Seismic risk: the biases of earthquake media coverage

Q2 Social Sciences
M. Devès, Marion Le Texier, Hugues Pécout, C. Grasland
{"title":"Seismic risk: the biases of earthquake media coverage","authors":"M. Devès, Marion Le Texier, Hugues Pécout, C. Grasland","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-125-2019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends\ndirectly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media\nshould play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of\nearthquake media coverage by the international news reveals systematic\nbiases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32\nworldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that\nthe press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news about\nseismic events was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559\nmagnitude 5+ events). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a\ntypical framing of the “earthquake news”. Except for the “Nepal quake”, the\nduration of the coverage is usually very short. Thus, the news tends to focus\non short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses,\nmaterial damage and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the\nrecovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely\naddressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news\non impacts shows a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage\nestimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the\nrole played by the international community in helping the “poor and\nvulnerable”. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to\nmentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being\nlargely ignored. The notion of the “seismic crisis” also seems unclear, with\naftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards\nare barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these\nbiases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented.\nIf scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a\nfew hours after an event. Why not take the opportunity to familiarize\npeople with the real timeline of seismic disasters?\n","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoscience Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-125-2019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract. The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends directly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media should play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of earthquake media coverage by the international news reveals systematic biases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32 worldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that the press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news about seismic events was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559 magnitude 5+ events). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a typical framing of the “earthquake news”. Except for the “Nepal quake”, the duration of the coverage is usually very short. Thus, the news tends to focus on short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses, material damage and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the recovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely addressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news on impacts shows a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage estimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the role played by the international community in helping the “poor and vulnerable”. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to mentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being largely ignored. The notion of the “seismic crisis” also seems unclear, with aftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards are barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these biases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented. If scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a few hours after an event. Why not take the opportunity to familiarize people with the real timeline of seismic disasters?
地震风险:地震媒体报道的偏见
摘要个人应对危险情况的能力直接取决于他们预测接下来会发生什么的能力。媒体应该在这方面发挥关键作用,但对国际新闻媒体对地震报道的广泛分析显示出系统性偏见。我们研究了2015年全球32家报纸以英语、西班牙语或法语发表的320888篇新闻文章的语料库,发现媒体报道的事件非常少:71%关于地震事件的新闻只报道了3次地震(在1559次5级以上地震中)。结合频率和内容分析,揭示了“地震新闻”的非典型框架。除了“尼泊尔地震”,报道的持续时间通常很短。因此,新闻往往侧重于短期问题:事件规模、海啸警报、人员损失、物质损失和救援行动。与恢复、恢复、重建、缓解和预防有关的长期问题几乎没有得到解决。预防性安全措施几乎从未被提及。新闻冲击显示出对死亡人数、物质损失估计和轰动效应的特殊偏好。有关应对措施的新闻往往强调国际社会在帮助“穷人和弱势群体”方面所发挥的作用。报道的科学内容往往仅限于提及震级,而地震烈度的概念在很大程度上被忽略。“地震危机”的概念似乎也不明确,余震有时被视为孤立事件。除了海啸警报外,次要危害几乎没有被提及。这些偏见加在一起,导致了损害无法预防的宿命论判断。如果要传播科学信息,就应该在事件发生后几个小时进行广播。为什么不借此机会让人们熟悉一下地震灾害的真实时间线呢?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geoscience Communication
Geoscience Communication Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信