interviews with them show that the view from the field by public diplomacy practitioners
is very different from the one emerging from the official reports. The analysis will focus first
on their activities and objectives. It will then move on to examining why, despite the
acknowledgement that foreign correspondents are important to British foreign policy, they do
not appear to be allocated resources that match this recognition. It will examine the evolution
of foreign correspondence over the years from the perspective of the Officers, particularly in
terms of how such changes have affected their work. This section will conclude by pointing
out what ―managing‖ the foreign correspondents actually means from the point of view of the
IMOs‘ daily job.

Objectives and activities

In the words of John Hewitt, the job of the IMOs is ‗to act as facilitators for all the foreign
media who are living and working in London‘: ‗we‘re, in a way, their first port of call whenever
they want anything from Government. We can put them in touch with the right people‘ (1).
To do so the IMOs have a database with the ‗addresses, phone numbers, mobile numbers
and e-mail addresses‘ of the correspondents, which they progressively update as and when
the journalists establish contact with them:

‗...initially we rely on them contacting us first; because as I say, usually it‘s someone
from their own country who tells them about us – there is a lot of word of mouth – but
as I say, the Embassies, before they [journalists] come to London, the Embassies and
the High Commissions tell them about us, or they‘re often replacing someone in
London and that person will tell them about us. I mean, it‘s usually quite a priority for
their colleagues to tell them about us here.‘ (4)

The IMOs routinely conduct a range of activities:

Setting up interviews with officials. This involves organizing interviews with officials from all
government departments. It also includes invitations of selected groups of journalists to
Prime Minister Question Time and other events taking place at Number 10. It does not
exclude other government departments, which run their own press conferences and
communication activities, to engage with foreign correspondents directly. However, as
Davina Crole puts it, the IMOs‘ role is ‗beating the drum for foreign correspondents‘ (3). The
Officers act as the main intermediaries between foreign journalists and the government
offices.

Sending out information to the journalists via e-mail (‗mailshot‘). According to John Hewitt,
the information relayed on behalf of government departments does not just cover
‗government press releases, invitations to various events, or operational notes about
accreditation to various events,‘ but also, as he explains, other organisations which are of
interest to the journalists, such as ‗the City of London Corporation, the main institutions in
the City such as the Bank of England and Lloyds of London,‘ the CBI (Confederation of
British Industry), ‗the National Trust, art galleries, museums like the Science Museum and

31
the British Museum, ‗art galleries and the Royal Opera House,‘ and ‗the main Universities.‘
He particularly mentions the London School of Economics:

‗the London School of Economics has a number of academics which we frequently put
in touch with the journalists because they do act as independent balanced sources on
the British political scene and the economic scene, and we often organise briefings for
them with these people on political issues [...] We don‘t actually deal on behalf of the
Opposition, but the London School of Economics can, and we can set up independent
academics who talk to the foreign media about the situation in the UK, and we do that
quite frequently.‘

Organizing orientation and networking workshops. The IMOs mentioned a ―Working with
Whitehall Workshop‖ that took place in February 2011 at the Foreign Press Association and
that is organized every year: ‗We‘ve just had what we call a ‗Working with Whitehall‘
workshop, where we get press officers from all the Government departments to meet in one
place and we invite all the foreign journalists to come along and see them, and it‘s a way for
the journalists and the press officers to network, and we do that once a year‘ (2). Another
kind of activity is the organization of introductory meetings between diplomats and
journalists: ‗Whenever new ambassadors are appointed we always get them to meet the
journalists from the countries where they‘re going to‘ (Hewitt, 3). A further examples is the
organization of meetings with the London Lord Mayor:

‗We take them [foreign journalists] regularly to see the Lord Mayor of London at
Mansion House [...] because of his strong connection with the Government during his
year in office he does many trips abroad more or less as a sort of trade emissary and
he is there to promote the City of London financial services, and before he goes on
each trip we get the journalists from those countries he‘s visiting to go and meet him at
Mansion House for a briefing and a question and answer session‘ (Hewitt, 2).

