Advertisement

Chernobyl pp 133-147 | Cite as

The Media and Crisis Management

  • Harry Otway
Part of the Springer Series on Environmental Management book series (SSEM)

Abstract

Modern governments can effectively communicate with citizens only through the mass media, especially in emergencies when people must be informed immediately of developments and advised on what to do. According to an opinion poll reported by Schneider (1986), 80% of respondents got their information about health countermeasures after Chernobyl from the media, while only 3% contacted public health authorities directly.

Keywords

Nuclear Energy Crisis Management Opinion Poll Public Health Authority Official Source 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Borelli, G. et al., 1987, Stampa quotidiana e incidente nucleare di Chernobyl: Primi risultati di una indagine in corso, ENEA, RTI/STUDI-VASA(87)5, Marzo, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  2. Chausse, J., 1987, L’accident de Tchernobyl: Quelques consequences economiques et sociales, IPSN, DPS/SEGP, Note LSEES 87/17, September, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  3. Gubarev, V. and Odinets, M., 1988, Chernobyl Two Years On, International Pravda 2(7):26–27.Google Scholar
  4. Hance, B.J., Chess, C., and Sandman, P., 1988, Improving Dialogue with Communities: A Risk Communication Manual for Government, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Herbert, R., 1987, Chernobyl: How the Cover was Blown, New Scientist, April 23: 34-46.Google Scholar
  6. Hohenemser, C. and Renn, O., 1988, Chernobyl’s Other Legacy, Environment 30: 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Otway, H., 1987, Risk Communication, Experts and Democracy, Risk Analysis 7: 125–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Otway, H., Haastrup, P., Cannell, W., Gianitsopoulos, G., and Paruccini, M., 1986, Analysis of the Print Media in Europe Following the Chernobyl Accident, Commission of the European Communities, EUR-11043 EN, Ispra, Italy.Google Scholar
  9. Peltu, M., 1985, The Communications Media, in Otway et al. eds., Regulating Industrial Risks: Science, Hazards and Public Protection, Butterworths, London, UK.Google Scholar
  10. Peters, H.P. et al., 1987, Reactions of the German Population to the Chernobyl Accident: Results of a Survey, Kernforschungsanlage Jülich, Juel-Spez-400/ Trans, May.Google Scholar
  11. Rubin, D., 1987, How the News Media Reported on Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, Journal of Communication pp. 42-57.Google Scholar
  12. Schneider, E., 1986, Tschernobyl: Psychische Folgen schwerwiegender als Strahlen-schaeden, Medical Tribune: Österreichische Ausgabe, No 44, October 31:20.Google Scholar
  13. Sharlin, H., 1986, EDB: A Case Study in Communicating Risk, Risk Analysis 6: 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Walker, M., 1986, A Stroll Down Gogol Boulevard, The Guardian, 26 May 1986.Google Scholar
  15. Webster, D., 1986, How Ministers Misled Britain about Chernobyl, New Scientist, October 9:43–46.Google Scholar
  16. Wynne, B., Williams, P., and Williams, J., 1988, Cumbrian Hill farmers’ Views of Scientific Advice, in Chernobyl: The Government’s Response, UK House of Commons Select Committee on Agriculture, HMSO 408-415, July, London, UK.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg/Austria 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harry Otway
    • 1
  1. 1.Joint Research CentreCommission of the European CommunitiesIspraItaly

Personalised recommendations