William Ruto, president of Kenya, addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York, 23 September 2026. (Geneva Solutions/Paula Dupraz-Dobias)

NEW YORK – With more than 100 world leaders expected to take to the podium by the end of the United Nations General Assembly high-level week – their 15-minute time slots are a rare opportunity for countries to get their voices heard. But for international Geneva and other United Nations hubs, the real test is in the side rooms, as agency representatives defend their mandates to belt-strapped donors.

“UN80 is just a start,” Khalilur Rahman, UN General Assembly president, said at the beginning of the marathon of speeches by heads of state regarding the reform process initiated by outgoing UN chief António Guterres. “Moving positions on a budget sheet may deliver savings. Merging bodies may remove duplication. Streamlining structures may improve efficiency. These steps are important and often essential for good housekeeping. But they are not enough.”

Reiterating the theme of this year’s General Assembly session, ‘Restoring trust, managing transformation, a UN that delivers for all’, many leaders spoke of the loss of trust in the organisation, particularly due to its failure in recent years to prevent and end conflicts, and that the body no longer reflected current realities. But it wasn’t all doom and gloom. Heads of state often highlighted the achievements that international cooperation delivered for their countries, as well as the need to defend and strengthen multilateralism.

Read the full story on Geneva Solutions.

Reporting on International Geneva needs to dig deeper. A new journalism index covering international organisations in Geneva found that stories do a good job of telling readers why something matters, but less so of showing the process behind multilateral decisions.

Behind the data. The Geneva Centre for Multilateral Journalism, a nonprofit launched earlier this year, analysed 247 “coverage records” over six weeks, from 9 June till 21 July, on issues from artificial intelligence to human rights, to health governance. The records – which included not just articles from 71 media outlets (including Geneva Solutions) but also corporate reporting by organisations – were judged on substance, public understanding, governance literacy and source diversity. Overall, the index produced a score of 67.4 out of 100.

Key takeaways. Source diversity was the weakest area, with coverage often reliant on institutional sources while including fewer independent experts. The pilot also found that journalists focused more on the outcome of decisions but less on the steps behind them, taking as an example the United Nations secretary general candidates’ debate on 9 June, where it said coverage of the process through which a leader is picked, including the role of the Security Council, was less visible.

The bigger picture. The report's authors, Sydney Wiser and John Helprein, who is also the editor of Geneva-based media Arete News and the co-founder of the GCMJ, said the index aims to measure how effectively journalism explains international organisations. “If future editions contribute to better reporting, greater institutional literacy, more informed public understanding, and deeper knowledge of the journalism that connects international institutions with global audiences, the objectives of this inaugural pilot will have been fulfilled,” they said.