In episode 1 of “In the Dark,” we learn about the killing of 24 civilians in Haditha at the hands of U.S. Marines, told as a neighbor, Khaled, remembers the event. Madeleine Baran, along with a team of journalists, follows the story over the course of four years through interviewing people connected to the case and analyzing archival materials.
As part of this project, Baran “embeds” herself with subjects through accompanying them on an investigation. Khaled, her primary subject, is searching for answers about the Haditha killing, and Baran’s reporting informs this search. In this respect, embedment is a collaborative effort, in which journalists chase stories along with their subjects.
In some contexts, embedment requires journalists to risk their lives. Through her reporting in Ukraine, Cailin Doornbos put herself in danger to help American readers understand what happens on the front lines. Caitlin Dickerson’s chronicles through the Darién Gap offer another example of the dangers embedded reporting can involve. In both these contexts, immersive reporting is impossible without risks. Journalists must put themselves in danger to understand the dynamics of migration and war.
Some information can only be uncovered through embedment. For instance, Dickerson verifies that some death counts of migrants in the Darién gap are underestimated through talking to people living along the crossing and seeing mass graves herself. Embedment also gives journalists access to otherwise inaccessible sources. Migrants likely trusted Dickerson more because she made herself “one of them.”
On that note, embedment raises ethical challenges about the responsibility of journalists to maintain some level of distance with their sources. I question the ability of journalists to become “one of them.” Embedment risks providing journalists with a false sense of familiarity with a subject. Clearly, Dickerson gained a deeper understanding of the experience of crossing the Darién Gap through making the journey herself, rather than just speaking to migrants about it. At the same time, as a journalist, she is in a more secure position than many migrants crossing the gap. The experience of crossing, for Dickerson, might obscure the difference in privilege between her and migrants on the same path.
At the same time, embedment might emphasize these differences. The process of accompanying subjects on their journeys–whether through the Darián Gap or through an investigation–might allow journalists to better understand the challenges their subjects face and, at the same time, their own position as observers.
These readings led me to consider how we might practice embedment as students. Some of us, while in Berlin, embedded ourselves in stories. Raphi and Miriam embedded themselves in a Ukrainian church, traveling to the site and spending a day with the group organizing it. Most of us stuck to interviews. In some cases, interviews are all we can do, especially under the constraints of time. That said, I am curious about how we might expand the idea of embedment beyond spending time physically with a subject. What are other ways–through videocalls, shared routines, or social media–we might embed ourselves in stories from afar?
