Sharing our thoughts and best practices.


Active shooter training prepares journalists

(The Kiplinger Program, along with the Ohio Association of Broadcasters, sponsored three active shooter training workshops in June. The programs were held in Columbus, Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio and were presented by FBI profilers and SWAT team members. In three days more than 60 journalists from about 30 media outlets were trained in identifying, preventing and surviving an active shooter situation.) 


Sit through three hours of active shooter training and it’s very likely your perspective on safety and personal survival will change … for the worst. 

Watch videos of past active shooters as they explain their reasons for mass killings, pay attention to the signs that could have led the way to the prevention and hear the horrifying story of survivors.  

Do all that and you’ll almost certainly be convinced this could happen to you at your media office on any given day.  

 Congratulations, you get the message, because that’s exactly how the FBI views active shooting scenarios.  

 If you think this can’t happen to you and at your workplace, you’re lying to yourself. There is still this mindset that this won’t happen, that I won’t be a victim,, it happens other places to other people, but it won’t be me,” FBI SWAT team leader David Britton told the room of journalists in Cincinnati. “Do you think those people who found themselves in similar situations didn’t think the same thing? 

 If there is a singular takeaway from these three days of active shooter training, it’s this – it can happen to you. With an active shooter on a killing rampage in this country every 18 days, the odds are dramatically increasing. Pair this with the elevated hatred for the media-fueled by political rhetoric and it’s no surprise that violent incidents against journalists are on the rise. It stands to reason shootings will as well. 

 Fortunately, you can prevent it or survive it. If you take is seriously and prepare. 


Shootings by the Numbers 

 The FBI has compiled some interesting statistics over the last 20 years that can provide a modest roadmap to managing the crises. Ignoring the signs left in the open by a potential shooter is the common mistake made. 

 “In so many cases we talk to survivors and people who knew the shooter and we see where they left ‘bread crumbs’ that could have been traced and alerted people to their intentions. People either don’t pay attention, don’t want to get involved or pass it off and it’s simply the best way of prevention,” FBI profiler Kristin Cadieux said. 

 Know this: 

  • 87 percent of mass killers have no prior police records. There is no indication that someone who’s had brushes with the law is more likely to kill in mass.  
  • 67 percent of killers were known to their victims (or some of them). Workplace shootings are the most common by someone who’s worked there or has relationships with people who do. 
  • 28 percent act within 24 hours of their decision to kill, 26 percent wait a week, 22 percent wait 8-30 days. Active shooters don’t snap. They go through a very elaborate process to reach this point, not the least of which is planning and preparation for the day.  
  • Between 2000-09 there were 8.6 active shootings per year; 2010-17 it’s 20.6.  
  • There is an active shooter incident in the U.S. every 18 days. 
  • 46 percent of shootings take place in commercial buildings, 24 percent in schools and 10 in government buildings.  
  • Just under 1,700 people have lost their lives in U.S. mass shootings, the majority of them coming in the last 10 years.  
  • Most mass shooters obtain their guns legally, 175 legally compared to 59 illegally. However, an additional 79 are uncertain to law enforcement.  
  • Four key contributors to mass killings in recent years, according to the FBI, has been: financial stress, social media, access to firearms and mental health issues. 
  • But, only 25 percent have been diagnosed with a previous mental illness. 

 Profiling a potential shooter is easier than predicting when and where they will strike, Cadieux said. 

 Most mass killers have specific motives or carrying out their reign of terror. The root of many is a real or perceived injustice or a slight that has happened to them by a friend, employer and they can’t let it go. They dwell on the slight and many of their failures personally or professionally are the fault of others who have slighted them. Sometimes these “slights” are years old.  


Common motives include: 

 The need to be omnipotent, all-powerful and in control 

The need for infamy or notoriety. Many active shooters idolize previous shooters. 

The need to resolve an ego issue 

Revenge or punishment, often for the slight. 

The desire to promote an ideology such as race or cultural supremacy, religious beliefs. 

The need to kill someone and then commit suicide, usually involving a love interest. 

The perverse desire to experience the thrill of killing people. 


 Be Aware and Be Ready 

 As good as law enforcement can be at preventing many incidents (and they stop hundreda year we don’t know about) they can’t accurately predict when someone will strike or what may be the trigger point that sent a person on a rampage. 

 The best professional advice is to be prepared by planning and practice. 

 “Every business needs to have a plan when someone breaches and starts shooting. Training and practice are what keeps you alive. It’s the difference in surviving or panicking,” Britton said.  

 The most common practice is known as the Run, Hide, Fight Method. Known my different names, it encourages people trapped in a building or in open space with an active shooter to flee first, hide second, and if need me, fight as if your life depended on it. 