Organizing tours for journalists. Newly-arrived journalists are invited to take part in visits of
political institutions:

‗From time to time we organise visits to various places. We‘ve got one next week
where we are taking about a dozen or 18 newly arrived journalists to Parliament to see
how Parliament operates. They have a tour of the House of Commons and the House
of Lords, they watch Prime Minister‘s Question Time, and we have an expert on hand
to answer their questions, and we take them to see a debate in the House of Lords as
well. And we give them lunch there, and we usually invite about half a dozen MPs to
join them, so that they can talk to them about whatever they want to talk about and
make contacts.‘

Tours are organized both in London and across the UK. John Hewitt, for instance, explains:

‗I take journalists from time to time to Smithfield Meat Market, especially at Christmas
time because it‘s sort of appropriate, but we also go to the other main markets around
London‘ (3); ‗regularly every month now we‘re taking groups of about thirty journalists
at a time – foreign journalists – on a tour of the Olympic Park, and it‘s a special coach
tour which goes inside the Park and we stop at all the venues and they can look at and
film the various venues as they‘re being built and as they near completion, as they are
now. That‘s a very popular thing with the journalists, and we can fix up interviews for
them with the Olympic Delivery Authority and the various agencies involved in the
Olympics‘ (2)

As an example of visits across the country he talks about a trip to Northern Ireland:

32
 ‗And the week after next I‘m taking a group of journalists to Northern Ireland. That‘s
basically to see how the political situation has changed over the years and how the
place has been regenerated, and how it‘s a nice place to live now. It‘s not the scene of
the troubles that we had in the sixties and seventies, you know; so it‘s really to show
them how the peace dividend is basically working and how it‘s a thriving, happier place.
So that‘s a two-day trip.‘

The overall objective of all of these activities is, in the words of John Hewitt: ‗to present the
UK, and the UK Government, in a positive light to the foreign media. Because you are well
aware that our image abroad is often shaped by what is said in the foreign media. But no,
the objectives are really to keep them informed as best we can, and to provide them with
access to all the various events that are going on in the UK, and to tell them about them.‘ (4).
Davina Crole adds that the aims, ultimately, are ‗to encourage accurate reporting on the UK
and that means really helping them [foreign journalists] to report first hand‘ (1).

The role of foreign correspondents within the UK public diplomacy strategy: explaining the
contradictions
According to John Hewitt the foreign correspondents, within the UK public diplomacy
strategy are ‗between important and very important.‘ Having the relevance of foreign media
recognised, as he puts it, ‗has been quite a battle‘ and is ‗a recent phenomenon‘ (6).
Especially in relation to the most recent events in the Middle East, as he continues, ‗this
Government does regard the foreign media as really very important now‘ (6).

Having said that, the level of priority of foreign journalists has to be balanced with the fact
that all governments departments‘ attention, as both IMOs admit, focuses on the British
domestic media. As Davina Crole explains, the IMOs continuously have to emphasize the
importance of foreign journalists. As she describes it: ‗Various different kind of reports have
come out from different directions and they always say, you know, foreign correspondents
are very important, we should do more with them, but then you just have to sort of keep on
trying to reinforce that message; that‘s what we feel we‘re doing anyway‘ (3-4).

