Two Sides of the Lens: Insights from the SoJo Labs

SoJo Labs at the 2025 Solutions Journalism Africa Summit in Abuja

By Yecenu Sasetu

Journalism constantly demands a choice: to stop at the problem or to look deeper for what is working. Every day, reporters meet communities that survive against the odds; people who organise themselves after disasters, innovators who solve local problems with limited resources, and institutions that quietly shift outcomes. These stories matter. They tell the fuller truth of our society.

The Solutions Journalism Africa Summit, which happened in Abuja on November 14 and 15, brought this truth to the centre. Journalists, editors, data experts, educators, and newsroom leaders gathered to examine how solutions reporting shapes public understanding and strengthens accountability. The summit opened space for honest conversations and deep reflections on what makes it hard to do this work, and what must change so journalists can tell solutions stories with rigour and confidence.

The breakout session moved through a sequence of key themes. Each one revealed barriers that journalists face and practical actions that can strengthen our storytelling.

1. Funding and Sustainability

Barriers:
Funding shifts globally, making access to grants or newsroom support inconsistent. Many journalists want to pursue solutions-focused reporting but lack financial backing for fieldwork, travel, or extended investigation. Some newsrooms still rely on problem-centred content because they believe it attracts more funding. Journalists also struggle to understand the risk profiles of the solutions they want to cover, which affects the stories they choose and how deeply they investigate.

Recommendations:

• Identify and pursue solutions-focused stories because they open new pathways to funding, rather than waiting for funding before producing them.

• Use collaborations, such as shared reporting models, to reduce cost burdens and increase the variety of stories being told.

• Build community-driven structures that support reporting and strengthen the narratives around local solutions.

• Develop a deeper understanding of the risks tied to the solutions being reported so journalists can assess viability, sustainability, and credibility.

2. Editorial Support

Barriers:
Some editors misunderstand solutions journalism, treating it as soft, feel-good content rather than evidence-driven reporting. Journalists often submit stories only to be told that they “do not fit house style.” Many newsrooms still evaluate stories by their drama, not their depth. These barriers weaken the editorial process and discourage rigorous, investigative, solutions storytelling.

Recommendations:

• Strengthen editorial guidance by applying the four pillars of solutions journalism-response, evidence, limitations, and insight.

• Encourage editors to consider cultural, economic, and social factors that shape the impact of solutions.

• Promote long-form, investigative approaches so solutions stories reflect the complexity of the issues.

• Equip editorial teams with training that clarifies what solutions journalism is and how to edit for quality and accuracy.

3. Staying Objective

Barriers:
Objectivity becomes difficult when reporters approach stories with emotional reactions, preconceived judgments, or personal stakes. Conflict zones or politically sensitive environments increase this tension. Journalists may also confuse objectivity with neutrality, leading them to avoid necessary critique. When personal conflict or external pressure exists, objectivity becomes even harder to maintain.

Recommendations:

• Commit to objectivity before beginning a story by approaching every report from a dispassionate starting point.

• Hold yourself accountable before holding institutions or individuals accountable.

• Apply mediation and dialogue tools when conflict arises rather than reacting emotionally.

• Avoid subjective language that triggers bias or negative public responses.

• Use the four pillars of solutions journalism to create fairness and balance.

• Acknowledge that condemning wrongdoing does not violate objectivity when the evidence supports it.

• Provide context to every claim, ensuring that accuracy is not compromised by external influence or funding.

4. Lack of Adequate Training

Barriers:
Most journalists have not received proper training in solutions journalism. Funding shortages often limit training opportunities and prevent follow-up support. Many reporters struggle with long-standing habits of problem-only storytelling. Young journalists lack practical field experience. Training sessions rarely include people with disabilities, creating knowledge gaps in how disability issues are reported. Academic institutions also struggle to integrate solutions journalism into their curricula.

Recommendations:

• Expand training programs that provide hands-on practice in identifying, evaluating, and verifying solutions.

• Develop follow-up structures, mentorship programmes, and resource hubs that support journalists after training.

• Build capacity for lecturers so the methodology becomes a stable part of media education.

• Introduce solutions journalism early in tertiary institutions to rebuild habits from the ground up.

• Strengthen collaboration between academia and newsrooms, so students receive real-world exposure.

• Use social media challenges, competitions, and showcases to attract younger journalists.

• Ensure training materials are accessible across languages and include people with disabilities.

5. Limited Access to Quality Evidence

Barriers:
Journalists often misunderstand the role of data in solutions reporting, treating it as separate rather than essential. Many stories begin with assumptions or incomplete evidence. Some reporters prioritise the first narrative they see instead of investigating underlying data. Localising data remains a challenge; for instance, the same statistics may apply differently in Borno, Katsina, or Lagos. Journalists also struggle with biased data sources, limited time, and the pressure to find a “victim” that fits a pre-planned narrative. Continuity is often missing, which weakens long-term reporting.

Recommendations:

• Approach evidence by asking deeper questions about the community, the problem, and the numbers that shape the issue.

• Seek data from beneficiaries rather than solely relying on initiators of solutions.

• Localise evidence so stories reflect how solutions work differently across communities.

• Document the biases in data sources without adopting those biases.

• Investigate policy failures that may create future problems and report solutions pre-emptively.

• Produce stories in batches to capture multiple layers over time and avoid oversimplification.

• Prioritise continuity to show how solutions evolve, adapt, or fail.

Why This Matters for Us

For us at Shades of Us, these conversations reinforce a truth we already hold close: storytelling becomes more powerful when it captures both the challenges and the people working to overcome them. The two sides of the lens are not in competition. They help us see the full picture. As we continue to tell stories about justice, gender, health, and human dignity, these insights sharpen our approach. They remind us that solutions are not accidental; they are built, tested, refined, and often born from communities that refuse to give up.

Our responsibility is to tell those stories well, with honesty, empathy, and depth. And this summit made it clear that when African journalists commit to solutions journalism, we do more than report the news; we help shape our own narrative because, as Chimamanda Adichie said, there is danger in a single narrative.

This is the work we chose. This is the work we continue.