 In the Run scenario, it means knowing the exits in all situations – movie theaters, restaurants, churches, malls, office buildings. Know where they are and how to get to them quickly. Encourage others to run with you, but don’t wait for them. Leave personal items behind. Don’t ever go back for anything. Seconds count. Gather at a safe spot, preferably one that has been predetermined in the case of work. 

 According to Gadieux, in many cases, when the shooting starts people just drop to the floor and stay low in hopes of avoiding becoming a target. Sadly, those who lay flat and try to hide in open sight are the ones who are most likely to be killed. Escaping is always the best advice. 

 If you have to hide, keeping out of sight is key. “Each case is different, but most of our research tells us that shooters don’t shoot at what they don’t see,” FBI SWAT team veteran John Wagner said.  

 Turn out lights, barricade doors, disappear under desks if necessary. Stay calm and quiet. Turn off cell phones. 

 Lastly, understand that if you make the personal decision to stand and fight, you should plan to attack with a vengeance and plan to kill. Your life depends on it. “You can’t go about this passively,” Britton said.  

 Use anything and everything as a weapon. People can be injured or killed with a pen, Britton said.  

 For more steps and more in-depth analysis of active shooters consider this link from the three days of workshops. 

 “In the end, prevention is the key. The old adage ‘if you see something, say something’ applies here,” Cadieux said. “Most shooters reveal their intentions either through social media, in conversations to friends, family, colleagues. In a lot of cases, once they decide to kill, they can’t keep it to themselves, they want to brag and look for the attention.” 


Read More

2019 Kiplinger Fellows are diverse class of professional journalists; 22 selected from around globe


Twenty-two veteran journalists from newsrooms around the world will make up the 2019 class of Kiplinger Fellows at Ohio University.

The newest class includes staff from national newspapers, large-market television and radio outlets, major daily newspapers as well as exclusive online journalists from the U.S. and abroad.

Eight fellows were chosen from outside the United States – England, Spain, Pakistan, Moldova, Costa Rica, Belgium, and two from Canada. Nearly 400 journalists applied for the fellowship program, which will take place April 7-12 at the Ohio University Scripps School of Journalism in Athens.

“The talented pool of journalists wanting to participate in our fellowship is inspiring, but makes the selection process all the more challenging,” executive director Kevin Z. Smith said. “It’s always a difficult process to select the few who come. We believe this class is a great representation of the current state of global journalism with freelancers, online producers as well as those from legacy media coming to Ohio. These are 22 excellent fellows.”

Smith said the fellowship’s mission is to train and return the Kiplinger Fellows to their newsrooms (or home offices) armed with a new set of digital skills and the motivation to train others and improve the level of journalism worldwide.

The international 2019 Kiplinger Fellows are:

  • Andrea Baillie, managing editor, The Canadian Press; Toronto, Canada
  • Jane Gerster, national features reporter, Global News; Toronto, Canada
  • Waheedullah Massoud, production executive, BBC; London, England
  • Madalin Necsutu, editor-in-chief, Evenimentul Zilei; Chisinau, Moldova
  • Ali Rashid Panhwer, sub-editor, Associated Press of Pakistan, Karachi, Pakistan
  • Cindy Regidor, correspondent, France 24; San Jose, Costa Rica
  • Teri Schultz, freelance reporter, NPR, Deutsche Welle; Brussels, Belgium
  • Miguel Toral, director,; Madrid, Spain


The U.S. 2019 Kiplinger Fellows are:

  • Bethany Barnes, investigative reporter, The Tampa Bay Times, Tampa, Fla.
  • Kate Cook, city editor, Herald-Citizen; Cookeville, Tennessee
  • Beth Fertig, senior reporter, WNYC public radio; New York, New York
  • Joe Hernandez, reporter, WHYY public radio; Trenton, New Jersey
  • Jon Horn, reporter, KGTV; San Diego, California
  • Srividya Kalyanaraman, editor, BostInno, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Luz Lazo, transportation reporter, Washington Post, Washington, DC
  • Ginny McCabe, freelance reporter; Cincinnati, Ohio
  • Megan Pratz, producer, Cheddar; Washington, DC
  • Maria Luisa Rossel, correspondent, UNO-TV; Washington, DC
  • Colleen Shalby, engagement editor, Los Angeles Times; Los Angeles, California
  • Deepa Shivaram, associate producer, Meet The Press; Washington, DC
  • Charlotte West, freelance reporter; Seattle, Washington
  • Max White, digital producer, WXYZ; Detroit, Michigan

The Kiplinger Program in Public Affairs Journalism is in its 46th year, spending the first 45 at Ohio State University. It has evolved since its founding, transitioning from a nine-month master’s program to a digital media fellowships in 2011. In addition to the weeklong fellowship, the program offers workshops and training across the globe. In 2018, the Kiplinger Program training reached nearly 1,200 journalists. Full information about the Kiplinger Program is available at

The Kiplinger Program was endowed at Ohio State in 1973 by Austin Kiplinger in honor of his father, W.M. Kiplinger, one of the university’s first journalism graduates in 1912. W.M. Kiplinger pioneered a new kind of journalism when he became publisher of The Kiplinger Letter and later Kiplinger’s Personal Finance. He has been described by his son as “a dedicated journalist, a muckraker and an inspiration to young journalists… a very original thinker.”