This is, in fact, confirmed by John Hewitt‘s mention of a progressive reduction in the staff
and resources allocated to dealing with foreign correspondents:

‗There aren‘t enough of us to do it. When Davina and I started doing this: Davina has
been doing this eight years and I‘ve been doing it ten, we were in a separate team
called the International Press Section, and there was a team of about eight people
doing various things. But basically there were four or five of us doing what Davina and
I do now, and gradually we were whittled down and then became part of the Press
Office, and the others left and Davina and I remained. And what we‘ve had to do is
that we still produce what we used to do but less of it. You know, we can‘t produce the
same that five or six people did, so we prioritise and cherry-pick, and whatever you like,
you know, we do the essential things‘ (9)

Davina Crole further explains that this is the result of an internal reorganization that brought
the International Media Office, initially a detached operation called the London
Correspondent‘s Unit, into the centre of the FCO Press Office. On the one hand this has led
to positive developments:

‗when we were a separate department just arranging these visits and programmes and
things we weren‘t at the centre of big stories going on and that [the move] is definitely
beneficial for us and for the foreign journalists because it means that we can be
reminding press officers that they must be helped in the information they need. So from
that point of view it‘s good‘ (5)

33
On the other hand, the role of IMOs has perhaps fallen into the cracks of the institutional
reorganization. As she further elaborates it has also ‗meant, with cut backs that go on all the
time, that there has been a sort of natural wastage as people have left. They didn‘t actually
cut the jobs; you know the four press officers came into the press office to do it but [...], as
they left or retired they haven‘t been replaced‘ (5).

This would help explaining why the recognition that foreign journalists are important and the
calls for ―doing more‖ are not reflected by an increased allocation of resources for actually
dealing with them. These are the words with which Davina Crole pointed out again the
effects of the bureaucratic machine on the activity of the IMOs:

‗in reorganisation different people ...they don‘t quite join up the implications or, you
know, people [...] move on from their jobs every three years so the person who writes
the report now is saying we should do more with foreign correspondents doesn‘t even
know that there used to be a department that did that. So I think it‘s a little bit like that
really. Everybody‘s all the time trying to keep costs down and everything‘ (6)

Dealing with foreign correspondents over the years: which changes?

I was interested in finding out how the changes in foreign correspondence affected the IMOs‘
work. Having been in the post for between 8 and10 years, they were able to comment about
the developments they have witnessed over time in the identity of the correspondents, their
newsgathering routines, and journalistic outputs. They will now be briefly discussed in turn.

As for the identity of the correspondents, John Hewitt described the fluctuations in foreign
journalists‘ cohorts‘ sizes depending on their nationality. He appears to identify a gradual
decline in numbers:

‗Yes, I mean, since I‘ve been doing this the South American representation has
dropped quite dramatically, especially Argentina and Brazil. Brazil is creeping back a
bit as its economy grows again [...] I think basically China has increased, because of
its economy and increasing influence around the world. I mean, they‘ve obviously got
a big group of people here. I think that‘s more to do with China‘s ambitions as a super-
power than its media interest, but again we have to remember that most Chinese
media is state-controlled. But I think that other groups are gradually reducing.
Americans have stayed the same here, but Europeans probably are beginning to
gradually reduce their numbers; not by much, but gradually, it‘s a sign of the times.
Many are going over to on-line of course, which often seems to require fewer people in
any one place. The days of the big bureaux are numbered in that some of them, you
know, used to have a dozen or so people, like Agence France-Presse and people like
that. I think that will reduce over the years‘ (8)

Davina Crole recognizes that there are now less full time correspondents and more
freelancers and stringers. There are about ‗half and half men and women‘ (rather than
mainly men) and more of them now tend to work from home rather than a rented office (7).

These trends, however, do not really affect their work. As Hewitt explains, even in the age of
instantaneous communication and global media, journalists ‗still need to talk face-to-face
with various people about what‘s going on, so that hasn‘t changed: the need to meet and
have access to Ministers hasn‘t really changed‘ (7) Davina Crole, when asked whether it is
more difficult to establish a contact with occasional stringers who might be working from
home, also confirms that this is not at all the case. In fact she explains that there was never
really a time when journalists would be easily available. Even the Foreign Press Association
‗never quite managed to be a centre where it‘s quite bubbling with journalists [...] too much

34
competition in terms of bars and restaurants and things like that, so there never was a kind
of buzzie place where you would see them all. So no I don‘t find it harder to contact them‘
(8).

