The story is well known. Colombian Nobel Prize winner in literature Gabriel García Márquez once proposed to Jaime Abello Banfi that he create a foundation that would offer workshops for Latin American journalists. Abello Banfi, a lawyer by profession and who at that time was the manager of the regional channel Telecaribe, wondered, "Why would anyone think I could be the person?" he told LatAm Journalism Review (LJR).
This would mark the birth of what is now the Gabo Foundation, which has expanded beyond its workshop concept to offer scholarships, awards, conferences, publications, and perhaps one of the most important journalism festivals in Ibero-America: the Gabo Festival.
In 2024 alone, it awarded more than US$145,000 in scholarships and held more than 60 activities, including workshops, seminars, meetings, talks and master classes.
“I am the eternal student. First and foremost, I am a product of the foundation. I mean, I'm not the great expert who built a foundation, but I've learned a lot over the course of these 30 years. And I'm very proud of everything I've learned,” said Abello, who believes the key to the foundation has been its adaptation to the times.
"It's a foundation that has been flexible and faithful to its roots at the same time. And that has been a role that I, as director general, have been responsible for ensuring," he said.
The job has, in some ways, involved carrying the weight of Gabo's legacy. But for Abello, "the greatest burden is the pursuit of money," he said with a laugh. “It's been a great, extraordinary, enriching experience, and I've also enjoyed it immensely. We've always tried to maintain joy and hope above all else in journalism.”
His future project now involves finding a headquarters for the foundation and strengthening it to ensure continuity beyond Gabo and himself.
For his work at the foundation and "in recognition of his extraordinary contributions to journalism in Latin America and his role in advancing Inter-American understanding," the Maria Moors Cabot Prize awarded him a Special Citation on Oct. 8. The jury also recognized him as a staunch defender of press freedom and of Latin American journalists under attack.
Abello, accustomed to giving awards and organizing events, feels strange about being "on the other side," but quite excited to be able to do so. He sees these recognitions as "incentives" to continue his work, and in this case, he interprets them as recognition of the work of the entire network that makes up the foundation: not only his team, but also the teachers, journalists and allies with whom the projects have been carried out.
Abello participated in LJR's 5 Questions section, where he discussed the current state of journalism, the importance of its role in democracy and the future of the foundation.
The interview has been edited for clarity and length.
1. The Cabot Prize recognizes those working for inter-American understanding. How has the Gabo Foundation achieved this?
The first thing is the focus we had from the beginning. We were born as an Ibero-American foundation. That was the initial approach we had with Gabriel García Márquez. He had already had other experiences and was a very international man and a firm believer in that shared identity, in those shared problems, in those advantages that the Spanish and Portuguese languages give us to truly create synergy and maximize opportunities for collaboration and shared learning.
Second, having formed a network of teachers who are not only local or national in Colombia, but truly regional.
And the third thing was that, in an area like journalism, where we're committed to excellence and to journalists, we realized there was definitely a framework for knowledge sharing, a framework that was truly regional. Because we need to have a regional perspective on many topics and problems, and that has been clearly demonstrated in the flourishing of collaborative journalism.
2. The foundation was created to offer training to journalists. What areas and topics should journalists currently receive more training in? Where are the gaps?
I think the first thing is to accept change. Changes in the social function of journalism. Some essential elements remain, but others have changed. And what has changed above all is that we no longer have the economic and social privilege or the most privileged platform for communication, information and advertising.
Now this is shared by many people, especially the platforms. Journalism is no longer a fourth estate; the true power of communication now lies with the algorithm and the platforms that control it.
Jaime Abello Banfi, José Salgar, and Gabriel García Márquez at the 2006 anniversary commemoration of the then Foundation for New Ibero-American Journalism (FNPI), now the Gabo Foundation, in Cartagena, Colombia. (Photo: FNPI Archive / Libardo Cano)
Accepting this change means rethinking the social value and essential function of journalism. There are several elements that we were clear about from the beginning. One is that journalism is, above all, a service of public interest. And it's a service that, even if it has difficulties in funding, is indispensable for democracy. It's irreplaceable. We must ask ourselves what specific value we add to democracy, and it has to do with the exercise of the freedom to investigate and verify facts and, if necessary, to make the established powers uncomfortable. Journalism is indispensable for countering the systematic and organized manipulation and disinformation, and the propaganda, that are on the rise.
