Influence of Media on Disasters

The roles of governments, especially those on the international stage, arguably impact the direction of a country’s recovery and reconstruction process. Jason Enia in his article on a comparative examination of the effect of the 2004 tsunami on conflict in India and Sri Lanka, highlights the consequences of foreign government decision to “assist the post-disaster relief and reconstruction may … [impact] the relative bargaining strength of one or more parties to the conflict” (Enia 23). This establishes the consequential impact of politics in a post-disaster scenario. However, there are other aspects in our society that shape the way we perceive a disaster and can influence the sentiments of the masses: the media.

The modern development of mass media from live coverage on news networks to following updates on social media provides the world with information of a disaster and its aftermath as it is occurring. The aspects of media coverage of a disaster are multidimensional, from covering the disaster’s prevention to coping with the aftermath and from the effects on the collective to the individual. The benefits of the technological revolution provides the masses during the disaster with cautions and necessary information with the ultimate goal of “keeping morale of the people high, to create self-confidence, to prevent panic, and to maintain order” with ensuring the effected population with the necessary precautionary information (Nair 37). Nair argues in his research on the role of media in disaster management, the aftermath of the disaster portrays not only the collective effort in rescue, but captures “devastation and human misery… as an appeal to the people to come forward to render help in various ways” (38). This prompts the question of how media accessibility affects our vulnerability to disasters?

Nair’s research also includes the aspect of media coverage on potential disasters and raising awareness among communities. “The media, by communicating the information to the people and concerned authorities sufficiently in advance, can enable them to take the necessary steps to prevent and minimize the losses of lives and property” (Nair 37).

The media does have it’s values as described above, yet one must remember the motives under the stories of many news stories goes beyond the virtuous intentions of informing the masses. Journalists are providing coverage of an event that they know will draw attention of the masses, gaining them viewers and listeners. Therefore, when they choose to manufacture informative stories on potential disasters, one might question the motives for publication of the story going beyond the general information. An article that focuses on how catastrophes are reported highlights how “even the worst of disasters [have] a limited life as a news story” and an apocalyptic tone (Cockburn “Catastrophe on Camera: Why media coverage of natural disasters is flawed).

In terms of coverage for the aftermath of a disaster, the role of media can arguably be more influential besides drawing on the sympathies of unaffected individuals and providing information to those affected. Are there consequences of a media’s coverage of the disaster and its aftermath? If so, what are those potential consequences on the short-term relief provided and on the long-term conflicts and reconstruction in the country?

There is a pessimistic tendency to view humanity as selfish, choosing to cover a story on the misery of humanity for personal gain rather than to motivate collective effort in providing aid. Yet, the study conducted by the Department of Economics of Colby College and the AnalysisGroup, Inc. revealed that the media coverage of the 2004 Tsunami generated charitable giving that was economically and statistically significant based off of the news coverage length of time. The results demonstrate that “an additional minute of news coverage raises donations by about 2.5%” (Brown and Minty 22). This study, although defending the notion suggested by Nair that media coverage of disasters generates action, does not diminish the bias in the method of coverage of devastation in order to promote these stories.