In terms of newsgathering routines, I asked the IMOs whether they had experienced
differences in the behaviour of journalist cohorts from different countries. My hypothesis was
that the journalistic culture correspondents have been socialized in could lead to variations in
terms of both independence from official sources and critical attitude to them. In this respect,
here are the comments of John Hewitt in relation to journalists‘ participation to organized
activities:

‗The Americans as a group – and there are about 90 American journalists in London –
are different from most of the others. They don‘t frequently attend press conferences
and events, and they don‘t go on any of our trips. They are inclined to do things
individually; they don‘t operate as a group so much. Europeans are very much like the
UK media, and very similar in character and nature. There is a big group of Chinese
journalists in London, probably 60, and the same amount of Japanese. Both are
extremely polite and very nice to work with, but the Chinese, of course we have to
recognise that all Chinese media is state-owned, most of it, and so we have to sort of
know where they‘re coming from. But they‘ve always been very professional and they
attend a lot of our events, are quite frequent attendees of our events, as are the
Japanese‘ (7)

Foreign correspondents do appear to differ in the extent of their critical attitude to briefings:

‗the main change I‘ve noticed [over the years] is that they are slightly more aggressive.
And that‘s actually from a fairly calm standpoint. I‘ve always found them on the whole
very reasonable and probably a bit more civilised than the British media, but they‘ve
become slightly more aggressive. Obviously within the Arab journalists – and there is a
big group of Arab journalists, probably 250-270 here - they‘ve become more aggressive
in their questioning of officials and Ministers. I mean, obviously because of the
situation in the Middle East. So they‘ve been more challenging perhaps, but on the
whole the foreign media in London has been very good, but it is still challenging. It
doesn‘t take any old answer, and it is prepared to challenge and to seek information
elsewhere if it doesn‘t get what it wants from Government, and that‘s a regular
occurrence. They don‘t – you know, the good ones – they don‘t just sit there and take
it, they actually get up and go and find out‘ (6)

As for the correspondents‘ journalistic output I was interested in finding out the extent to
which foreign correspondents met the objectives of the IMOs, as well as how the
effectiveness of the IMOs activities was measured. Here is an excerpt of the interview
exchange that shows the IMOs‘ flexible and fairly relaxed approach to the content produced
by the correspondents. This attitude is related partly to the fact that there are not enough
resources to monitor the output of the correspondents, but also to the sheer volume of
material produced by so many journalists for almost as many different countries. It is also
reasonable to assume that, having worked in journalism themselves, the IMOs well
understand the reality of journalistic routines. This helps explaining the acceptance, as a fact
of journalistic life, that correspondents will look for alternative sources of information beyond
the official ones and that official channels might not be appropriate for all stories all the time:

‗Q: Do you have a way to measure the extent to which you are reaching your
objectives? For example, from interviewing some correspondent,s it sounds like they
do not rely much on official briefings, so it sounds like many of them gather information
on-line or through alternative sources...

35
 Yes, a lot of them do that, or even get information from the British media. But there are
a lot of briefings going on all the time. I mean, we don‘t invite all of them to everything.
We have to be selective and invite appropriate journalists to the appropriate event, and
our Government Ministers don‘t give regular briefings to the media. We‘re always
trying to get them to do more but they don‘t do as much as they‘d all like. But people
do get invited.

Q: You said that one of your objectives is to facilitate a positive presentation of the UK,
but how do you monitor the extent to which you have achieved these objectives?
Would you monitor the output of these journalists?

We ask the [foreign] posts, the Embassies, to keep an eye out. Whenever we have
journalists along for some event the post in question is automatically informed, you
know the Embassy gets to know about it. But they‘ll get a note about it from us, and
they keep a look out on the media in their patch and then let us know what sort of
response there has been. Sometimes the journalists send us cuttings or an on-line link
for what they‘ve done, but to be honest we only get about 3% feedback in that way. It
mainly gets from posts who obviously check the local media and then let us know
what‘s been achieved.

