Why Journalism Matters
How adversity and the perils of war gave birth to one of Ukraine's most successful news outlets. And using investigative journalism to discover the upcoming stars at this year's Women's World Cup.
6 minute read
The brave, inspiring tale of the Kyiv Independent
WJM often hears from readers that this newsletter is interesting and informative, but couldn’t we make it less depressing?
Personally, I don’t find any of it depressing. In fact, it is a source of continual inspiration that investigative journalists (and their counterparts in campaigning activism) are willing to risk their lives and liberty to expose the criminal deeds and abuses of power that blight the world.
In this business, a positive impact relies on bravery, imagination and belief. Belief that informing the public in a balanced and objective way matters. Belief that revealing the wrongdoing and lies that would otherwise remain undetected is the first step towards eliminating them.
And if you’re looking for evidence that this can happen, look no further than Ukraine and the story of the Kyiv Independent, the English language online newspaper. This month the editor-in-chief of this outlet, award-winning Olga Rudenko told their story at the summer conference held every year at the Centre of for Investigative Journalism in London.
In November 2021 around 50 staff at the Kyiv Post, Ukraine’s oldest English language newspaper were fired, without warning or explanation.
As Rudenko explained to the conference: “They came to work one day and learned that they were fired, effective immediately. All of them. The owner made it clear he was recruiting key staff to replace us with more obedient people that would not get him into trouble.”
According to Rudenko journalists in Ukraine have always been considered disposable. They were told what to write by rich owners. They didn’t have a say.
“That’s what I was told by more experienced colleagues: Make your peace with it, this is how things are done.
“Fighting back made very little sense from a practical standpoint. We had no money. There is, to my knowledge, no history of journalists launching a publication in Ukraine and making it sustainable, and the owner of the Kyiv Post had the money to hire the best people for the new Post, if he wanted to. But we thought if we just went away, then we accept that this is how things are done. Then we agree that, yes, money rules all. They win, we lose.”
But Rudenko and her colleagues did fight back. Three days after being fired they decided to launch the Kyiv Independent. They published their first product, the Ukraine Daily newsletter in a week and the website launch followed within three weeks, supported with the help of emergency funding from the European Endowment for Democracy. Then they started a membership programme in order to build a sustainable readership and long-term funding.
“For three months we worked very very hard, no time off, the usual start-up thing. In the background, the rumours were coming in about a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine. Troops massing near the Ukraine border.
Bluffing, intimidation
“We thought it could be bluffing, intimidation. Something I learned: it’s incredibly hard to make yourself believe that something so abnormal can happen even when all the signs point to the fact that it will happen. Your mind really shuts down and says ‘no’. Up to the last minute, I thought it was not going to happen.”
At the Kyiv Independent’s first meeting they discussed the possibilities of an invasion and what their response would be if it did.
“We didn’t have the resources to relocate all staff to western Ukraine. We asked members of staff to make the decision about whether they would stay in Kyiv, in Ukraine, or leave the country. I remember one saying ‘I’m going to stay,’ and a colleague replying: ‘Make sure you know what you are talking about. If you are a journalist in Kyiv and Russia invades the city it can be a death sentence to you.’ These were the kinds of conversations we were having.”
Then on February 24 the unthinkable did happen. They wrote their first war report (Putin Declares War on Ukraine) and published it. Immediately they started hearing explosions.
“The next couple of days are all kind of a blur. Some of the team members left Kyiv, some stayed, some decided for their safety they needed to leave the country temporarily. We all continued to work, then some days later something strange began to happen; we are in this state of shock, barely sleeping, just writing, writing, writing.
“Then someone says: Did you see how many Twitter followers we have? It turns out the numbers went from 30,000 to one million in the week after the invasion, then to two million where we are now.”
The same thing was happening on the website. Page views started to rocket and other journalists started calling, asking for interviews.
Rudenko commented: “That was overwhelming. Then a couple of months later Forbes did their annual 30 Under 30 Europe list, and four are people from the Kyiv Independent. Then there is a call from Time magazine, that they want me to be on the cover. I say no at first then they talk me into it. So a few months into the war, I raise my head from the computer, look around, and realise we are going to make it. It looks like we are a success.”
But when the summer arrived, Rudenko supervised her first major investigative project, and it turned out to be an ethical as well as a reporting challenge.
“A journalist comes to me and says she has a tip for an investigative story and she needs to talk to me about it because it’s a risky one. She has information that some really bad things are happening in one of the units of the Ukrainian army, specifically in the International Legion, formed from foreigners who wanted to volunteer to fight for Ukraine.”
Russian war crimes
At the time both the Ukrainian press and international media were focused on investigating Russian war crimes, not examining the moral shortcomings of the Ukrainian military.
“We had this overwhelming feeling that we are in the same boat, the military are defending us, they are untouchable. We worried that if we published the story… it can tarnish the image of Ukraine at a time when we rely on our allies for aid, weapons, and funding. We can be labeled traitors at home. We can face bullying or actual prosecution since Ukraine is under martial law, which gives a lot of freedom to the government when it comes to the press.
