Disclaimer: Asymmetrical Haircuts is produced as a podcast, meaning it is meant to be listened to and not read. Because of this, we recommend that you listen to the episode while reading, because the written word does not do justice to the emotion or tone used by our speakers. However, because we recognise there might be bandwidth issues or you might be using a hearing aid, we have provided written transcripts for all our available episodes.

Gigi Green: 00:05  What does it mean to bear witness when the world turns a blind eye? And who bears witness when the witnesses are silenced? Hi, my name is Gigi Green and I’m a production intern at Asymmetrical Haircuts. Welcome to the final episode of our 2026 summer series chronicling the theme Witness to War Crimes, a series where, together with my colleague Sam McGuire, we’re diving into the archives and republishing episodes looking at how journalists, filmmakers and investigators bear witness to global atrocities, often when no one else will. We’re ending the series with a conversation with a journalist who found herself having to recalibrate how she approached her work when her country was invaded by Russia in February of 2022. That’s right, we’re talking about the geopolitically hot potato called Ukraine, and this week we’re rerunning episode 59, When Your Beat Becomes a War Zone with Oksana Kovalenko. Oksana is a journalist for the Ukrainian online news site Babel, covering politics, war, law enforcement and war crimes. Motivated by impunity, she pursued a law degree and is now dedicated to writing about international tribunals and finding ways to bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to trial. In this episode, Janet and Steph spoke with Oksana about her experience reporting on the early days of the war, how her work has changed and the toll of PTSD on journalists. Stay tuned until the end where we update you on what’s changed since 2022.

[INTRO TUNE]

Narrator: 01:22  No one can act with impunity. These are crimes that are beyond the pale. We are talking about human beings. We’re not talking about numbers. We need a court. That’s as simple as that. This is Asymmetrical Haircuts, your international justice podcast with Janet Anderson and Stephanie van den Berg. All rise.

Janet: 01:41  Hello and welcome to Asymmetrical Haircuts. I’m Janet Anderson.

Stephanie: 01:44  And I’m Stephanie van den Berg. And we’re continuing today with the theme of reporting in a war zone. We’ve just done the interview with Danny Kemp, the AFP journalist, where he described what it was like to be the first international journalist reporting on the Bucha massacre.

Janet: 01:59  And we want to shine the light on Ukrainian journalists as well. You can see them, like there was one on the front page of Time magazine just recently, and you see them sending messages on Twitter and providing lots of up-to-date info, using their voices also to counter the disinformation messages that come out. But not all of them are frontline, going to the site of a bombing or, you know, doing the kind of stuff that, that Danny was doing with his team. Some are dealing with linkage between war and justice and the accountability issues. Some are doing the usual political work, you know, just holding truth to power. And some are looking for human stories as well.

Stephanie: 02:36  And one of the journalists we’ve gotten to know in the last weeks is Oksana Kovalenko. She’s worked with Babel, an online news site which launched in Ukraine in 2018. And she’s worked there since the launch. And she covers politics, war, law enforcement and war crimes. Hi, Oksana.

Oksana Kovalenko: 02:52  Hello.

Janet: 02:53  Oksana, you’ve got this incredible brief, but we got to know you because of your specifically strong interest in accountability, which means that we hope that we’re going to be seeing you here in The Hague, that you’re going to be visiting in The Hague shortly. And we’re so looking forward to that. But let’s try to understand your situation right now. And maybe you could run through a bit about the conditions that, you know, like an ordinary person like you, an ordinary journalist is working in, moving from place to place, air raids, petrol. Just, just give us a picture.

Oksana Kovalenko: 03:24  So, I have to tell you that today is not an ordinary day because we didn’t have air raids yet. Yesterday, we had five, I think. And I got used to them, as many other people in Ukraine. And I used to go to… I live in a private house and I used to go to a basement before. In February, we did that with all our family. But then I’ve understood that Russians are using aviation. They’re using air bombs. And I understood that my basement will not help if it happens. So I’ve stopped going there. And so if even an air raid starts, we will continue our conversation.