Q: So that‘s the way that you can measure your effectiveness?

Yes, that‘s it. It‘s too expensive to get an agency to do it. I mean, you can do it for,
say, one country at a time now and again, but you can‘t do the whole world‘s media; it‘s
just impossible and too expensive‘ (5)

The value of communicating with correspondents: a journalism-focused approach

The value of the IMOs‘ dealing with the foreign correspondents is, ultimately, not so much in
either feeding them with information, or monitoring and controlling the content they produce,
but in establishing a relationship with them over the long term. Talking to them, seeing them,
communicating over the phone or over e-mail supports the establishment of mutual respect
and trust, as this excerpt suggests:

‘Q: What do you really think is the value of following the foreign correspondents this
closely? Is it the relationship that you build? I mean, what do you think is the
advantage of dealing with them so directly?

Well, it‘s basically building trust, and forming a proper professional relationship. I mean
we want them to trust us so that when we tell them things they believe us. And I mean
obviously we tell them the truth – we don‘t do ‗spin‘ as they say, you know? We tell
them what‘s happening as much as we can tell them, and as I say, our main job is to
put them in touch with the right people so that they can do their interviews, and so they
can do their interviews with the Senior Press Officers here. And what they‘re told is
invariably on the record, and that‘s otherwise stated. So it‘s building up trust, when we
see them and we get to know them. I mean, a lot of the foreign journalists know
Davina and I very well and trust us, you know? So that‘s the main thing, and they know
that although we work for the Government [...] what we‘re putting out is not rubbish.‘

The bottom line, as John Hewitt puts it, is that ‗other sources are always available‘:

‗there is no point in attempting to control that, for me, we don‘t – there is WikiLeaks of
course, and there are all sorts of blogs, but the journalists of course have to make up
their minds which is authentic and which is not. There is so much now of course on the
internet which is rumour. We can only deal with either facts or policies and strategy:

36
 we can‘t really go beyond that. But we can lay on people to be interviewed, or
briefings, or Ministers, so the journalists get the opportunity to question‘ (7-8).

As he continues: ‘we‘re quite happy for them to go and challenge it elsewhere and seek
alternative views‘ (10).

Conclusion
By focusing on the case of the UK, the paper has offered an empirical insight into a largely
unknown aspect of public diplomacy: the role of foreign correspondents in shaping the image
of a country to the eyes of foreign audiences. It has contrasted the limited and, under many
respects, simplistic ―theory‖ of dealing with foreign correspondents contained in officials
reports with the ―practice‖—both an examination of the identity, newsgathering routines,
journalistic outputs of foreign journalists in London and the activities of the International
Media Officers at the FCO. Apart from generating new knowledge about a topic about which
no systematic research exists, the paper raises two important sets of questions.

The first is about the relationship between public diplomacy practice and theory. The
comparison between the official reports and the practice of International Media Officers
highlights the apparent disconnect between those who write public diplomacy strategy and
those who implement it on the ground. More specifically the approach to dealing with foreign
correspondents on a day-to-day basis is far more flexible and sophisticated that the official
reports would lead to imagine. The IMOs concentrate more on building trust and facilitating
the newsgathering of foreign journalists rather than using them for ―sending a message‖ to
foreign audiences. While the ultimate objective is that of presenting the UK in a positive
light, the IMOs accept that journalists access a variety of sources and that the notion of
somehow monitoring, let alone controlling their output is just unfeasible. The point, in Davina
Crole‘s words is about giving them ‗a balanced picture‘ not the ‗propaganda,‘ to enable them
‗to report in an informed way‘ (3). At the end, it is not just the foreign correspondents who are
‗credible messengers‘ (Peterson et al.: 13) in relation to foreign audiences. Also those who
deal with correspondents need to be credible messengers. And being recognized as such
takes time, a sustained effort (for instance involving continuity of personnel, the resources to
build up and update a database of comprehensive contacts) and perhaps a professional
interest in foreign correspondents producing good journalism rather than conveying
information.

