The content that conflict journalists produce is spread far and wide. These journalists observe and digest the truth to feed to the public and bring justice and awareness to those who are unable to speak for themselves.
Though the media released by conflict journalists is widely viewed in the general public, it wasn't until the broadcasted murder of American journalist James Foley captivated a worldwide audience in August that conversation surrounding "conflict journalism" became a topic of discussion on social media outlets.
Many conversations quickly revealed that massive pockets of society are unaware of the definition and impact of conflict journalism.
"I think especially these days, people don't know what conflict journalism is," said Lindsay Palmer, an assistant professor with a global media ethics concentration in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Journalists reporting from conflict zones "do not set out to reduce conflict. They seek to present accurate and impartial news," said Ross Howard, in a conflict sensitive journalism handbook he wrote and produced for professional journalists. "But it is often through good reporting that conflict is reduced."
Palmer believes that journalists must be present in conflict zones to stimulate discussion and facilitate change.
"To improve the world, and to improve society, you [must] have conflict correspondents. Without knowledge of the very worst things that are happening in society, it's very difficult to inspire people to change," Palmer said.
"If you don't have professionals who are trained to go to these places and try their best to communicate back to the rest of the world what is happening, you very simply can't get anyone on board to try and make changes."
When the objective media isn't present
Historically, substandard journalism and biased news management condemned entire ethnic groups and social classes to xenophobia and violent conflict.
This is exactly what happened in the Rwanda genocide of 1994. Biased and partisan media outlets in Rwanda helped foster and massage a toxic environment that dramatically increased and influenced the fear-mongering and violence that left at least half a million people dead.
"Media were used in Rwanda to spread hatred, to dehumanize people, and even to guide the genocidaires toward their victims," reads a message prepared by the United Nations to the symposium on the media and the Rwanda genocide. "Three journalists have even been found guilty of genocide, incitement to genocide, conspiracy and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda."
Journalists that have reported on the Rwanda genocide, including Allan Thompson, argue that the killings in Rwanda intensified after international media left the country in April of 1994. By failing to report on the content, Thompson said, there was no one to hold the murderers accountable for their actions.
This belief supports the notion that civilian lives can quite literally depend on the continued practice of conflict journalism.
As of now, outcry on social media has shown that not everyone is supportive of these journalists. There are thousands who condemn their reporting and argue that, when journalists are murdered or die while reporting in conflict zones, that the journalists "shouldn't have expected otherwise," due to the very nature of conflict journalism.
5. Crime: 18% of journalists killed covered a crime beat for their publication. Print journalism is the most dangerous medium to cover any type of content on, with 31% of all journalists killed reporting for a print publication at their time of death.
4. Human Rights: 21% of journalists killed in the last 22 years covered a human rights beat when killed.
"No wonder prostitution is so rampant in China, I mused as I watched the four girls watch us: why stand on your feet all day for slave wages when you can get rich on your back?" – Tom Carter, Unsavory Elements: Storys of Foreigners on the Loose
3. Corruption: 23%, or 249 journalists, have been killed covering a corruption beat.
4. War: Surprisingly, this bullet-ridden beat doesn't top the list, but it still makes a significant statement with 39% of journalists killed covering a war beat. So far in 2014, nearly 30 journalists have been killed in Syria alone.
5. Politics: 46% of journalists killed covered a political beat at the time of their death. This accounts for nearly half of the total number of journalist deaths, making politics the most dangerous beat in the world.
(All data included in this listicle courtesy of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)