Janet: 04:12  Okay. Okay. Well, just let us know. But, I mean, I remember when I was just preparing with you, you talked about that there’s basically no petrol around, that it’s very difficult for you to get anywhere.

Oksana Kovalenko: 04:23  Yes, that is the problem. Well, we live in conditions of war. And journalists also have to live in the conditions of war. Missile attacks, whatever. Even if you are not in front line, you are in conditions of war. Sometimes it is difficult to get stories because we cannot go and meet people. Also because we don’t have petrol right now, because Russians attack our infrastructure. They attack our refinery plant, our oil storage facilities, railways, etc. So it is difficult to get petrol and to move around. I, I’m staying at home and sometimes using bicycle to go to to a store or something because my car is standing without petrol and waiting for a better period.

Stephanie: 05:18  I think you’ll find feeling very at home when you come here to the Netherlands because we’re on bikes here, here as well.

Oksana Kovalenko: 05:24  I also wanted to add that some of journalists also get post-traumatic syndrome right now. It is already happening because they witness horrific events and it’s difficult to keep it inside. And I saw some people who who were already expecting it.

Stephanie: 05:45  Because now your work has changed also very much. You’ve been reporting on war crimes before. You’ve been covering this since the invasion of the Crimea and the Donbas. How is this different for you? And is it for you also a risk that you are exposed to things that you have a traumatic reaction to?

Oksana Kovalenko: 06:07  Yes, I had such traumatic reaction before because the war started in 2014 and first it was Crimea and then it was Donbas. Crimea was not, was using the force but still it was traumatic because it was my, part of my country and I saw how it all happened. And as, as to crimes, for example, we could see the deportation of people, like people were forced to leave. And then there were lots of Russians who came into Crimea, for example. Or they’ve started to call to the army the people who were actually Ukrainian and who were living in Crimea, and this is a crime. And then when Donbas started, I was volunteering also. I went to front line. I brought some helmets and vests to our soldiers. I saw it in my eyes what is going on. It was not that horrible as right now because there was no, there was no aviation. Because aviation is the worst what people can see in the war, I think. Because it’s, you cannot hide anywhere from from the air bombs. It’s terrible. As to crimes, because I, we see lots of crimes and we are trying to talk about them and to, so that not only Ukrainians know about it, but also also the whole world should know about it. And when the safe corridors opened, we started to talk to people who came out of Bucha, for example. They were not liberated, this small towns were not liberated yet, but these people started to talk about the situation. And what we heard, it was horrible.

Janet: 08:10  I just wanted to mention that maybe we’ll hear a little bit of strange noise on this recording. It’s because we’re, we’ve got maybe some notifications, and I think I was drinking a cup of tea earlier and you might be able to hear that. So I apologise for, you know, any sound quality issues. I was wondering specifically, kind of woman to woman, whether you have been particularly following the stories of the sexual assaults on women and the alleged rapes against women, either earlier or more more recently.

Oksana Kovalenko: 08:48  I didn’t hear about them before. Like the first time I started to hear about it, it was since February 24th. And actually we’ve started to learn about this not very long time ago because women do not talk about it a lot. They feel ashamed and they do not want to talk about it. So when you find out the stories about this, you’re getting very impressed. Because, like, for example, it’s not just rapes of women, it’s rapes of children, which is very, very difficult to hear these stories. And we had such story in Babel. It was about two girls. One girl was nine years old and the second was 11 years old. The first one was injured very badly during the rape and the second girl is suspected of being pregnant after the rape. I don’t know what what is going on with them right now because we had this story for about a month ago, I think. But there are lots of such stories. And these rapes happen to little girls and boys and to young women and to men. I don’t know who, who can, who can be this person who does that.

Stephanie: 10:18  And how is it then for you to have to report on that? Because I’m already sitting here thinking that is going to make it difficult for me to sleep at night, to know that this, this stories are going on. I understand that you have this drive to report it. But how do you deal with having to hear, to listen to that?

