Best Drupal HostingBest Joomla HostingBest Wordpress Hosting

World Policy Journal is proud to share our weekly podcast, World Policy On Air, featuring former Newsweek On Air host David Alpern with timely insights from global affairs analyst Michael Moran of, risk and geostrategy consultants. Click here to subscribe on iTunes!



The VICE Approach: Shock First, Explain Later (If Ever)














By Aimen Khalid Butt

In an attempt to “investigate” the drinking habits of Ugandans, the VICE team put poor villagers in front of a camera and made fun of them as they got drunk. This online video labeling Uganda as the “drunkest place on earth” currently has over 1.8 million hits. Unfortunately, this exploitation of the vulnerable, this contempt for culture, and this celebration of tasteless humor passes as journalism today and is endorsed by journalists as highly reputed as CNN’s Fareed Zakaria. The growing VICE media empire, which includes VICE magazine and online documentaries, has a new HBO show. VICE claims to offer “news from the edge” in which hosts Shane Smith, Thomas Morton, and Ryan Duffy visit different parts of the world to investigate stories and report what they say is really going on.

While VICE’s attempt to bring international issues to the forefront in a new, exciting manner should be celebrated, it shirks impartiality, context, and accuracy. Its goal, instead, is sensationalization. VICE co-founder Shane Smith says he is simply “telling stories,” but their stories aren’t just exploitative; they’re hurting journalism by compromising the quality and content of reporting for increased entertainment value.

And it's working. VICE is making money and capturing the attention of young people around the world. VICE Magazine alone claims to reach 1.2 million people in 26 different countries, not to mention the milllions of viewers of its HBO show and online videos.

There are two responsibilities that should come with reporting news: It has to be true, and it has to be fair. This, however, seems to be something the VICE team hasn't given much thought to. Their show can too easily be confused for real investigative journalism. There is no doubt as to the immense entertainment value that the VICE HBO show holds for  viewers looking to spend 30 minutes watching something they have no knowledge of, but when it comes to a complete and fair representation of events, VICE loses points.

VICE examined the issue of Kashmir, the contested area between India and Pakistan, in their second episode, but neither side of the conflict was fairly represented. VICE presented Pakistan’s side of the story through the opinions of a professor who was fired from a university in Pakistan, reportedly for his extreme ideological views—clearly not an indicative spokesperson for the country. He seemed like a convenient option for the VICE team to interview, since his over-the-top views on Kashmir perfectly aligned with VICE's portrayal. Ironically, the Indian Army Officer who was interviewed for the show seemed more impartial about the Kashmir issue than the host, Shane Smith.

The carelessness of the show comes off as intentional, as if designed to provoke. In the first episode, sweeping statements like “North Korea is the worst place on earth” and “the Indo-Pak border is the most dangerous border in the world” were heard frequently with nothing to substantiate these claims. How is the India-Pakistan border more dangerous than, say, the Pakistan-Afghanistan border?

As a Pakistani, I failed to recognize the Pakistan that VICE showed on television. I could barely identify the parts of the country it depicted. The footage from Pakistan mostly showed broken roads, dilapidated buildings, shabby people, donkey carts, riots, protests, etc., all of which–although do exist in Pakistan–do not define the majority of it. This is probably why I’m not too shocked anymore when Americans frequently ask me how, coming from Pakistan, I speak such good English. The show indulges in lazy stereotypes that affect real people.

The problems associated with this kind of journalism, if that’s what you want to call it, are simple. To start off, when only convenient parts of a story—the parts that sell—are shown, like harrowing and gory images of broken limbs and amputated body parts sprawled all over after a suicide attack in Afghanistan, viewers are deprived of the context of what’s actually going on. In this particular case, viewers could be led to believe that Islam, as a religion, might condone the killing of the innocent in the name of God, which is contrary to what it actually preaches. Since the whole story is never told, viewers tend to dwell not on the people involved in the conflict, but instead imagine themselves as the three young, privileged men venturing into dangerous territories. It masquerades as journalism, but the stories it tells have much more in common with reality TV than with reality.