This point brings up the second set of questions. They relate to the methodology to conduct
research on public diplomacy. There are countless mentions of terms like ―audiences,‖
―trust,‖ ―credibility,‖ ―relationships,‖ and ―engagement‖ in both official documents and
research, but they do not translate into a real focus on the human aspect of public
diplomacy. This study points out that a greater awareness of the foreign correspondents‘
changing micro-practices in the specificity of a political and media environment—London in
this case—as well as of the organizational challenges of dealing with them on day-to-day
basis—John Hewitt called it ‗the real thing‘ (11)—can support a greater understanding, for
those who write public diplomacy strategy, of what is really needed to engage foreign
publics. This requires more ethnographic approaches and the combination of different fields
of study. This project has brought together the sociology of journalism, international
communication, and international relations.

37
Bibliography
Archetti, C. (2010a) ―Comparing International Coverage of 9/11: Towards an Interdisciplinary
Explanation of the Construction of News‖, Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism 11(5):
567-588.
Archetti, C. (2010b) Explaining News: International Politics and Journalistic Cultures in
Global Context (New York: Palgrave).
Archetti, C. (2008) ―News Coverage of 9/11 and the Demise of the Media Flows,
Globalization and Localization Hypotheses‖, International Communication Gazette 70(6):
463-486.
Atkins, C. (2011) ―Churnalism: When Press Releases Masquerade as News Stories,‖
Guardian, 23 February, available online at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2011/feb/23/churnalism-press-releases-news-video
(accessed February 2011).
Bober, M. (1999) Coining the Image of Britain: A Comparative Radio Newsroom Study at the
German HR3 Inform Magazine and the London Foreign Correspondent Bureau, MA
Dissertation, (Centre for Mass Communication Research, University of Leicester).
Carter, S. (2005) Public Diplomacy Review, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)
website,
http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/public-diplomacy-review (accessed May 2008).
Cohen, B.C. (1963) The Press and Foreign Policy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press).
Corman, R. S. (2009). ―What Power Needs to be Smart.‖ Paper presented at the Digital
Media and Security Workshop, University of Warwick, 21 May 2009.
Corman, R. S. (2010) ―Public Diplomacy as Narrative,‖ Paper Presented at the International
Studies Association Annual Convention, New Orleans, 20 February 2010.
Davison, W. P. (1974) ―News Media and International Negotiation‖, Public Opinion Quarterly
38(2): 174-191.
Evans, A. (2008) ―Towards a Theory of Influence for Twenty-First-Century Foreign Policy:
Public Diplomacy in a Globalized World‖, Commonwealth Office (FCO) website,
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-fco/publications/publications/pd-publication/21c-foreign-
policy (accessed June 2008).
Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2011), Digital Diplomacy Communication Directorate
website, ―What is Digital Diplomacy?‖ available online at:
http://digitaldiplomacy.fco.gov.uk/en/about/digital-diplomacy/ (accessed February 2011).
Ghorpade, S. (1984) ―Sources and Access: How Foreign Correspondents Rate Washington,
D.C.‖, Journal of Communication 34(4) 32-40.
Hallin, D. C. and P. Mancini (2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and
Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Hamilton, J. M. (2009) Journalism‘s Roving Eye: A History of American Foreign Reporting
(Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press).
Hamilton, J. M. and E. Jenner (2004) ―Redefining Foreign Correspondence,‖ Journalism:
Theory, Practice and Criticism, 5(3): 301-321.
Hannerz, U. (2004) Foreign News: Exploring the World of Foreign Correspondents (London:
University of Chicago Press).
Hess, S. (1996) International News and Foreign Correspondents (Washington DC:
Brookings Institution).
Hess, S. (2005) Through Their Eyes: Foreign Correspondents in the United States
(Washington DC: Brookings Institution).
Hiatt, F. (2007) ―The Vanishing Foreign Correspondent‖, The Washington Post, 29 January,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2007/01/28/AR2007012801050.html (accessed December 2008).
Kalb, M. (1990) ―Foreword,‖ in Simon Serfaty (ed.) The Media and Foreign Policy (New York:
St. Martin‘s Press).

