Perko - Media Reporting on nuclear emergencies: What Can We Learn for Better Communication

7/31/2019 Perko - Media Reporting on nuclear emergencies: What Can We Learn for Better Communication

1/19

1

Tanja PerkoBelgian Nuclear Research Centre SCKCEN

Turcanu C., Nuclear Research Centre SCKCEN, BelgiumPrezelj I., University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

Cantone M-C. , University of Milano, Italy

Media reporting on Nuclear Emergencies:

What can we learn for bettercommunication?

International Experts Meeting on Enhancing Transparency and

Communication Effectiveness in the event of a Nuclear or Radiological

EmergencyVienna, June 18-20, 2012
http://www.google.be/imgres?imgurl=http://www.idialog.eu/uploads/images/Logos/logo_unimilano.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.idialog.eu/index.php?page=partners&usg=__TY6PsSFveAc1PsdBrQCTgCx_QYE=&h=312&w=300&sz=25&hl=nl&start=2&zoom=1&tbnid=tlQzOoEjO3s-NM:&tbnh=117&tbnw=113&ei=dC8dT86NK4qL8gO1wPCmCw&prev=/search?q=university+of+milan+logo&hl=nl&sa=X&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&tbm=isch&prmd=ivnsm&itbs=1http://www.uni-lj.si/en/


2/19

2

In this presentation we demonstrate that:

Media creates a high media pressure at the beginning ofan emergency attention is lost for later phases.

Nuclear emergency management has to be prepared forfield reporting.

A nuclear accident is (ab)used in media coverage as aframe for discussions about nuclear energy.

Centralisation of communication in nuclear emergencies is

not possible. The most conflicting topic in emergency management is

(still) public communication.

The gap between technical language and common

language is (still) huge.


3/19


4/19

4

Attentiveness to Fukushima accidentmonotonous decrease = challenge for recovery

(Content analysis of 2 Belgian, 2 Italian and 2 Slovenian newspapers, 2 months)

Number of articles published per week

20

13

405357

77

116148

196

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Week after the accident (11-03-2011)

Numberofarticles

N=720


5/19


6/19

6

Field reporting = challenge for emergency managementAs close to the issue as possible

Although danger, not allowed, disturbing, uncertain .the journalists want to and have to report from the area

of the nuclear/ radiological emergency.

In every nuclear emergency, there will be journalists

reporting from the field.

Photos: Veerle de Vos, VRT


7/197

Media reportedmore than only about the accident


Importance of nuclear accident in article

32%37%

63%

43%

57%

68%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Belgium Italy Slovenia

%

ofarticles

Not primary topic

Primary topic

NB=260

NI=270

NS=190


8/198

How has the main topic changed?

(Content analysis of 2 Belgian newspapers, 2 months)

Focus of articles

11%5%

2%5% 4% 4% 5%

15%

0%

19%

18% 22%21% 26%

21%13%

23%

15%

12%

11% 6%10%

14%

11%

13%

0%

0%

4%

5%6%

8%

9%

11%

13%

8%

15%

22%

20%

14%

21%

18%

4%15%

0%

15%

4%

9%

8%

4%

5%

2%

3%

0% 0%

13% 15%

21%

10%

11%

23%

25%

38%

25%

4%1% 2% 3%

2%

2%

3%

0%

0%

1%1%

1% 1%0%

4%

0% 8%

0%

2% 3%3% 3%

0%

2%

5% 0%

5%

7% 6%

4%

9%

7% 11%

0%8%

10%

4% 5%8%

3%5% 6% 5%

0%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Week 1

(N=196)

Week 2

(N=148)

Week 3

(N=116)

Week 4

(N=77)

Week 5

(N=57)

Week 6

(N=53)

Week 7

(N=40)

Week 8

(N=13)

Week 9

(N=20)Week after the accident

ofarticlespublish

edina

eek

Other focus (open)

Economic impact

Blame

Sustainable energy

Energy consumption and supply

Future of nuclear

Information exchange

Safety/risk aspect

International reaction

Affected inhabitants

Crisis managementTechnical aspect

N=720


9/199

From diversity


Focus of articles

11%5%

2%5% 4% 4% 5%

15%

0%

19%

18% 22%21% 26%

21%13%

23%

15%

12%

11% 6%10%

14%

11%

13%

0%

0%

4%

5%6%

8%

9%

11%

13%

8%

15%

22%

20%

14%

21%

18%

4%15%

0%

15%

4%

9%

8%

4%

5%

2%

3%

0% 0%

13% 15%

21%

10%

11%

23%

25%

38%

25%

4% 1% 2% 3%

2%

2%

3%

0%

0%

1%1% 1% 1%

0%

4%

0% 8%

0%

2% 3%3% 3%

0%

2%

5% 0%

5%

7% 6%4%

9%7%

11%

0%

8%

10%

4% 5%8%

3%5% 6% 5%

0%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Week 1

(N=196)

Week 2

(N=148)

Week 3

(N=116)

Week 4

(N=77)

Week 5

(N=57)

Week 6

(N=53)

Week 7

(N=40)

Week 8

(N=13)

Week 9


ofarticlespublishedina

eek

Other focus (open)Economic impact

Blame

Sustainable energy


Future of nuclear


Safety/risk aspect



Crisis management

Technical aspect

N=720


10/1910

to future of nuclear energy.


