However, one area of concern in the report is that of the reference to ‘misguided authorities’ who protect interview subjects from journalists. The reports suggests “that authorities are sometimes misguided in trying to protect victims from the media in the first aftermath of a disaster. Telling their stories can be helpful and cathartic in the first 48 hours. But later, grief sets in and more care is needed, the report suggests”. This is of great concern because it is based purely on the view of the 28 journalists interviewed and not any mental health or trauma science, or indeed the survivors themselves.

At the panel presentation on Nov. 19 to launch the report, journalist and Black Saturday survivor Gary Hughes spoke to this point saying that in the first 48 hours following the fires he gave numerous interviews but could not remember who he gave them to and whether they were print, radio or TV, nor could he remember what agencies they were from. Hughes did not speak of catharsis or a positive experience, but indeed of being emotionally drained and wrung out from such interviews. He also questioned whether traumatised people could fully understand the implications of being interviewed by media following such events. He reported that yes, people do want to talk about the event afterwards – to anybody who will listen.

From a trauma perspective it is not unusual for people to want to speak about their experiences immediately post disaster. As Hughes highlights, they want to speak to anyone. Perhaps this can be mistaken for informed consent and a willingness and even an eagerness to do an interview. Gary Hughes also questioned whether amid the turmoil and trauma are they really capable of comprehending the ramifications of their story going public, nationally and possible internationally – probably not.

I am not suggesting here that journalists do not interview subjects in the first 48 hours post disaster, but I am concerned that the report seems to challenge the ‘misguided authorities trying to protect victims’ because 28 interviewed journalists have decided it is cathartic for victims to be interviewed. It may well be helfpul for some people to be interviewed about their experiences, but there is no real research as yet as to whether this is cathartic – or more damaging.

On the other hand the report does support ‘media free zones’ which gives fire affected people the power to stay away from the media, presenting alternatives for those survivors who want to quarantine themselves from media interviews. In the face of trauma one of the most debilitating aspects is the helplessness experienced at the hands of such a disaster, and one of the prerequisites for post trauma syndromes. To offer the option of ‘media free zones’ is a very good suggestion.

The Dart Centre has been speaking with the Victorian Bushfire Recovery office about conducting research into the longer term effects of media interviews and exposure on disaster effected individuals and communities. This type of research will contribute significantly to understanding the issues outlined above. The need for such research was also highlighted at the reports launch.

I would wholeheartedly support the suggestion that the study be used in journalism education and industry, however I would caution that the aspects that relate to trauma effected people have an added commentary of what is known from trauma experts about what is actually cathartic and helpful for survivors in that 48 hour period post disaster.

...] More: Lunch With Roger Corbett [...

This research was really interesting – I wouldn’t have guessed that they were holding so much back…

We should, in the interests of completeness and in the context of often glib invocations of ‘CHOICE” and “unique content” remember that the advertising model of funding media (alongside pay/subscriptions), including quality journalism, has always meant all of us paying more for goods and services to account for the advertising element and as tax payers indirectly as companies claim advertising inputs/costs through the tax system.

I know CHOICE is akin to a religion for many but it is essential to ascertain the exact character and reality of apparent choices and who is actually paying and how, both overtly and in more veiled ways.

...] Margaret Simons on Media Skip to content « Foxtel’s Kim Williams Takes the Fight Up to “Old Television”, Government a… [...

...] Simons’ “disinterested journalism of integrity” is  produced by trained, experienced freelance journalists as well as mainstream news [...

And agree it should be compulsory reading for journalism educators and students.