38
Kruglak, T.E. (1954) ―The Correspondents of the American Newspapers in the UK‖,
Journalism Quarterly, Summer.
Lambert, D.A. (1956) ―Foreign Correspondents Covering the United States,‖ Journalism
Quarterly 33(3): 349-356.
Leonard, M. (2002) Public Diplomacy (London: Foreign Policy Centre).
Melissen, J. (2005) (ed.) The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations
(Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Morrison, D. and H. Tumber (1981) Foreign Media Correspondents Based in London,
ESRC-funded project, final report.
Morrison, D and H. Tumber (1985) ―The Foreign Correspondent: Date-Line London‖, Media,
Culture and Society 7(4): 445-470.
Mowlana, H. (1975) ―Who Covers America?‖ Journal of Communication 25(3): 86-91.
Nair, M. (1991) ―The Foreign Media Correspondent: Dateline Washington D.C.‖, International
Communication Gazette 48: 59-64.
Neil, H. (2007) American Carnival: Journalism Under Siege in an Age of New Media
(London: University of California Press).
Paterson, C. (1997) ―Global Television News Services‖, in A. Sreberny-Mohammadi, D.
Winseck, J. McKenna and O. Boyd-Barrett (eds.) Media in Global Context: A Reader
(London: Hodder Arnold).
Peterson, P.G., K. F. Bloomgarden, H. A. Grunwald, D. E. Morey, S. Telhami, J. Sieg, S.
Herbstman (eds) (2003) Finding America's Voice: A Strategy for Reinvigorating U.S. Public
Diplomacy : Report of an Independent Task Force Sponsored by the Council on Foreign
Relations (Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press), available online at:
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/public_diplomacy.pdf (accessed
December 2010).
Potter, E. (2002) ―Canada and the New Public Diplomacy,‖ Clingendael Discussion papers in
Diplomacy,
http://www.clingendael.nl/publications/2002/20020700_cli_paper_dip_issue81.pdf
(accessed December 2007).
Potter, E. (2008) ―Web 2.0 and the New Public Diplomacy: Impact and Opportunities‖,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office website, http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-
fco/publications/publications/pd-publication/web-2 (accessed May 2008).
Public Diplomacy Alumni Association (n.d.) Public Diplomacy Alumni Association Website,
―What is Public Diplomacy?,‖ available online at: http://www.publicdiplomacy.org/1.htm
(accessed January 2011).
Reporters Without Borders (2010) ―Press Freedom Index,‖ available online at:
http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2010,1034.html (accessed March 2011).
Sambrook, R. (2010) Are Foreign Correspondents Redundant? The Changing Face of
International News (Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism).
Schlesinger, P. (1978) Putting ―Reality‖ Together: BBC News (London: Constable).
Serfaty, S. (ed.) (1991) The Media and Foreign Policy (New York: St. Martin‘s Press).
Suh, J. C. (1972) ―126 Foreign Correspondents Talk About Work in America‖, Editor and
Publisher (15 April): 27-30.
Taylor, P. M. (1981) The Projection of Britain: British Overseas Publicity and Propaganda
1919-1939 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Thussu, D. K. (2007) News as Entertainment: The Rise of Global Infotainment (London:
Sage).
Triesman, D. (2007) ―Public Diplomacy: Steps to the Future‖, Speech delivered at the
London School of Economics, LSE and Foreign Policy Centre Public Lecture, 23 April
2007,
https://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/LSEPublicLecturesAndEvents/pdf/20070423_LordTriesm
an.pdf (accessed May 2008).
Tumber, H. (2006) ―Journalists at Work: Revisited‖, Javnost-The Public 3: 57-68.

