Panel Nerds: Tragedy Under the Microscope

Who: Sheri Fink, Matthew Shaer, Jennifer Gonnerman, moderated by Charles Homans
What: “On Covering Tragedy”
Where: New America NYC
When: April 29, 2013
Thumbs: Up

When reporters set out to interview people of any sort for a longform article, they have to walk the line between invading others’ privacy and coloring their story with personal anecdotes and impressions. That fine line is even more precarious when the subject matter at hand is tragic, even if the events themselves are in the near distance. In these cases, these writers have an obligation to both the victims and their families as well as to their readers to convey the truth and to add context.

What comes with that responsibility, this panel acknowledged, is entry into the difficult and traumatic world of people who are coping, reeling, questioning, or re-living. Sheri Fink says that her background in medicine helps her gain credibility and, in turn, access to interview people for her medical-related longform stories. What happens at times of disasters, she says, is that we’re exposed to the hardships that others endure regularly.

It’s hard for us to discover the way others live, Jennifer Gonnerman agreed. But that’s what makes us human first, and journalists second. Because this work can be so emotional at times, Matthew Shaer said that it’s important for every writer to consider how the article is shedding light on a community, or a culture, or human suffering, or something else. The subjects of these stories have entirely different reasons to speak about these episodes or disasters than the writers do, and anyone interviewing them must maintain respect and exude patience.

While other reporters for daily newspapers do cover some of these same stories, they don’t get the same space to go as broad or as deep. Longform writers, on the other hand, get up close and personal. Thanks to this  permission and proximity of a subject, Gonnerman says, you can draw out a lesson that “illuminates the world” in the process. They agree to cooperate when you offer them dignity.

What They Said

“Unfortunately, once something horrible happens the doors open in a way they weren’t in a closed environment.”
– Jennifer Gonnerman says people want to talk about their circumstances in the wake of life-changing events

“I can never predict who’s going to be upset about what I write.”
– Sheri Fink finds that even positive depictions can upset people

“I’d like to think, perhaps self-servingly, that people do war the larger story… but we live in a Buzzfeed world.”
– Matthew Shaer sees a place for longform journalism

“One of the benefits of this ind of writing is you get to this complex figure.”
– Charles Homans thinks about what role the writer should have in the creation of his of her story

“We like to be terrified in a way.”
– Sheri Fink posits why true crime and disaster stories sell so well

What We Thought

• Moderator Charles Homans did a nice job keeping the conversation on topic and focused when it looked like the panel might stray to other equally interesting topics but less relevant to the event. He also came with a rich collection of materials that proved not only had he read the “best of” selections from all of these writers, he’d thought about them all. He did a great job making connections between one writer’s multiple works, as well as showing how two different writers cover material in similar ways.
• We liked Shaer’s point that the easiest way to tell a story about an “outsider” community is to show how exotic it is by today’s standards. By fighting that impulse, Shaer says that you can create a better caricature of the people involved in the story. You can humanize them if you try.

PANEL RULES
Some audience behavior seems to repeat itself panel after panel. We’ll be updating a running list of “PANEL RULES!” that will help ensure that you are not the dweeb of the Panel Nerds.

Panel Nerds don’t like…Wits Matchers
One of the main takeaways from this event was how essential context can be when telling a story. Well, that rule shouldn’t apply to people posing questions. Nearly everyone who asked a question during the Q&A first identified their profession or prestige before hitting the panel with their inquiry. The questions themselves were all excellent and worthy of consideration and response. But these brief introductions weren’t necessary and should have been scrapped altogether. The best rule to keep is always to ask the question as directly as possible, and then sit down quietly.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.