Oksana Kovalenko: 10:39  We have to listen to that and we have to report it. And we also report about the killing of people. When Russians left the towns near Kyiv, we could see people with tied arms and shot into their head. And no one knows why it happened. I, I was, I was writing a story of a girl who went out through the safe corridor from from Bucha. And she told me about a man who just wanted to get some water and he was shot on the street. And no one knows why. And there are lots of such stories. And we have to deal with them. And we have to tell them. And I don’t know. That’s what I told. Some journalists already have this syndrome. Some journalists are not having it. But I think this may happen anytime. Because we have to deal with all these stories.

Janet: 11:38  I understood from you, Oksana, that you’ve recently, or relatively recently, got a law degree. And I wondered, beyond the original degree that you had, so I was wondering whether that was to help you kind of understand terminology in, in what’s going on, or, or was it because you could use it in your journalism somehow? What, What was your- not, not going way back into your past history, but how are you using it now?

Oksana Kovalenko: 12:07  Yeah, it was a long story about my my second degree. To make the story short, now it helps me a lot. It was not just only to get the terminology, but I just wanted to understand how this all works. The tribunals, the courts. How do the prosecutors work? What do the lawyers do? How this system works. And this, now it helps me a lot to write about all these topics because I understand. I know, yes, I do know the terminology. I do know what… I don’t have to use a lot of time, for example, to understand what what is going on because I understand every part, like, during the investigation, what is going on. And what, what can i ask for which, what information can I ask? And then during the court, what should I do? What should I expect for? What should I ask during this period? This helps me a lot to understand how to report, what to report, what to ask, what to do, where to go to find some information. Let’s explain it like this. And sometimes it helps me to have conversations with with different ministries, for example, which are not giving me the information. And I can use law and say that they have to give this information because it is written here. So it helps me a lot.

Stephanie: 13:47  And you usually cover, or you used to cover politics, local politics and corruption, those types of stories. But I’m assuming that that story is, I guess, a bit on the back burner now in Ukraine. Do you worry also that you potentially have to kind of feel that you cannot say anything now for fear of kind of being marked as not being patriotic enough or not supportive enough of your country now that is in these difficult times?

Oksana Kovalenko: 14:19  I was thinking about this for for last week, actually. And there are two parts. One part is a war part and another part is our internal things, internal politics, let’s say it like this. And now I found out that as when we are talking about the war, yes, I have some kind of self-censoring because this is my country and I’m Ukrainian and I just need my country to be strong and to survive after all this war. So there are some things which I, I understand that we cannot get such information for. As in Israel, for example, we are not asking the information about, not about the people, but we are not asking figures, for example, of our casualties in the army because we know they will not give it and we understand why they’re not giving, like in Israel. For example, there are some, some things which are not, I’m not sure that this is the right time to write about them. Like I have lots of questions why, for example, why Russian army was able to get Kherson so quickly. This is the question and I will ask it, but I think I will ask it a little bit later because now it is not very good time for people to know this because this, we all, now we are all standing for Ukraine, we are doing all our best, and if we get such information, we may, like, get upset, you know, it will be difficult to stand again. And so this is why I’m not asking such questions. But when we are talking about internal, internal politics, I feel free and I ask tough questions if I see that they are not doing something good. For example, we have a minister of education and people are having lots of questions for what he’s doing. And our president, it was like two days ago, I think, our president tried to cover him, if I may say so. And this is not good. And we are all talking about it because because this person is not on his place. And we are not censoring ourselves. We are talking about it because, well, this is not the war part. Let’s say it like this. So when I answer the question about censorship, I can divide it into, into parts.

Janet: 17:09  And you’re not working in a vacuum as Ukrainian journalists. There are many other people there from every country. Here in the Netherlands, we see Dutch journalists going in and out, foreign correspondents. I also see with the UK quite a lot of different journalists coming and going. What do you think that they’re getting right and wrong in the way that they’re reporting? I don’t know if you want to stand judgement over your fellow journalists, but, you know, do you, do you think they’re doing a useful job?

