ChiWalla

What protocols are there to ensure that an editor is doing their job well? I'm thinking of basic professionalism to writers/reporters, responsiveness about active stories, open-mindedness regarding views different from their own? What accountability is there to ensure that editors respect the reporting and reporter? Usually communicating with an editor is a one-way street and they have control, even if their judgment is flawed, problematic, or misinformed.

It seems that editors, especially on international news from developing countries, who are the 'gatekeepers', should have experience as reporters working in Asia, Africa and LatAm. However, many of them have never been to these continents at all and have limited reporting/writing experience in general. Isn't is problematic that an editor who has no real knowledge about the developing world is making the call about complex developing countries from a desk in DC? They also don't understand the limitations and challenges of reporting from developing countries and this lack of understanding can really burden the reporter. Why not hire editors who have that experience?

You are probably aware of the New York Times' controversial job post for its Nairobi bureau chief. How do you avoid this kind of myopic, biased lens, often dictated by editors sitting in the US who have never even been to these continents (Africa, developing Asia), much less worked there? It also seems that if there were reporters with good background in economics and business reporting who are looking at the big picture, rather than just reporting on conflict and disaster (important for sure, but to the detriment of other stories), there would be a broader range of stories. Hence reporting from say, Wall Street Journal and Financial Times, can be broader and more balanced than general media.

Yes, it's a concern at NPR (and other major US/UK media outlets). Will Dobson doesn't assign or edit (most?) daily stories, so he's not the person a reporter would be dealing with directly. There are many intermediate editors who are the gatekeepers and do the day-to-day editing. How does management know if an editor is doing a good job if they don't ask the reporters/writers they are working with?

FYI for the forum, this is NYT's Nairobi job posting. It does neglect many other important stories happening beyond terrorism, war, conflict, etc. that is the focus of most US media coverage of Africa.

"Our Nairobi bureau chief has a tremendous opportunity to dive into news and enterprise across a wide range of countries, from the deserts of Sudan and the pirate seas of the Horn of Africa, down through the forests of Congo and the shores of Tanzania. It is an enormous patch of vibrant, intense and strategically important territory with many vital story lines, including terrorism, the scramble for resources, the global contest with China and the constant push-and-pull of democracy versus authoritarianism.

The ideal candidate should enjoy jumping on news, be willing to cover conflict, and also be drawn to investigative stories. There is also the chance to delight our readers with unexpected stories of hope and the changing rhythms of life in a rapidly evolving region."

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/nairobi-bureau-chief-at-the-new-york-times-1332110667/?originalSubdomain=ke&fbclid=IwAR0f2KExCDtnOu6n-9zSotlZ-N0MkTHXO9WWFyAVmVK7ZIrF0Z6KF7Cs2a4