What I found most disappointing upon seeing the show, however, was the way VICE hosts view and comment on the culture and society of the countries they visit. While they walk through countries like the Philippines and interact with people, they make comments like “that’s so weird” after they're closely escorted by a security officer while walking through a rebel group’s training camp. Their comments are often disrespectful to those who live there, as well as disdainful of the local culture.

VICE hosts Shane Smith, Thomas Morton, and Ryan Duffy risk their lives to visit dangerous areas in countries like North Korea and Afghanistan to cover stories, offering a rare view to those of us on the outside. Not many people would sign up to meet Taliban representatives in Afghanistan or visit the militia camp of a rebel group in the Philippines. VICE also manages to convey certain angles that we normally don't see. Their interview with children recruited by the Taliban to become suicide bombers is a moving example of what should be part of a compelling and important story. It would, however, be more commendable if something more substantial came out of their experiences that actually added to impartial, holistic information to the knowledge base of the world.  

The shift in media coverage from responsible, neutral reporting to making anything and everything that sells leads to misrepresentation of events and issues. VICE is increasingly an important news hub for the world’s youth, and with that should come responsibility. VICE can still tell a good story, but they shouldn’t sacrifice their unique potential in favor of easy sensationalism.



Aimen Khalid Butt is an editorial assistant at World Policy Journal.

[Photo source: Vice Publishers]


Anonymous's picture
I think they'll always be

I think they'll always be haters in life and Mr. Butt, no matter what someone tries to do they'll always be someone with a problem, like you in this example. VICE does a great job getting young people, hell anyone to actually care about a place or an issue that they might not ever know about. No one watches the news anymore, ESPECIALLY under 35 year olds and who says news needs to be so formulaic, its always the same thing over and over again. Watching news in an unconventional way with a fresh and in your face POV is exhilarating, sometimes its hard to see whats happening in the world. It's always easier to sit on the other side and critique someones work, you took offense because you didn't like how your people were depicted. I'm sorry for that but seeing hard images can leave a resonance and if it means someone starts to care about something they knew nothing about, then so be it. I think Ill keep watching the show because even though the footage is tough to take in, it always keeps my interest and I believe their integrity should be commended, not everyone is doing what VICE is doing and HBO should get props for keeping it real.

Anonymous's picture
VICE - news or what?

Good point of view, well expressed by Mr. Aimen Khalid Butt. I also find VICE news reporting to be a bit troubling. On the one hand, I applaud that they are willing to go to dangerous, remote areas where few people dare to go, to report on obscure but important subjects that other news outlets are unwilling or unable to deal with. But the synthesized "everyman" outlook that they adopt for their reporting detracts from the seriousness of the subjects and the credibility ofthe reporters. I understand why they do it - it sells. But it is superficial and leaves the audience, mostly younger North Americans, less informed and thinking less critically about important global topics. I don't know if informing and promoting critical analysis can be done by a news outlet that wants to sell its product to a mass audience and make large profits. CNN, Fox and others fail consistently and resort to similar sensationalistic approaches to sell their news output. Mass audiences do not read The Economist or watch BBC or Al Jazeera news.
Post new comment
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly. If you have a Gravatar account, used to display your avatar.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image. Ignore spaces and be careful about upper and lower case.


Around WPI

Jihad in Sub-Saharan Africa 

This paper, “Jihad in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenging the Narratives of the War on Terror,” examines the history of Islamic movements in Africa's Sahel region to contextualize current conflicts.

World Economic Roundtable with Vicente Fox 

In this World Economic Roundtable, former Mexican President Vicente Fox discusses his current quest to make his country a hub for technology. 

Intern at World Policy

Want to join our team? Looking for an experience at one of the most highly sought-after internships for ambitious students? Application details here.


Al Gore presides over Arctic Roundtable 

As the United States prepares to assume chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2015, this inaugural convening of the Arctic Deeply Roundtables launches a vital conversation for our times. 


When the Senate Worked for Us:
New book offers untold stories of how activist staffers countered corporate lobbies in the U.S.

MA in International Policy and Development
Middlebury Institute (Monterey, CA): Put theory into practice through client-based coursework. Apply by Feb. 1.

Millennium Project’s State of the Future 19.0: Collective Intelligence on the Future of the World


To learn about the latest in media, programming, and fellowship, subscribe to the World Policy Weekly Newsletter and read through our archives.

World Policy on Facebook