Oksana Kovalenko: 17:40  I have to thank them a lot, actually, because I’m very thankful to all these journalists who are coming to Ukraine and writing about the situation, going on frontline. And you probably know that since 24th of February, there were many journalists who were killed by Russian army. And it is, for example, for approximately, it is more than 20 journalists. And there are international journalists also. So I’m very thankful to people who come here. And even if it is dangerous, they’re doing their job and writing and showing the whole world what what is going on. But a few days ago, I saw some strange articles in some newspapers. For example, like journalists and some so-called experts who wrote that Ukraine should surrender. Well, they didn’t say that Ukraine should surrender, but they, they were writing about plan for peace. And this plan for peace was all like Ukraine should accept all the Russian demands. And it’s, it’s impossible because, well, we need Ukraine to be a country. And if we accept all the Russian demands, there will not be Ukraine anymore. And it’s strange that these articles, now we can find them in international newspapers.

Stephanie: 19:14  And are there any, any stories that they are not covering that they should be covering for you? And also does it- also for yourself, are there stories that you are not doing that you would like to be doing now about the war?

Oksana Kovalenko: 19:33  Well, when the war started, we in Babel, and I saw it in many other newspapers, we’ve started English versions so that people can read our stories also. They can find out what is going on from our side. And I can see that people read our English version. So I, I think that we did everything right. And people who are interested, they can find some information in Babel or other Ukrainian newspapers, online outlets, etc. As to my foreign colleagues, It’s, I’m sorry to say that, but I didn’t have, I, I don’t read much right now because I actually, I actually don’t have time to do it. One more thing which is difficult for journalists right now, and I can see it from other journalists, that it is difficult to work. I mean, you are doing, we are working, not we, me, for myself. I’m doing the same work I was doing before, but I need more time for it. It is difficult to concentrate. It is difficult to think. It is, it is more difficult. And I think that this is because of war. Because it like, you feel a little bit different, and it’s a little bit different too. It’s difficult to do your work. And so, while I’m working slower, more slowly, I cannot read, don’t have much time to read other articles.

Janet: 21:15  And looking ahead, I don’t know, assuming that the war, things change in some way, is there a story that struck you that you really, really want to tell in the future that you think is going to, I don’t know, encapsulate in some way what what what Ukraine has been through?

Oksana Kovalenko: 21:35  Yes, there is such story. And as I’m always saying, saying that I know where to start and I don’t know where to end. This is a story about the family of mother, father, and two sisters. One sister was nine years old, and another was 15. And they were trying to escape from one of the occupied towns. They got under the attack. Father and mother were killed. And one of the girls was injured. The younger one was okay, and she was trying to pull out the, her sister, from the car. And then the Russians came, and they took these two girls. And one girl, the younger one, they just gave her to stranger people in one of the villages. And no one knows where the older one. Because they told something like, we will take her to the hospital. And from this time, she is missing. No one knows where where is she. And I’m thinking that she’s 15 years old. She’s young lady. And after all these stories about rapes, et cetera, I’m very, I just feel horrible when I think what may happen to her. And I also know that people were trying to get some information in Belarus, for example, where where she might be. And they didn’t get this information. So my plan was to go all through the way the Russians came out of Ukraine, and try to talk to people to find some information about this girl. Maybe someone saw her. Maybe, well, like to make my small investigation and probably to get some information who could see her. But, well, I need, I need lots of time for this, and petrol for this. And I don’t know if, well, I have to work a lot to get this information. And I’m not sure if I will get any. And I hope that, that we will find something about her.

Janet: 23:53  Yes, I hope so too. We usually end this podcast with what we call Asymmetrical Haircuts questions. And so we have three questions for you that we didn’t, that you, that we didn’t prepare you for. One is always a very journalist question. What didn’t we ask you, but we should have asked you? What do you think that we didn’t pay attention to, but we should have maybe?

