Sarah Moran, senior engagement officer in Asthma + Lung UK’s clean air team, explains how the charity prepares and support storytellers for media work in an increasingly hostile online environment
_________________________________________________________________________

At Asthma + Lung UK, we’ve long known that storytelling is one of the most powerful tools for shifting public opinion on air quality. Air pollution is the biggest environmental health threat currently facing the UK, yet it is often a challenge to engage the public with something that can’t be seen with the naked eye.

Whether its people with asthma forced to leave polluted cities, or children breathing dirty air in their local playground, empathy can be a powerful tool for change.

However, increasingly polarised debates – around issues like Clean Air Zones for instance – have pushed the conversation around clean air into far more hostile territory. Look at the comments left under any news story about ULEZ, and you’ll see the harassment levelled at those who dare speak in favour of it. As a charity working in this space, this shift has forced us to re-think how to protect our clean air storytellers in the age of trolling, misinformation and online hate.

Speaking out shouldn’t mean abuse, which is why it's vital charities work to strengthen safeguarding process around storytelling, ensuring supporters can continue to share their experiences in an ethical and empowering way.

These are the steps we’ve taken at Asthma + Lung UK to keep our storytellers safe, while ensuring their voices continue to be heard.

Clean air can be controversial – be honest
Clean air storytellers come to Asthma + Lung UK from many different places. Some already have experience in campaigning, others have never spoken to - or even met - a journalist before.

Whatever their prior experience, every storyteller receives Asthma + Lung UK’s clean air media guide before undertaking any media work. This clear, accessible introductory document outlines why storytelling is important, how their story may be used in the media and how their interviews will work in practice, including tips on how to prepare.

Crucially, we do not shy away from the challenges that can come with clean air storytelling.
Giving storytellers an informed choice means confronting the reality that, despite our best efforts, we cannot control how a journalist covers their story, or how audiences react. In a media landscape which rewards sensationalism and user engagement, all too often journalists are slow to remove hateful comments left by readers, or to edit misleading headlines or inaccuracies which may portray our storytellers in a negative light.

Securing informed consent
For storytellers who decide to proceed, the next step is an interview with a member of the Asthma + Lung UK team, in which they are invited to share their experience of air pollution in a non-committal, relaxed environment. At the same time, storytellers are invited to fill out a consent form which outlines where, if anywhere, they’d want their story shared, whether they’re happy to be named and pictured in the media, and whether there are any issues which might need addressing around media involvement – for instance, any concerns they might have about how they will be identified.

We know our storytellers have lives outside of Asthma + Lung UK, so flexibility around personal circumstances is crucial. A draft version of all new copy written about a storyteller is emailed to them for approval. Storytellers can withdraw their consent at any time, and it automatically expires after three years, after which time any new media requests require a new consent form.

Assessing and dealing with risks
Once a storyteller has given consent for their story to be shared, specific media requests are assessed through a separate safeguarding process. This short, but important, form outlines any potential risks associated with a media opportunity.

As a lung health charity, lots of our supporters live with respiratory conditions that must be carefully managed, so mitigations might need to be put in place should a reporter want to interview a storyteller by a busy road with lots of pollution, for instance. Risks are assessed according to their severity and shared with both the storyteller and the journalist where necessary.

In recent years, clean air storytellers have unfortunately also faced personal attacks when speaking out on more polarising issues.

One prominent example is domestic wood burning, which has become entangled with debates around personal freedom amid a broader erosion of trust in political institutions. This has fed a vicious cycle of media coverage whereby polarisation drives engagement, and thus further coverage.

In response, we have developed a new dedicated RACI framework for wood burning-related media requests, ensuring clear roles and responsibilities across the process with clear signposts on who is responsible, accountable, consulted and informed at each stage.
Consideration is given to the publication, any prior working relationships with the journalist, the storyteller’s personal circumstances and experience, and the strategic value of the opportunity.

For particularly divisive topics, we might prioritise broadcast interviews given their greater reach, reduced opportunity for abuse in ‘below the line’ comments from audiences online and the benefit of allowing storytellers to speak in their own words, rather than through a journalist who – even with the best of intentions – might misrepresent their point of view.

Only once input has been gathered from all relevant members of staff do we proceed with the opportunity. Wherever possible, we only us storytellers first names, so they cannot be not tracked down for abuse on social media.

Post-publication, coverage is logged in a dedicated tracker and rated red, amber or green based on the storyteller’s experience, helping to inform future storyteller-focused media work to ensure their wellbeing is as protected as possible.

Strong processes protect everyone
In a fast paced, ever-changing media landscape where charities compete for attention, it can be tempting to rush into opportunities to secure coverage before this groundwork is properly laid. But this not only undermines an organisation’s credibility with supporters, it can also damage relationships with journalists, especially if stories are later withdrawn or concerns emerge after publication.

So, when charities take the time to create conditions where people feel safe to share their experiences - and fully understand the risks - they also can increase trust and better working relationships with contacts in the media.

More importantly however, they foster a culture where storytellers feel empowered and confident to speak up on their own terms, and are thus more likely to do so again in the future.

Protecting case studies is therefore more than just mitigating risk. It is about nurturing the voices that drive social change and ensuring they continue to resonate, inspire, and influence real world change.

---