A JoeyOffAir Reporter Reflects on HumAngle’s Data and Solutions Reporting Workshop in Jos

When I walked into the hall for the HumAngle Data and Solutions Reporting Workshop in Jos, Plateau State, on Tuesday, September 15, I was not quite sure what to expect. I was among 13 journalists selected in the state for the two-day event, and as I took my seat, I wondered what new lessons I would take away from the training. Before long, however, it felt like I had stepped into a room filled with untold stories, stories shaped by conflict, displacement, misinformation, and the everyday realities of communities trying to rebuild.

As the workshop began, I realised it was not just another professional training. It was an opportunity to pause, listen, and rethink how we approach stories about communities living through conflict. In her opening remarks, Khadijat Oscar, Programme Officer at HumAngle, encouraged us to think more deeply about the role of journalism in combating misinformation and promoting peace, particularly in communities affected by conflict. Her remarks set the tone for what would become two days of learning about not only how we report, but also how we understand the people and circumstances behind the stories.

The workshop is part of HumAngle’s Countering Misinformation and Promoting Peace in Nigeria’s Middle Belt project, implemented in Benue and Plateau states in collaboration with Journalists for Human Rights (JHR), with support from the Canadian High Commission through the Canada Fund for Local Initiatives (CFLI).

For me, the workshop became a journey from understanding conflict and misinformation to thinking about how journalists can use data, evidence, and solutions-focused reporting to tell fuller stories. These are core areas of journalism that HumAngle, as a media and knowledge institution working at the intersection of conflict, humanitarian, and development issues, has considerable experience in. That made the training particularly relevant to the kind of reporting required in communities where facts can be contested, information can spread quickly, and the consequences of poor reporting can be significant.

Understanding the Context

One session that immediately stood out to me was “Context Setting: Scenario Activity”, facilitated by Johnstone Kpilaakaa, HumAngle’s Standards Editor. The practical exercise reinforced an important lesson: journalists need to build strong and meaningful relationships with their sources, particularly local sources, rather than relying solely on information obtained through third parties.

My biggest realisation from the session was that building relationships with local sources should go beyond simply obtaining information for a story. It is about trust, understanding the community, and creating channels through which people feel safe enough to share their experiences. When people trust a journalist, they are more likely to provide context, point to issues that may not be immediately visible, and speak about experiences that might otherwise remain hidden.

This is particularly important when reporting conflict. A journalist who understands the community is better placed to recognise the context behind an incident, question information that may be misleading, and identify stories that might otherwise be missed. The session reminded me that good reporting often begins before a journalist arrives with a notebook or starts recording. It begins with the relationships built over time and the effort made to understand the people being reported on.

Reporting Conflict with Empathy

That lesson naturally connected with the conversations that followed throughout the first day, as other sessions explored the realities and responsibilities of reporting in conflict-affected communities.

Marie-Therese Nanlong, a veteran journalist, shared her experience during a session on “The Realities of Navigating Misinformation in Conflict-Affected Communities”. She drew attention to the challenges journalists encounter when reporting in places where information can be difficult to verify, tensions are often high, and different versions of events can circulate rapidly. Her experience offered a practical reminder of the difficult decisions journalists sometimes have to make when trying to establish what is true without putting themselves or their sources at unnecessary risk.

In another session, Fidelis Mbah, a journalist with Al Jazeera, taught on “Human Rights Journalism: Finding the Stories and Reporting Them Ethically”, while Hauwa Shaffii Nuhu led a session on verification in low-resource environments. Together, the sessions reinforced the importance of approaching sensitive stories with accuracy, context, and empathy, particularly when reporting on people whose lives have been directly affected by violence or displacement.

It is easy, particularly when working under the pressure of breaking news, to focus on what happened. But behind every incident are people whose lives may have been permanently altered by violence or displacement. There are families dealing with loss, communities trying to recover, and individuals living with consequences that may continue long after the headlines have faded.

Their stories require more than facts. They require care.

That was one of the clearest lessons I took from the first day: conflict reporting is not only about documenting an incident. It is also about understanding the people, history, and circumstances surrounding it. Without that context, a report can tell audiences what happened without helping them understand why it happened or what it means for the people involved.