Oksana Kovalenko: 24:18  I’m always trying to, to tell more about the crimes which Russians did here. Because it’s like I want every, everyone in the world to know about it. Because they were not just killing, they were not just rapes. They, they are deporting people, Ukrainians, to Russia. And they are destroying homes. They are just destroying the cities. And it’s, and, and when I see, when I see Russian propaganda and they are saying that, well, it’s Ukrainians who do this, not Russians. And I just cannot understand how people can believe it. And it’s, it’s terrible. And what is interesting that, that this propaganda, it works.

Stephanie: 25:05  And we always ask, I don’t know whether this will work for you, but do you have a kind of favourite court case, something that you have covered or something that you’ve seen from a distance that you, you kind of turn over again and again in your mind and say that was really interesting? Is there anything that you can remember covering?

Oksana Kovalenko: 25:26 I was, I was watching, watching the such tribunal. It was our former president Yanukovych. It was one of these tribunals when he was accused of treason. And I was writing about this court from from the very beginning till the end. And it was very interesting to see how the prosecutors work, how the judge works, how the lawyers work. And I was writing about it, a story. When this ended, I wrote a big story about it. And one of my editors told me after this that there was a guy who was, wanted to get the right to make a film about it, basing on my story. I mean, it never happened, but he wanted to, well, at least there was a person who liked this story a lot and he wanted to make a movie basing on my story.

Stephanie: 26:32  Now that you you’re bringing up this following this court case, I have a question that I have for the kind of war crimes trial we’ve been seeing on the, here also on the news in the last couple of days. How do you see that first war crimes trial? Is this how these cases usually go in Ukraine? Because from looking from abroad, it seems really quick. For example, this case of the 21-year-old Russian soldier who was put on trial.

Oksana Kovalenko: 27:02  Yes, it was pretty, pretty quick. But I have to say that I think this is the first time in Ukraine we have such, such court. And I’m just learning what are they doing. So I will not comment a lot because I don’t know and I cannot compare with anything. So I’m just looking for how they are doing it. And I’m very interested in future tribunals in Hague, actually. I’m looking forward to see some high-level persons from Russia. And I want to see them on that bench somewhere in Hague.

Janet: 27:49  Well, we’re looking forward to you visiting here. But we have another final, final question, which is maybe a bit of a luxury in your current situation. But have you been reading anything or listening to anything recently that you would like to share with our audience? Or do you have a favourite book or a favourite movie that you think that other people would like to, like to know about? You’ve already said that you’re not reading a lot at the moment, but maybe there’s something.

Oksana Kovalenko: 28:19  Well, when the war started, I understood that I cannot see any movie. I cannot read any book. I cannot listen to any music. And only a week or two ago, I’ve started to do so. And you know, what is it? It’s about Nuremberg Tribunal. And I was just looking for some documentaries about it and some old movies about it. This is what I can watch right now. And the last movie I saw, it is The Reader, I think. It is The Reader with Kate Winslet. I was just very impressed with this movie. I saw it yesterday. And this is really very good.

Stephanie: 29:08  Well, thank you so much for taking time out of a busy and crazy schedule in life at the moment for for talking to us. And we really look forward to seeing you in The Hague and hopefully showing you the ICC, where maybe someday somebody will show up and then you can report on that case with us.

Oksana Kovalenko: 29:28  I hope it, it would be great. I hope so.

Stephanie: 29:34  Interrupting our regular programming, just to say, please come and support us on Patreon and get our newsletter for the price of just a cup of coffee. You can hear Janet and me talk even more about war crimes and books that we like to read and music that we like to listen to and what we are doing. Come and follow us and support the show. Thank you.

