Don’t Make My Mistakes: A Guide to Reporting in Unfamiliar Places

 

 

I thought I had found the perfect story. While Googling around one day, I discovered a group of architects and engineers in a southern European city working to reduce urban heat by reprogramming ancient infrastructure, such as centuries-old aqueducts. Little had been written recently about the effort. As a science journalist based in the Netherlands, I was immediately intrigued. I was already going to the country for vacation, so I thought, “Why not try and write about it?”

I called a source involved in the project to get a sense of the story. He was a colorful character, full of good quotes and eager to show me the group’s work in person. I pitched an editor I had worked with previously, who greenlit the piece. Check, check, and check.

But when I arrived at my destination a few weeks later, I realized there was less “there” than I had thought. While touring the city’s cobblestone streets with the people working on the initiative, I learned that there was not much progress for me to report on. There also appeared to be some sort of dispute between different government bodies, uncertainty about who actually had jurisdiction over the infrastructure, which was hampering the project. Aware that readers don’t want 1,000 words about bureaucracy in southern Europe and unsure how to pivot, I felt out of my depth. I emailed my editor voicing my concerns and asked to kill the story. I know it was the right choice, but this experience has haunted me since.

Scores of journalists report on countries or areas where they are not a native and do so successfully. What do the pros say about researching and reporting stories focused on a new community? I spoke to four journalists, some of whom have explored international reporting in sensitive areas.