Read More

Empowered Myanmar Women’s Struggles, Contributions Come to Life in New Book

Kiplinger Fellow Jennifer Rigby (Class 2015) returned this year from a nearly three-year stay in Myanmar where she chronicled life in the Asian nation, particularly focusing on the empowering women who gained prominence after years of oppression, the “other ladies” of the oftern chaotic nation.

Here is a recent Q&A with Jennifer who is back in her native England with husband and child.


Q1. Give us some background how you found yourself in Myanmar and for how long. And, when did the idea of the book come to you?


I moved to Myanmar with my now husband, who is also a journalist, in 2015. It was a compromise: we both wanted to live and work abroad, but while I suggested somewhere pleasant, like Denmark, he suggested Syria. Myanmar was a mix of the two: reasonably safe, for foreigners at least, and a fascinating place to live with some heartbreaking, challenging and important stories to tell, too.


We also moved there at a time of great hope. After decades of oppression at the hands of a military junta, the first free and fair elections were taking place (in November 2015), and the human rights icon Aung San Suu Kyi was set to win. She did win, but it hasn’t been quite so hopeful since. Her government has overseen what has been widely called a genocide of the Rohingya people, and as I write, two Burmese journalists working for Reuters, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, have been sentenced to seven years in prison just for doing their jobs. It’s not the democratic future she was expected to herald.

My book was originally inspired by Suu Kyi – affectionately known simply as “The Lady” in Myanmar – and the hope she inspired in the Burmese people and around the world. But a lot had already been written about her, and I didn’t want to add more to that. Then, over the next 18 months or so living in Myanmar, I found many more people and stories in the country that embodied hope almost as completely as she did.


So I decided to write about them instead – the ‘other ladies’ of Myanmar of the title. And it’s a good thing I did, because with every day that has passed and every atrocity that has taken place on Suu Kyi’s watch, these women have become more than an addition to her. Rather than her backing singers, as they perhaps were in my original idea of the book, they have now become the headline act; they are carrying the whole tune, and with it, hope for Myanmar’s future.


Q2. How did the book materialize?


I had the idea for the book, but for a freelance journalist to take time out from making money with stories is a precarious business. So I applied for and got a grant from the International Women’s Media Foundation, which enabled me to focus on all of the women’s stories in depth – traveling to meet them, shadowing them, spending days with them. That was brilliant, and essential to give me time to do the book properly. At the same time, I pitched it to publishers, and the Institute of South-east Asian Studies took it on.


Q3. Was there any time you were concerned about portraying these women given they were rebellious of sorts and you were giving them attention?


The women were all totally aware of what was going on when we were speaking, and the fact that the interviews would end up in a published book. For some of them, their rebellions are not contentious – the refugee sexual heath nurse, for example, or the acid attack survivor – while they are bravely fighting for change, they aren’t fighting for the kind of change that will wind up an increasingly authoritarian government.


That’s not the case for some of the more overtly political campaigners, such as the Rohingya human rights activist, Wai Wai Nu. She is perhaps in a more precarious position, but it’s a place she has incredibly courageously chosen to put herself many times since she got out of prison. As an activist, she uses the local and international press to try to raise awareness for various causes, and so I think – I hope – my book can be part of that for her. But I do think she and a few of the other women had to be careful in what they said at certain points.


Q4. Myanmar is a complex country that seems perpetually mired in conflicts of politics, war and religion. How much of the turmoil factored into your decision to approach a book from these unique feminist views?


Myanmar is spectacularly complex, and I don’t claim to understand it. However, what I did notice as I lived there, learned more and read more books about it, was that any attempts to understand it or explain it came from the male viewpoint, the male voice.


Apart from Aung San Suu Kyi, I just felt that the perspectives of women in Myanmar were completely unheard in the wider world. And at a moment when it seemed the country was about to undergo a historic change, it seemed to me that they were going to play more of a part in its future, and in making it a feminist future. So I wanted to hear from them, and I wanted the international community to hear more from them.


Q5. Were there some figures or topics that were just too sensitive to approach in a book? Did you ever think “officials” might be staring over your shoulder as you interviewed them? Anyone who wanted to talk with but couldn’t?