39
Tunstall, J. (1971) Journalists at Work. Specialist Correspondents: Their News
Organizations, News Sources, and Competitor-Colleagues‖ (London: Sage).
US Department of Defence (2009) ―Report on Strategic Communication‖ (Washington DC:
US Department of Defense),
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/dime/documents/DoD%20report%20on%20Strategic%20Com
munication%20Dec%2009.pdf (accessed February 2011).
US Department of State (2011) US Department of State website, ―Undersecreatry for Public
Diplomacy and Public Affairs,‖ http://www.state.gov/r/ (accessed February 2011).
Voltmer, K. (2006) (ed.) Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies
(Milton Park: Routledge).
Wilnat, L. and D. Weaver (2003) ―Through Their Eyes: The Work of Foreign Correspondents
in the United States‖, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 4(4): 403-422.
Wilton, C., J. Griffin, and A. Fotheringham (2002) Changing Perceptions: Review of Public
Diplomacy, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) website,
http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/pdf10/fco_wiltonreviewpubdipmay02 (accessed
May 2008).

40
Appendix

Interviews with foreign correspondents - List of questions

Identity
What is your function (in the newsroom)?
How long have you been a journalist for?
How long have you been in London for?
How did you become a journalist? Briefly describe your education and training
How did you become a foreign correspondent? Why in Britain?
How do you see your role as foreign correspondent? Would that be different from the way
you see your role in your home country?

Have you worked elsewhere as foreign correspondent? If so, where?

Who were your previous employers?
Was it for the same medium (ex. TV, press, etc...) or for a different one?

Newsgathering routines
Working conditions and schedule
How many stories do you produce a day/week?
What is your working environment like? Do you work with other people? Where are you
located exactly?
What are the problems and difficulties in your job?
(if short on resources, what impact does this have on selection of stories, research, and
output?)
What are the good aspects of your job?

Sources/Research
Where do ideas for stories come from?
Who initiates a story? You or the home office? What percentage of stories are your own
suggestion and how many are requested by the home office?
What kind of contacts do you have with the home office and how frequently?
How would you go about reporting a certain event? (what do you do first, then.....)
Who/what are your sources? How long do you spend on each kind of source? (newspapers,
TV, internet, news agencies, contacts with colleagues, interviews...)
What proportion of your stories comes from other media?
What is your typical day like?

News values
What makes a ―good story‖?
Could you make an example of a good story and one that was not? Why?

Output/Stories
What are the typical topics of your stories, if any?
Can you tell me more about your last story?
How did it come about? Who initiated it? How did you research about it?

Audience/impact
Who is your audience? Who do you write for? Briefly describe your public‘s profile.
Do you get a sense of the impact of your stories?

41
Do you receive any feedback from your audience or from your home office?

UK image
If I say ―Britain,‖ what is the first thing that comes to mind?
What do you think is the image of Britain coming out of your stories? Are there patterns (like
stereotypes about Britain)?
To what extent do you think your stories and those of your colleagues shape what your
home audience thinks about Britain?

If the journalists has worked elsewhere/for different medium/for different organization

Was the choice of stories different there? In which way?
Was your routine different?

If the journalists has worked for a long time in journalism

What impact have developments in new communication technologies (advent of mobile
phones, the internet, camera phones,.....) had on your activity over the years? (schedule and
number of stories, access to sources, relationship with home office, competition with other
media, shorter attention span of audiences...)
Have such developments made the job easier or more difficult?

Future of foreign correspondence

Are foreign correspondents becoming redundant in the ―global village‖ and in an age of
instantaneous communications?
What is the foreign correspondents‘ ―added value‖?
Where is foreign correspondence going?

42