Gigi Green: 29:56  Hi, Gigi here again. That was a shorter episode, but an important one. It was recorded in May 2022, shortly after the spring negotiations in Istanbul, and just a month after the world learned the harrowing full scale of what happened in Bucha. Four years on, we’re still waiting for an ending. Putin said back in May of this year that the war was, quote, coming to an end, end quote, and that he was open to meeting Zelensky. But a month later, he rejected Zelensky’s request for a direct meeting outright, and as recently as July, the two leaders were still only speaking through separate phone calls with President Trump, not each other. So, cautious optimism, maybe, but also nothing we haven’t heard before.

Gigi Green: 30:37  But in regards to journalist safety, so since the Russian invasion in February 2022, Reporters Without Borders has documented more than 175 cases of journalists who have fallen victim to abuses amounting to war crimes committed by the Russian army. According to the European Federation of Journalists and partner organisations, 2025, so last year, stood out as the deadliest period for journalists in Ukraine since the first months of the invasion. And this is owing largely to rapid advances in drone technology and just simply a blatant disregard for press markings. Journalists are essentially now becoming targets themselves, with dozens held in Russian custody on charges of terrorism and espionage. 

Gigi Green: 31:16  As to the war, July 2026 has been marked as the deadliest month for civilians since May 2022, with at least 430 civilians killed and over 2,600 injured. And as Oksana alluded to in the episode, even in the very early days of the war, long-range weapons like missiles and drones remained the leading cause of casualties. So as has been the case for the last four years, it’s pretty bleak out there. And I myself have definitely noticed Ukraine gradually descend lower and lower into the depths of my weekly newsletter, seemingly overcast by whatever Donald Trump said that week, or how much money Elon Musk has made, Iran, the sort of doom and gloom of AI taking over, perhaps Gaza, and then Ukraine, and not to mention Sudan or any of the other humanitarian disasters our world is bearing witness to. But our series this summer is titled Witness to War Crimes. And throughout, we’ve rerun episodes interviewing individuals whose job it is to bear witness. But what about our job as consumers of media, as consumers of news, and just as fellow people? This week, I really want to ask something a bit more specific than just, is anyone paying attention? Because there’s a difference between coverage and coverage. So is Ukraine still front and centre because outlets are documenting what’s actually happening on the ground? So I’m talking about the war crimes, the accountability efforts, the human cost, or has it just become another entry in the daily sort of who’s up, who’s down diplomatic scoreboard? Trump said this, Putin said that, will there be a summit, will there not be a summit, etc. And I think, unfortunately, the honest answer is increasingly the latter. 

Gigi Green: 32:51  So The Ukrainian Review actually did a four-year analysis of how outlets like The New York Times and Der Spiegel have covered the war, and they concluded that coverage has shifted from, quote, emotional shock and detailed battlefield reporting to cold geopolitical calculation, end quote. So that’s pretty damning, with Ukraine basically treated not as the subject of the war, but as a, quote, object of major diplomacy, end quote. Its fate essentially examined through the lens of what Washington or Berlin might do next. And even Xinhua, the Chinese state outlet, now covers the war mostly through the frame of negotiations rather than the reality on the ground and human suffering. And it’s also the volume too. So Ukraine appeared on the covers of major international magazines 15 times in 2022. Last year, in 2025, this number dropped just down to five. Meanwhile, the actual accountability work, so the stuff our series is nominally about bearing witness to war crimes. So that largely continues away from the front page. So yes, the ICC still has active arrest warrants out for six senior officials, including Putin and Russia’s Children’s Rights Commissioner for the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children, and also for military and defence officials over strikes on civilian infrastructure. 

Gigi Green: 34:05  Ukraine and the Council of Europe signed an agreement last year to set up a special tribunal specifically to prosecute the crime of aggression, and also a joint investigation team involving Ukraine, six EU states and the ICC has been quietly building cases since weeks after the invasion. But none of this tends to make headlines the way, for example, a Trump-Putin phone call does. So maybe the fair question isn’t actually, is Ukraine still getting attention? Because it clearly is in some form. But the question should be whether that attention is doing the job our series title suggests it should, actually bearing witness, or whether it’s drifted into treating a war of aggression and its documented atrocities as just another item on the sort of diplomatic war game scoreboard.