“The third threat was that the main protagonist of the story is allegedly a gangster who has access to a lot of weapons at the moment. What if he wants to go after the reporters of the story? Journalists have been killed in Ukraine, it’s not something that has never happened.
“This was a huge, very important test for us. We decided we were going to run the story doing our best possible job. We are going to verify sources, we are going to be very diligent, but we are going to run the story…we believe shining light on misconduct in the Ukrainian military even during war is in the long run helping Ukraine. And we were ready to take risks.”
“But we ran the story and ran the second part a few months later. The second part included new allegations, including the misappropriation of weapons, which is a very dangerous topic.
“About three weeks ago, this story won the European Press Prize, one of the most prestigious awards you can get in Europe. I cried when I learned because I remembered sitting on the floor of my kitchen panicking about it, I remembered all the strength we needed to publish this story.”
Despite this success Rudenko realised that they could not afford to relax. She didn’t want the Kyiv Independent to be ‘a short-lived accident success story’.
“We want the Kyiv Independent to be there when the war ends. When the reconstruction of Ukraine begins. We want to cover that. We want to be the window of the world into Ukraine for many years to come.”
And what is the most important lesson that Rudenko learned in establishing the Kyiv Independent?
“Sticking to what you believe in — your principles — and standing up for them always pays off down the road. If we decided to obey the [Kyiv Post] owner and stop writing stories about the prosecutor general, it wouldn’t be a big deal, right? Stay off this one official and we would still be in a safe and comfortable position. But we would never have launched the Kyiv Independent, never had the success we had, or been on this journey together.”
Reference
GIJN feature on Rudenko’s speech to the CIJ
5 minute read
…And here is the Kyiv Independent’s most recent groundbreaking investigation
Despite the difficulties and dangers of doing investigative reporting during a war, the Kyiv Independent has published some significant stories that have had real impact.
One of the most noteworthy is their recent examination into why the Ukraine remains short of ammunition on the battlefield. This report also shows the Kyiv Independent’s rapid coming-of-age as it entailed a cross-border investigation involving The Investigative Desk, Lighthouse Reports, and Follow the Money (Netherlands), El Diario (Spain), Delfi (Estonia), and Libération (France).
The Kyiv Independent and its partners spoke with ‘dozens of insiders, arms producers, diplomats, the Ukrainian government and military sources, and soldiers on the front line’.
The KI edition of the report, written by Anna Myroniuk and published on July 10 is not only important for Ukraine; it also reveals how the European Union, and indeed NATO, are woefully lacking in co-ordination when it comes to the supply of weapons and the ammunition they require. If there was ever to be a larger conflict with Russia, these issues may prove crucial to a successful NATO campaign.
As Myroniuk writes: “The European Union’s failure to make sure Ukraine has enough ammunition heavily impacts the country’s ability to withstand Russian aggression.”
Ukraine sources describe the system as a ‘mess’ which lays bare the EU’s fragmented standards in arms and ammunition. For example, a 155mm shell for a German howitzer will not fit an Italian launcher of the same calibre.
“Red tape and subsequent shortages thwart military operations, and delay the counteroffensives that Ukraine is being pressured to accomplish....Having spoken to diplomatic, military, and industry insiders, the journalism consortium found that even now, over a year into the all-out Russian war, the EU didn’t manage to implement any solid ammunition production ramp-up plans – due to member states’ protectionism and bureaucracy, among other reasons.”
Here are the key findings of the investigation:
Over a year into Russia's full-scale war, neither Ukraine nor the EU has implemented any solid plans for ammunition production ramp-up
EU member states' governments hardly sign any long-term contracts with producers, while the "wait-and-see" arms industry is reluctant to take financial risks
Ukraine's arms makers also complain about a lack of state support yet scale up production under existing capacities anyway
Ukraine uses from 3-10 times (depending on the intensity of fighting) less ammunition than Russia does, but its ammunition expenditure is still several times higher than Europe's production rates
National protectionism of member states and the bureaucracy of the EU prevented rapid decision-making to tackle ammunition shortages
The lack of unified ammunition types in the EU forces soldiers on the front line to alter their ammunition and adapt weapons, which can delay or jeopardise operations
Soldiers on the eastern Donbas front were deeply disappointed when they discovered that that their recently delivered Finnish 120mm mortar bombs wouldn’t fit into their Italian Mod. 63 mortar despite being of the same calibre.
“Taras, the commander of the brigade's mortar battery, was tasked to find a way out of the situation. Ten people used grinders to manually trim all eight tail fins on each mortar bomb to fit the Italian mortar. There were 400 bombs to trim.
"My infantry was relying on me. At the time when we received these bombs, we had nothing else from the brigade artillery left," Taras told the KI journalists. (Taras is a pseudonym because he dare not reveal his full name for fear retaliation for publicly complaining about the supplies.)