Focus of articles

11%5%

2%5% 4% 4% 5%

15%

0%

19%

18% 22%21% 26%

21%13%

23%

15%

12%

11% 6%10%

14%

11%

13%

0%

0%

4%

5%6%

8%

9%

11%

13%

8%

15%

22%

20%

14%

21%

18%

4%15%

0%

15%

4%

9%

8%

4%

5%

2%

3%

0% 0%

13% 15%

21%

10%

11%

23%

25%

38%

25%

4% 1% 2% 3%

2%

2%

3%

0%

0%

1%1% 1% 1%

0%

4%

0% 8%

0%

2% 3%3% 3%

0%

2%

5% 0%

5%

7% 6%4%

9%7%

11%

0%

8%

10%

4% 5%8%

3%5% 6% 5%

0%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Week 1

(N=196)

Week 2

(N=148)

Week 3

(N=116)

Week 4

(N=77)

Week 5

(N=57)

Week 6

(N=53)

Week 7

(N=40)

Week 8

(N=13)

Week 9


ofarticlespublishedina

eek

Other focus (open)Economic impact

Blame

Sustainable energy


Future of nuclear


Safety/risk aspect



Crisis management

Technical aspect

N=720


11/1911

Diverse topics in media after nuclear emergency

In nuclear events media do not report only bythe following the basic questions

(golden W: who, what, when, where, why)

they also bring light to safety/risk, technical

aspects of other nuclear installations and

policy regarding nuclear energy.


12/1912

Political discussion in articles related toFukushima accident

"Referendum" in Italy

11% 10%

2% 0%

15%

35%

44%50%

14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Week 1

(N=83)

Week 2

(N=51)

Week 3

(N=44)

Week 4

(N=24)

Week 5

(N=20)

Week 6

(N=26)

Week 7

(N=9)

Week 8

(N=6)

Week 9

(N=7)

Week after the accident

%ofarticle

s



13/1913

A conflict or strong disagreementpresented in more than every third article

Conflict reported in article

37% 38%

30%

44%

39%

35%29%

43% 45%

0%

5%10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Week 1

(N=196)

Week 2

(N=148)

Week 3

(N=116)

Week 4

(N=77)

Week 5

(N=57)

Week 6

(N=53)

Week 7

(N=40)

Week 8

(N=13)

Week 9

(N=20)


Numberofarticles

N= 720


14/1914

The most conflicting topic related to emergency managementpublic information

Conflict in Emergency management

61%

35%40%

39%

65%60%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Public information

(N=64)

Em. workers +

actions(N=21)

Other em. actors +

actions(N=8)

%ofarticles

No Conflict

Conflict

N= 127


15/1915

Information sourcesIn every article approx. 3

The most quoted were Japanese governmentand TEPCO

EU quoted in 2%

IAEA quoted in 8%Most quoted:

Domestic External Japanese

It

Gov. 37% Gov.37% Gov.66%Be Sec.media 30% Sec.med. 30% Gov.59%

Si Op.makers 37% Gov.35% Gov.81%


16/1916

Although about radiation, risks, dangeronly 10% of articles reported radiation units

Presence of radiation units

12%

88%

8%

92%

12%

88%

0%

10%

20%

30%40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Units No Units

%o

farticles

Belgium

Italy

Slovenia

NB=260NI=270

NS=190

mSv in 30%


17/1917

Descriptive comparisons used in 22% of articlesmostly with historical nuclear accidents

Type of risk comparisons

0%

29%

12%9%

48%

40%

4%

28%

0% 1%

30%

58%

0%

45%

3% 0%

21%

45%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

risks from

medical

purposes

(e.g. x-ray)

natural

radiation

background

workers'

exposure to

radiation at

nuclear

something

else

(legal,..)

limits,

norms

historical

nuclear

accident

%of

articleswithcomparisons

Belgium

Italy

Slovenia

NB=58

NI=71

NS=29


18/1918

Fukushimathrough the prism of

Chernobyl


"Chernobyl" mentioned per week

5%

25%20%

0%

29%

20%

32%

8%

22%

14%

49%

18%

26%24%

29%

59%

41%

19%

8%

35%

17%

17%

31% 29%

0%0%

64%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9


%

ofarticlesperweek

Belgium

Italy

Slovenia

NB=260

NI=270

NS=190


19/1919

ConclusionsOr what can we learn for better crisis communication

Nuclear emergency:

creates a high media pressure at the beginning of an

emergency attention is lost for later phases,

attracts journalists to report from the affected area,

opens a discussion pro- and contra- nuclear,

is discussed by different information sources,

challenges public communication,

highlights the gap between technical and commonlanguage.

Perko - Media Reporting on nuclear emergencies: What Can We Learn for Better Communication

Documents

Transcript of Perko - Media Reporting on nuclear emergencies: What Can We Learn for Better Communication