I wrote a post a while ago asking how journalists should report trauma in the wake of the bushfires. I have more to say on it in the Crikey e-mail later today, including some disturbing reports of media intrusion and the line being pushed too far. I also have some things to say about Ross Gittins.
Following on from all this, an idea occurs to me. Why doesn’t a big media organisation – and the ABC might be best placed to do it – spend some real time and resources asking the public what sort of things they want from journalists over the months and years ahead, during which bushfires will continue to be a big story.
We need new ideas on how to do the job of reporting. Something that goes beyond the cliches in which everyone is either a hero or a victim.
As I say in the Crikey e-mail, I have never known a story that so intimately involves us all. Everyone in Victoria, it seems, is either directly affected or knows someone who has lost their home or their life.
If we believe what we say – that journalism is important and a force for good – then we should have the courage to ask what, in this situation, journalists can be for.
3 Comments
If we excuse a few of the more cringe-worthy feelgood faux-ments on some brekky TV programs, the coverage of the Vic Bushfires has been overwhelmingly positive. It seems to have done more improving the standing of journalism as a trustworthy profession than perhaps anything I have witnessed in my short career as journalist, or even longer career as a professional media consumber.
What was most heartening was to hear – repeated – that many people in the directly affected areas relied on the coverage of one news channel in particular not only to be informed, but to make informed decision which may have saved their life. If this does not reveal journalism as being important and a force for good, then I am not sure what does? Certainly not media-thirsty koalas, anyway…
This doesn’t really comment on the reporting of trauma, though. What I have commented on that one of the positives to come out of the bushfires – not that I can freely use that terminology – is that, in my opinion, it has helped reduce the nexus that exists between the layperson (oh, I just did) and the role of journalists.
This may sound callous, but I have a rule of thumb reporting these sorts of events. A journalist should not add to the trauma, either through their actions or the story they eventually write/broadcast. The event itself should be the source of the trauma – be it a car crash, fire, drowning, whatever – not what they read in the newspapers. That, of course, is far too simplistic because people react very differently to different things. Some people have been touched by the way I’ve covered their 17-yo son’s death in a car crash while others are devastated at the coverage of a basketball grand final. There is no easy or immediate answer to these questions, but asking them and being mindful of the impact is important.
I think Gittin’s piece was pretty accurate. It’s a bit hard to argue that the coverage hasn’t been ridiculously over the top outside Victoria. Is it really only an Aussie thing to help your neighbours? When you say in Crikey,
“This might be what Ross Gittins failed to appreciate in this controversial piece in The Sydney Morning Herald. I think it reads as though it was written from a long way away — namely, an office in Sydney.”
Ouch. Don’t you realise that all of Australia has been saturated with this, not just Victoria? It doesn’t matter how far away Gittins was, it was saturation coast to coast, even to the extent of newsradio being given over to a local Victorian ABC for days on end. Frankly here in Perth, I’d rather have had their usual BBC feed. Hourly, or even half hourly updates would have been quite sufficient for the rest of the nation who didn’t need to know what roads were closed. It was excessive even before the full extent was known. This was mainly driven by the fact it was near Melbourne, accessible to Melbourne journos and TV. Would there have been the same coverage if the Southwest of WA was on fire? No, of course not. I guaruntee newsradio would have been broadcasting Arsenal versus whoever.
I’m sure some people isolated by floods for weeks further north would have been gritting their teeth. No thought of giving newsradio over to local Queensland ABC for a week was there?
The point you seem to be making (maybe I’m wrong) in the Crikey spot was that it was important to Victorians and that every person in Victoria knew someone involved so Gittins was over the top. You need to have a look at the rest of the national coverage. Is it a local or national disaster? You seem to be mistaking Victoria for Australia.
“In Victoria, we are all in the middle of a story that involves us all in a way that is quite unprecedented — at least in my career.”
Again, Victoria. Gittins is talking about, as far as I can see the national coverage. Of course it’s more important in Victoria, it’s personal over there, but for the rest of us, yeah it’s bad, but we have no connection with these people or places. It seems that we need to validate ourselves as Aussies by sending some clothes over to rural Victoria. Ridiculous.