“Since Ukraine gets arms from various countries and suppliers, it creates ammunition chaos and affects the performance of the military: Soldiers have to make time to weigh incoming munitions and manually grind them to fit their launchers, which can get in the way of military missions.”
This situation means that Ukrainian troops are forced to ration their munitions while defending themselves or planning for an attack. This gives Russia a distinct advantage.
“According to Ukrainian military and government sources, Russia can fire up to 10 times as much ammunition as Ukraine does during high-intensity fighting. On average, Russia fires 60,000 rounds of ammunition at Ukraine a day, whereas Ukraine fires 20,000, according to Ukrainian officials' public comments and off-the-record conversations with them.”
Series of explosions
Once well supplied , Ukraine's stocks dried up because of a series of explosions in ammunition depots between 2014 to 2018, widely blamed on Russian agents. Going back to at least 2012 there have also been explosions at munitions storage depots in the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, countries where Ukraine acquired Soviet-style ammunition.
“The Czech government has openly blamed the explosions on Russia. Ukraine's State Security Service and Prosecutor General's Office have investigated the blasts in Ukraine in connection with sabotage, murder, terrorism, and military service negligence. None of the investigations have resulted in convictions yet.”
Admiral Rob Bauer, chairman of the NATO military committee told member states' foreign ministers in mid-March 2022: "We deliver from half-empty warehouses. You have to refill it very quickly...NATO won't be able to provide Ukraine with lasting support if the war goes on for long."
According to Admiral Bauer Europe produces a total of around 170 different weapon systems, from aircraft to air defence. There are 16 different 155mm shells in Europe alone.
“Officials and experts in the United Kingdom and Germany later admitted that their own countries only had enough ammunition to last for mere days of high-intensity fighting.
“Soon after the start of the invasion, it became obvious that Ukraine was using ammunition much faster than EU countries were able to produce it.
“According to the Kyiv Independent's calculations based on publicly available information and sources, Ukraine is using at least five times as much ammunition as the EU members are able to produce. By mid-April, it became clear that the European defence industry could not keep up with Ukraine's growing battlefield demands.”
For more on the KI investigation click on the links below.
Reference
Kyiv Independent’s investigation on Ukraine weapons shortages
Radio Free Europe report on explosions in Bulgaria and Czech Republic
3 minute read
Using Data journalism to find the up-and-coming stars at the 2023 Women’s World Cup
Just to show that investigative journalism is not just here for the difficult and tragic aspects of life, here we look at some impressive data analysis of this year’s FIFA Women’s World Cup by the Australia Broadcasting Corporation. The tournament has just begun in Australia and New Zealand and will run until the final, scheduled for August 20 at Stadium Australia in Sydney.
Using digital story innovation to study the skills of the individual 736 players taking part, ABC analysed performances in a number of statistical categories, and offered its audience a look at up-and-coming stars, as well as the more established players. To figure it all out, ABC News did a deep-dive into individual player data gathered since the last Women’s World Cup in 2019.
This enabled the ABC’s Digital Story Innovation team team to identify footballers who will be crucial to their team’s success throughout this campaign.
They analysed the performance of players in all the positions: strikers, midfielders, defenders and goalkeepers, taking into account the different skills required for each of those positions.
Scoring rates
As far as strikers were concerned they identified Nigerian Asisat Oshoala as one of the players with the highest goal scoring rates over every 90 minutes But they also discovered that players like her score fewer goals than expected based on the quality of opportunities they have to hit the back of the net in all the games played.
Achieving beyond expectations in scoring were Jamaican Khadija Shaw and Norway’s Ada Hegerberg who outperformed other players by maximising the chances they got in ‘goal-scoring moments’.
“Hegerberg, the Olympique Lyonnais forward who won the inaugural women’s Ballon D’Or in 2020, is more accurate, while also tending to take shots that have a higher chance of success.
“Shaw, meanwhile, takes more shots per 90 minutes of play — but they are not as accurate on average as Hegerberg.
Hegerberg tends to take most of her chances from tighter positions right in front of goal while Shaw takes more shots from wider and more varied locations in and around the 18-yard box. (See illustration .)
The Jamaican striker also ranks higher for successful dribbles compared with Hegerberg, meaning she creates more chances for herself by taking on defenders one-on-one as opposed to leaning on teammates for service.
“Two different styles of play produce the same broad outcome: while Hegerberg is a more technical and clinical finisher of chances created by her teammates, Shaw is a more dynamic and self-driven striker who creates more chances with the ball at her own feet.”
Plenty more here for football stats nerds to savour over the next month!
Reference
Game Changers, ABC’s data investigation of player skills for 2023 World Cup
It’s free to subscribe and you can cancel anytime, so give it a try!
Contact us on greatjournalismwjm@gmail.com
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter
facebook.com/whyjournalism matters
twitter @JournalismWhy
Et maintenant disponible en français!