I didn’t really feel that there was anything too sensitive for me to approach, but that’s probably because as an international journalist, I was able to leave Myanmar whenever I wanted. Although I did write the book outside of the country, and I haven’t been granted a visa to return since.


Until recently, I would have said writing it in Myanmar would have been fine anyway, because it really seemed like press freedom was on the up since the dark days of the junta – but the recent sentencing of the two Reuters journalists has called that pretty seriously into question.


Otherwise, I spoke to everyone I wanted and didn’t feel anything was out of bounds – apart from Aung San Suu Kyi herself of course, who I would have loved to speak to but who doesn’t really grant interviews with the international (or indeed local) press that much anymore. Another great sign for a democratic leader…


Q6.  What’s the one takeaway you hope for someone reading this book?


I hope people reading the book see beyond Aung San Suu Kyi into the nuanced, wonderful, sad, frustrating, inspiring and fascinating country of Myanmar, and realize that there are women there –  as there are anywhere in the world – fighting the good fight to make sure our world is an equal one.


Q7 What the reaction to the book been like, so far?


It’s been positive, which is great. I hope to do more promotion in the next few months as I finish a few other bits of work, but I’ve had some good criticism and some good reception from a few editors for reviews and articles. And for now my husband is keeping track of the Amazon sales (it nearly topped the gay and lesbian bestsellers for a few days, which is cool but a bit odd, seeing as it doesn’t fit into that genre really in any way).


Q8. Plans for more travels or books coming up?


I’m about to have my second child (due in January), so I won’t be travelling much or writing after that for a year or so. Otherwise, it might just be because it is occupying my thoughts a lot at the moment, but I’d like to do a series about birth around the world: the different approaches of different cultures to this fundamental life event that everyone goes through.


I’d also love to get back to Myanmar when I can, partly to promote the book and also to discuss whether there is any interest in translating it into Burmese. Otherwise I’ll see what lies ahead!


Here’s the link to buy the book btw – any promo appreciated!


Read More

Applications closed for 2019 Kiplinger Fellowship

The application process for the 2019 Kiplinger Fellowship in Digital Media has ended.

Thanks to the many professional journalists worldwide who applied for next April’s fellowship at Ohio University.

Notifications will be sent to the chosen fellows by mid-December. If you have not received a confirmation email from Kiplinger by that time, we regret to tell you that you’ve not been selected. Because of the large number of applications each year, we do not send individual notices.


Read More

We are an enemy on behalf of the American people

This editorial is posted today in unity with more than 350 U.S. publications and organizations challenging President Donald Trump’s assertion that the media is the “enemy of the people.”


 By now President’s Trump’s assailing of the U.S. media as “fake news” and “the enemy of the people” is as much a part of his early presidential legacy as his frequent braggadocios and often insulting tweet storms. No less than 400 times has Trump hung the “fake news” tag on the press since he initiated the phrase more than a year ago, according to a CNN analysis in early August.

The persistent attacks on the media and the baiting of his base to turn against the press at his political rallies are all too commonplace. In fact, it is an effective strategy to humiliate, debase and seize power from the Fourth Estate for doing its job. Calling them the enemy serves to distance the public from the media while his supporters can ironically embrace a president with a propensity for presenting unverifiable information almost daily.

So, are we, the press, the enemy of the people?

Of course not.

But, let’s also be clear, we are indeed an enemy.

We are the enemy of the crooked politicians who conduct insider trading and spend campaign finances on themselves and their families. We are the enemy of the corrupt who take money offshore and evade the American tax system and the enemy of people who line their pockets at the public till or take bribes from lobbyists and special interests to serve themselves and their own desires over those of the people.

We are the enemy of the powerful who choose to extend that power over others like a cloak of despair. We see enemies in high places when people are starving and destitute while the powerful live in laps of luxury. The media makes enemies of those who attempt to control all levels of government. We abhor dictators, fascists, oligarchs, tyrants, oppressors, authoritarians, despots and totalitarians.

We are the enemy of the liars who spin stories, deflect from answering questions and create “alternative facts.” We take on those who trade in real fabricated news and conspiracy theories that are built on few, if any, shreds of truth. We challenge those in our own profession when their stories appear more like political propaganda than a semblance of fairness and truthfulness.

We are the enemy of those who want to undermine the First Amendment, who hope to gag the press and limit our scope and abilities to report to the American people. We are the enemy of lawmakers from the smallest to the mightiest who want to use laws, rules, regulations, even policing power to control the flow of information to the people and plunge government business deeper into secrecy.

You see, we are capable of being an enemy. Our history shows we are a strong, united, committed group loyal to our mission of free, factual and fair information, and because of that, we create enemies over time.

But, the American people is not one of those.

We are not the enemy of the American people. We are an enemy on behalf of the American people.

And, the sooner this president learns that the sooner this nation will return to a symbol of democracy.



Read More