People often ask us what kind of journalism we practice at The What If. Depending on our backgrounds, our answers have varied—some of us say peace journalism, others constructive journalism, and others solutions journalism.
To settle on one answer, we took a step back to examine how these approaches are defined. We realized that they aren’t in competition with each other; rather, they build upon one another.
Solutions Journalism (SoJo)
Developed by the US-based Solutions Journalism Network, SoJo is rigorous and compelling reporting on responses to social problems. It critically investigates and explains how people attempt to solve widely shared challenges, ensuring that solutions are part of the story.
Constructive Journalism
Developed by the Denmark-based Constructive Institute, constructive journalism is rigorous, solutions-oriented, and nuanced reporting that helps people navigate a complex world. It aims to inform, explain connections, and foster democratic conversations.
Constructive journalism is built on three pillars:
- Solutions Journalism (SoJo) – ensuring solutions to problems are part of the news
- Nuanced Reporting – avoiding simplistic black-and-white narratives
- Promoting Democratic Conversations – engaging the public and facilitating debate
Peace Journalism
Unlike the first two, peace journalism originates from the academic world rather than the journalism one. It focuses on reporting conflicts with the goal of fostering peace. It is committed to exploring the root causes of conflict and aims to “create opportunities for society at large to consider and value non-violent responses to conflict,”as Lynch and McGoldric put it in 2005.
All three approaches have in common to offer an alternative to the traditional “If it bleeds, it leads” model of news.
They share the belief that good, solutions-based journalism is vital for democracies and public discourse, and that stories have the power to shape narratives in a way that fosters constructive conversations rather than division.
