The Risky Job of a War Correspondent

    
      The job of a war correspondent: exciting and filled with drama, yet dangerous and risky. And what is a war correspondent exactly? It is a journalist who covers war stories firsthand from a war zone. So just how dangerous is the job? Well, think about it. They are in the middle of a war zone where Americans are hated. They are right there alongside the soldiers, reporting the action. So I think it is safe to say that the job is pretty risky. The job is even ranked in Player's 25 Most Dangerous Jobs in America.

 

     So why is it important to know this? Well just like soldiers in war, war correspondents are also repeatedly exposed to war and traumatic events. The difference between the soldiers and the journalists is that soldiers are trained to be in those dangerous situations and journalists are not. This makes these war correspondents more vulnerable to the troubling aftermath that can come with the job or even the troubles that come during the job.
 

 

     In the article, "War Reporters Defy Danger to Get Story", Ulrike Gruska talks about the dangerous conditions that these journalists work in. He comments, "They often approach scenes as closely as possible to be able to report first-hand. They travel to front lines, for example in Aleppo, Syria, where snipers hide behind windows and rooftops. When trying to get interviews, they will often enter areas that may have been mined." Most of these reporters are so dedicated to their job they will do about anything to get the shots they want. It is reported that in 2012, 141 journalists and bloggers were killed worldwide. Gruska says that unfortunately, with the dangers of this job, reporters will continue to die in these war zones.

 

     For the ones who do not die though, have a high chance of gaining a psychological disorder, such as PTSD or depression, because of all the dangers they face while on the job. Anthony Feinstein, author of Dangerous Lives: War and the Men and Women Who Report It, did a series of studies that assessed how journalists respond to the dangers of their job. In his first study, he compared war journalists with domestic journalists for the presence of disorders such as PTSD or major depression. What he found was that there were high lifetime rates of PTSD, major depression, and increased alcohol consumption in the war journalists. He also observed that the journalists who had these disorders were not being treated. Most just continue on with their job. 

 

     In Feinstein's studies, he also looked at why they return to their job even with all the hazards. He found that for some, it was personal ambition, wanting to keep the public informed, and even the desire to be in the dangerous and risky situations.

     I think the job of a war correspondent is very important, but at the same time, it should be monitored. During the job, these journalists are at a high risk of developing psychological problems. When the problems, like PTSD and depression, are left untreated, it can cause more harm to the person and the people around him or her. And also, if they want to keep doing their job, they need to be healthy. These ambitious journalists may think they are fit to return to these war zones, but are they really? So as a news organization, I think it is crucial to make sure journalists are checked and treated.