Gigi Green: 34:46  And I recently read an opinion piece in the Kyiv Post published, actually, in July 2026. So just last month, by British political analyst Dr. Stepan Stepanenko, written after he attended talks about Ukraine at the Chalke History Festival in England this summer. And he calls this, quote, the politeness of liberal neglect, end quote, which is the sense that audiences understand perfectly well why editors make room for issues such as Gaza, Iran, and whatever crisis comes next, let’s say, at the expense of Ukraine, but the result is what he calls absurd. And as he puts it, quote, a war shaping Europe’s future is treated as something one must go looking for like a niche interest, end quote. And his point ultimately isn’t really about the volume of coverage. It’s that a public that only sees Ukraine at moments of atrocity never really grasps the actual sort of ongoing machinery of endurance and accountability behind it. And I think there’s something very real encapsulated there. So we’ve been hearing about what’s called Ukraine fatigue as early as the summer of 2022 itself. But what Stepanenko hits on is that it isn’t simply about garnering attention for victims or bearing witness to current atrocity, but it’s also about what shapes history, the politics of memory and how we carry the process of reckoning with atrocity into the future.

Gigi Green: 36:02  On this topic, in a June 2022 piece for the Columbia Journalism Review, so the year of the invasion, journalist Jon Allsop made a case against caving to the fatigue altogether. So he wrote, quote, audience fatigue is not a good reason for us to stop putting difficult truths in front of them, them being readers, listeners. We should ensure at minimum that we are continuing to pay attention and giving news consumers the chance to. Our collective coverage need not match the volume of the war’s early days to be effective. Our most useful metrics now perhaps are the quality of our work, its prominence, and to the extent possible, proportionality to the severity of developments on the ground, end quote. And now I’m reading it out loud, these words, proportionality, severity, prominence, quality, etc. They really do seem to drum up some imagery of the metrics actually used in international humanitarian law or criminal law to ascertain whether or not certain crimes meet the bar or threshold of a war crime, etc. But that’s just a side point. But speaking of these metrics, quality and proportionality, so this is not just column inches. And that to me feels like the right test. And by that test, a lot of current coverage, however present it might be, is, in my opinion, failing the actual subject of our series, which is Witness to War Crimes. And of course, not all coverage fits that mould. And there are organisations such as The Reckoning Project or even independent journalists that do go the extra mile to actually investigate war crimes. But as Oksana alluded to in the episode we just listened to, your beat becoming a war zone comes with a lot of emotional baggage and a mental load that can be very difficult to manage. Now to wrap up the episode, I have a couple of recommendations.

Gigi Green: 37:42  So for a very moving and raw account of some of the early days of the war, I really highly recommend the documentary 20 Days in Mariupol by Ukrainian journalist Mstyslav Chernov. And then for more Asymmetrical Haircuts content on Ukraine, of course, check out our Ukraine tag on our website. And then Steph and Janet will be back with you next week. Thank you for your attention this past month. My colleague Sam and I have had a great time rerunning and updating old episodes, chronicling our chosen theme, Witness to War Crimes, and we hope you’ve enjoyed it as well. And to say goodbye, I hope you’ll indulge me by listening to the song I wrote when the Ukraine conflict broke out in February 2022, very wistfully titled I Think They Call It Peace. And this is back when none of us knew what was going to happen. And I think the message still holds true. So thank you very much.

Gigi Green: 38:27 [Singing]

[OUTRO TUNE]

Outro: 40:48  This was Asymmetrical Haircuts, your international justice podcast, created and presented by Janet Anderson and Stephanie van den Berg, in partnership with The Hague Humanity Hub. Music is by Audionautix.com. You can find show notes and everything about the podcast on asymmetricalhaircuts.com. This show is available on every major podcast service, so please subscribe, give us a rating and spread the word.

Stay safe and enjoy your day.