From Data to Solutions

The second day broadened the conversation by introducing practical tools that journalists can use to strengthen their reporting. We explored the use of data in conflict reporting, tracking and analysing digital evidence, the Solutions Reporting Framework, security risk assessment, conflict mapping, and tips on pitching stories.

For me, this was where the workshop’s connection between conflict, data, and solutions became clearer. The tools we were introduced to were not separate from conflict reporting; rather, they offered different ways of understanding and investigating the same stories.

Data can help journalists move beyond assumptions and anecdotes. It can help reveal patterns, provide context, and test claims that may otherwise be difficult to establish. Digital evidence can help journalists establish what happened and examine competing accounts, while conflict mapping can provide a clearer picture of the relationships, locations, and patterns surrounding a conflict.

These tools can make reporting more rigorous, but they also raise an important question: once we understand the problem, what happens next? That is where solutions reporting comes in.

A session on inclusion and gender-sensitive reporting, facilitated by HumAngle Assistant Editor Hauwa Saleh Abubakar, further emphasised the importance of sensitivity when reporting stories involving gender and vulnerable groups. It reminded me that even when the facts are correct, journalists still have a responsibility to consider how they portray people whose circumstances may make them particularly vulnerable.

Another important lesson for me was that a solutions story is not complete without the five pillars of solutions journalism. Reporting problems is important, but journalism does not necessarily have to end there. We can also examine responses, look for evidence of what works, consider limitations, and identify lessons that communities and decision-makers can learn from.

It challenges us to ask not only, “What went wrong?” but also, “What is being done about it, what evidence exists, and what can we learn from those responses?”

That shift in questioning can change the direction of a story. Instead of leaving audiences with only an account of a problem, journalists can investigate how people are responding to it, what appears to be working, what is not, and why.

The Stories We Are Yet to Tell

Perhaps my biggest takeaway from the two days was not a particular reporting tool or technique. It was the realisation that there are still many underreported stories in Plateau State and across the Middle Belt.

Behind the statistics, headlines, and breaking news are communities living with the long-term consequences of conflict. There are people rebuilding their lives, women and children facing unique challenges, and individuals whose experiences rarely make it into mainstream conversations. There are also people and communities developing ways of responding to the problems they face, yet these efforts can receive far less attention than the events that brought them into the news in the first place.

These stories can easily disappear once the immediate crisis has passed.

The workshop made me think more carefully about what happens after the headline. What happens to these communities afterwards? Who is listening to them? What challenges remain unresolved? What solutions are emerging? What evidence exists to show whether those solutions are working? And whose story have we not yet heard?

For me, these questions connect the different lessons from the workshop. Good conflict reporting requires context and empathy. Good data reporting requires verification and evidence. Solutions reporting, meanwhile, requires us to look beyond the problem without losing sight of the realities surrounding it.

Together, these approaches can help journalists tell more complete stories — stories that do not simply tell audiences what happened, but help them understand what happened, why it matters, how people are responding, and what remains unresolved.

More Than Getting the Story

The workshop reminded me that journalism is not simply about getting the story. It is about how we find it, how we verify it, how we tell it, and, perhaps most importantly, how we treat the people at the centre of it.

As a JoeyOffAir reporter, I left the workshop thinking differently about the stories around me. The next story may begin with a conflict, a statistic, or a piece of misinformation, but it does not necessarily have to end there. There may be a community rebuilding, a response worth examining, evidence that challenges what we thought we knew, or a solution that deserves closer attention.

Most importantly, there may be people whose voices have not yet been heard.

The workshop lasted only two days, but it left me with a responsibility that extends far beyond those two days: to look closer, ask better questions, verify what I find, and search for the stories that move beyond the immediate crisis.

For me, that is the value of moving from conflict to solutions. Journalism should document the problems communities face, but it should also listen closely enough to understand their realities, examine the evidence, and find the stories of response, resilience, and change.

The work does not end when the workshop does. From conflict to solutions, the work of journalism continues.