How to Say and Make People Say Haiti?

In so-called "mainstream" international media, information processing is never neutral. There are the facts, of course, but above all, the way they are told. A man shot in a Chicago street is "a man shot in a Chicago street": a localized, circumstantial fact that no one would think of generalizing to the entire state of Illinois, much less to the United States. But if the same event occurs in Port-au-Prince, suddenly it will be referred to as an act of violence "in Haiti." Less precision, less context, less nuance. Just "Haiti." Everything is said. Everything is condemned. The entire country becomes the sole stage for the event. This mechanism is not trivial. It relies on a form of systemic reduction: Haiti is no longer perceived as a territory composed of communes, departments, diverse living spaces, and multiple realities. It becomes a single block, homogeneous in its misery, its violence, and its tragedies. A murder in Bel-Air stands for Jacmel. A demonstration in Petit-Goâve stands for the Northeast. A gang in the capital speaks for an entire people. This semantic shortcut fuels an old media construction that, without explicitly stating it, perpetuates the idea of a "lost," elusive, incorrigible country. This phenomenon is not unique to Haiti. But there, it takes on a more perverse dimension. And yet, Haiti does not lack greatness. The first Black republic, the first independent nation born from a victorious slave revolt, the first state to have dared to defy the global colonial order to proclaim equality among all men: Haiti is a universal symbol of human dignity. Haiti consists of cities, each with its specificity, its dynamic, its way of making daily life move. It possesses feats of arms, foundations of pride, historical and contemporary references that should inspire respect and admiration. But instead of valuing this heritage and its ever-moving creativity, some media narratives seem fixated on failures, dramas, catastrophes — as if the country were merely a succession of tragedies. To break this spiral, it is not enough to denounce. We must occupy the space. We must produce meaning, narratives, images, voices. Haitian journalists, content creators, academics, artists, diplomats, and all those who carry Haiti in their flesh and in their thoughts must speak out. Not to embellish or conceal, but to contextualize, complexify, humanize. To say Port-au-Prince instead of saying Haiti. To say a neighborhood, a situation, a cause. To restore reality to its density. And above all, to remember that no country is reduced to its tragedies. Changing the narrative about Haiti is not an option: it is a strategic, cultural, and identity-based urgency. As long as Haiti is spoken of as a uniform block of chaos, no lasting investment, no sincere partnership, no enlightened solidarity will be possible. It is therefore time to impose another grammar, another geography, another way of speaking about Haiti. Because Haiti is not just a wounded nation. It is a living, thinking, speaking country that deserves to be named with precision, respect, and truth.
By Jean Venel Casséus