By Amr Emam
Reporter, Egyptian Gazette
Cairo, Egypt
Hosted by the San Francisco Chronicle
Daniel Pearl Fellow

Michael Collier, my editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, treated me as tenderly as a teacher would treat a child in a nursery school. When I embarked on any project for the newspaper, he used to take my hands and show me the way giving me the impression that it was me who was in the driver's seat.

Inspired by recurring news about U.S. government crackdowns on illegal immigration and continual raids to deport illegal aliens, I hurried up to him one day and told him that I wanted to write about that issue. When he asked me how I would approach it, like a dull student I murmured a few meaningless words haltingly and then fell silent. Then I told him that I could interview illegal immigrants and immigrants rights' groups and then make a story out of these interviews.

This, however, was not the type of journalism Michael was accustomed to doing. Absorbing all that I had to say about how I would execute my ideas, he asked, "Do you mean you want to interview an immigrant family and present this issue through them?"

"Yes," I answered after a while.

"You will present the larger picture through an individual case, right?"

"Yes," I answered again looking Michael in the eye.

Michael knew fully well that at that point I had not reached this degree of sophistication in professional journalistic thinking. In spite of that, he gave me the lesson in a mild way that left me in no doubt as to who is the decision-maker inside the newsroom.

But, Michael may not have realized that he was teaching me two lessons in one and at the same time. The way he suggested how I should approach the immigration issue had nothing of the customary forcefulness of newspaper editors both here and at home in Egypt. He presented the idea to me as if it was what I meant to say in the beginning, and that I only could not express myself in the best way.

I then discovered that this was an ideal relationship between editors and reporters. Editors, as coaches, should not impose their ideas on reporters, but instead, put them mildly on track, empower them and give them the impression that they are the decision-makers in the newsroom. This self-confidence-giving process, I discovered, gives reporters the power and the courage to step into all realms without hesitation.

Still, the most important lesson was about how I should write about big issues through small human examples. I was taught that when handling an issue, as a reporter I should not draw an outline of a big picture, but instead draw small lines that are more concrete and tangible to readers. I was taught to present readers with human cases to illustrate the problem, instead of writing about that problem in general or abstract terms.

It was not long until I found the human case that most expressed the point I wanted to drive home. I found a Mexican family that crossed the border to California 17 years ago, but was about to be deported under what immigration officials call "Process Back to Sender". What made the deportation more scary to these people was that the family had a 17-month-old toddler who, due to a medical condition, might die if was sent back to Mexico. The family was concerned that they would not find the medical treatment necessary for her rare heart deficiency.

I spent a whole day with this family. As I was returning to the office I drew a picture of the toddler and how the family was trying to lead a normal life in spite of the deportation order that was harrowing toward them.

The story drew a huge feedback with some of the readers saying that their heart went to the little girl. More important still, however, was the debate that this story caused about illegal immigration and how immigrants should be treated in the United States.

Among many others, this is a lesson that I can take home with me after I finish the fellowship. I do not think it would take me long until I can convince my editor that the best way we can address an issue is through concrete human examples; it would not be difficult for me to reason my colleagues out of their addiction to presenting the big picture in the most abstract of terms.

A month ago, tens of thousands of Egyptians complained that they had no access to potable water in their homes. This was shocking in a country, where the longest river in the world has been constantly flowing for thousands of years. Strange as it was, though, none of the local newspapers presented the story in a tangible sense, only writing about the general picture. Could not Michael's lesson work in this case?

At the same time, apart from the agreement I made with my editor about how I could share the knowledge I acquired here with my colleagues in Egypt through the training sessions I will hold once I am back, I would not treat my colleagues in a way that is different from Michael's way: I will put them in the saddle and ask them to hold the reins, but only give them the roadmap.

While, teaching is a continual process, I am determined to conduct the teaching part immediately after I set foot in Egypt. I also hope that by the new year, my colleagues in the newspaper and I would be able to present the readers with a better newspaper; a newspaper that presents them with value for the money they pay in the morning to buy it.

And, to me success can be measured in many ways including readers' feedback. But, more important still is my newspaper's ability to raise its circulation and also attract more adverts. I have always believed that my newspaper would not sell unless it presents value and I think lessons like the ones I learned here can make my newspaper more valuable.