Then there's a second area, definitely, which is the mastery of technology. That's a change. Journalism can no longer separate itself from the use of technology for many activities. Journalism is obliged to definitively work with technology, period. We have to recognize that one of the essential aspects of journalistic organization today is technology, and among other things, it's better to develop our own technological capabilities and not hand them over to external providers in that field.
There's a third aspect that's essential, and that's definitely ethics. And ethics is a constant debate; it means constantly questioning ourselves, and that requires personal reflection, following a moral intuition, studying cases, analyzing them and grounding them in reality. Gabo said it clearly at the beginning: “Journalism, ethics and technology are as inseparable as the buzzing of a horsefly.”
And I conclude by saying that we definitely need to strengthen our ability to tell stories and package those narratives in a way that appeals to readers. Gabo also used to say, "It's easier to catch a rabbit than a reader." Today, the competition is for relevance, and that competition is tougher than ever. So, if we don't do things in a way that empathizes with audiences, we're lost, and all of that can also be learned and strengthened.
3. Regarding platforms, how should this relationship, which involves constant tension with journalism, be managed?
We have to manage it as a power. Just as platforms offer us technological spaces to connect with audiences, we have to be very attentive to their interests. And those business interests now also take on new dimensions, such as politics. Especially when we see how artificial intelligence is driven not only by business competition, but also by power. This tells us that we have to provide journalistic coverage of it like any other power. At the same time, we have to learn to use all the capabilities these platforms provide for our work and in our relationship with audiences. It's a duality.
There's a third field, which is the field of resource negotiation. There have been some that have been more collaborative and flexible with the fact that they've changed the media economy, because it was the emergence of platforms that changed the media economy. They took away advertising, and now they control it.
They knew how to develop a business model that took a huge slice of the pie. There has always been an implicit claim to a share of the pie, and there have been some who have given back a little more in aid or opportunities.
It's a highly complex relationship because we also have to add the field of individual rights in relation to platforms and the protection of many rights, including data, privacy, and everything else.
4. It's inevitable to ask you about the current state of journalism in the region. From the foundation’s point of view, what is your assessment?
Journalism is under siege. It's under attack. There's a ferocity that has been spurred on by the enemies of journalism, seeing signs of weakness. The vulnerabilities that have to do with the sustainability of the media, with the way the entire sector is reorganizing and rethinking itself, which has to do with its own credibility issues with audiences, the withdrawal of many people from the news.
All of this makes for a very difficult context. It's one of the most difficult moments in the history of journalism.
But at the same time, I believe that the fact that journalism is driven not only by a vocation for journalism itself, but also for public service, is one of the factors of resistance, and in that resistance, we have to find new ways to explain ourselves to society, to reconnect or strengthen our connection with audiences, and to multiply our sources of funding.
It's a time of resistance and of keeping the faith because journalism is indispensable.
The enemies of journalism, starting with populist and authoritarian politicians, want to take advantage of this weakness to further undermine the prestige of journalism.
It's a fight we must wage.
5. Regarding this fight, García Márquez called journalism "the best profession in the world." However, there is disillusionment not only with audiences, but within journalism itself. More and more journalists are leaving the profession; there is even concern about generational change because the younger generations aren't studying journalism; they don't like it. What could be the optimistic message?
The important thing is to understand the role of journalism now. What journalism is doing is helping us see who really wants to be journalists, who understands what journalism is about and who gets there and stays. That space, which isn't easy, but it's very beautiful and has to do with many of the ideas that not only García Márquez, but many of the foundation's teachers, hold.
That's where I say journalism is indispensable. In this niche of indispensable journalism, which is probably difficult, uncomfortable for those in power, and which often has to be done outside of countries—there are countries in Latin America where such journalism is practiced from exile—that niche is where hope and meaning lie.
It's not easy, no, it's not easy. And as always, there are stories and communication. The question is how to engage with this reality in which journalism is a voice, and what is the voice that distinguishes journalism? How do we make people feel, and how do we also live up to being the best communicators and the best storytellers, those who do so with the utmost responsibility?
Our solution is definitely the pursuit of excellence, ethics and public service, independent commitment to audiences. This optimal journalism is the only journalism possible today. Mediocre journalism is what is going to die.
Now, optimal journalism faces enormous difficulties. Of course. But everyone makes their own choice.
