of trust in risk management organizations, the potential for adverse outcomes, a lack of familiarity with the risk, scientific uncertainty, risks to future generations, unclear benefits, inequitable distributions of risks and benefits, and potentially irreversible effects. Traditional media coverage of risks is frequently deficient in that many stories contain oversimplifications, distortions, and inaccuracies. For example, traditional media reports on cancer risks often provide few statistics on general cancer rates for comparison; often provide little information on common forms of cancer; rarely address public misperceptions about cancer; and provide little information about detection, treatments, and other protective measures.
These problems often stem from characteristics of the traditional media and the constraints under which reporters work. Many reporters work under tight deadlines that limit the time for research that yields valid and reliable information. Reporters also rarely have adequate time or space to present the complexities and uncertainties surrounding many risk issues.
Journalists achieve objectivity in a story by balancing opposing views. Truth in journalism is often different from truth in science. In journalism, there are different or conflicting views and claims to be covered ideally as evenly as possible. At the same time, general assignment reporters do not always have the scientific background needed to evaluate the data and disagreements related to a particular risk.
Journalists are source dependent. Under the pressure of deadlines and other constraints, reporters often rely heavily on sources that are easily accessible and willing to speak out. Sources of information that are difficult to contact, hard to draw out, or reluctant to provide interesting and nonqualified statements are often left out, even if these sources have fulsome information.
Effective risk communication depends in part on understanding the constraints and needs of traditional media and adapting one’s behavior and information to meet these needs. Given the continuing importance of traditional media in the transfer and exchange of information about risks and threats, Chapter 12 of this book discusses the constraints and needs of traditional media in detail. The chapter points out, for example, that few journalists have science or technical backgrounds and that many traditional sources of media have had to cut staff due to changes in where people get information.
3.2.5 Characteristics and Limitations of Social Media Channels in Communicating Information about Risks
As discussed in Chapter 13 of this book, the Internet and social media channels create new opportunities for people to share and exchange risk information. Tens of millions of people now share and exchange risk information directly with one another, unfiltered, and free from dependence on official and traditional sources.
Despite the growing impact of the Internet and social media on risk communication, much of the scientific and technical information about risks that people receive still originates from traditional journalism. The Internet and social media nonetheless play an extremely important and increasingly influential role in personal risk decision‐making. Through sites and platforms such as Wikipedia, blogs, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Reddit, WhatsApp, and Instagram, social media platforms significantly affect people’s knowledge, perceptions, and understanding of risks in a dynamic and highly competitive communication environment.
Social media are relatively new areas of study for risk communicators and create both opportunities and challenges. For example, as shown in Table 13.1 in Chapter 13, social media channels have several benefits for risk communication purposes.
Despite these benefits and potential opportunities, social media channels create challenges, such as identity theft, the potential to be hacked, and disinformation campaigns.
Research is emerging to fill gaps in science‐based knowledge about the following key issues:
1 How do individuals and decision makers access, evaluate, and use information about risks acquired through social media channels?
2 How do people evaluate and use risk information that is not vetted through traditional sources of risk information, such as technical, engineering, and scientific professionals?
3 How effective are social media channels in reaching those that do not have the knowledge, resources, skills, or motivation to access and use traditional sources of risk information?
4 To what extent do the social networks that are created by social media affect people’s risk‐related perceptions, understandings, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors?
5 How can research help organizations struggling with updating their social media policies – such as their employee’s use of social media?
6 How can research help organizations struggling with changes caused by the expanding reality of teleworking?
7 How can research help organizations struggling with the changes caused by the expanding reality of distance learning?
Researchers have also focused on how to overcome new challenges associated with the rapid spread of misinformation, disinformation, and “fake news” about risks by social media channels. For example, in a speech about COVID‐19 in February 2020, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director‐General of the World Health Organization (WHO), said WHO is “not just fighting an epidemic; we’re fighting an infodemic. Fake news spreads faster and more easily than this virus, and is just as dangerous.”2
WHO defined infodemic as “an overabundance of information, both online and offline. It includes deliberate attempts to disseminate wrong information to undermine the public health response and advance alternative agendas of groups or individuals. Mis‐ and disinformation can be harmful to people’s physical and mental health; increase stigmatization; threaten precious health gains; and lead to poor observance of public health measures, thus reducing their effectiveness and endangering countries’ ability to stop the pandemic. Misinformation costs lives.”3
In response to the COVID‐19 infodemic, a team of WHO “mythbusters,” working with social media companies, mounted a campaign to counter the spread of rumors, misinformation, and disinformation about COVID‐19. On WHO’s website, the mythbusters team posted a rapidly expanding list of COVID‐19 rumors, misinformation, and disinformation being spread by social media. These included rumors that taking vitamin and mineral supplements could cure COVID‐19; that water or swimming could transmit the COVID‐19 virus; that coronavirus disease was caused by bacteria and treated with antibiotics that in fact do not work against viruses; that drinking alcohol protects you against COVID‐19; that thermal scanners can detect COVID‐19; that adding hot pepper to your soup or other meals prevented or cured COVID‐19; that COVID‐19 was transmitted through houseflies; that 5G mobile networks can spread COVID‐19; that exposing yourself to the sun or temperatures higher than 25°C protected you from COVID‐19; that being able to hold your breath for 10 seconds or more without coughing or feeling discomfort means you were free from COVID‐19; that taking a hot bath could prevent COVID‐19; that COVID‐19 virus could be spread through mosquito bites; that hand dryers were effective in killing the COVID‐19 virus; that vaccines against pneumonia and seasonal influenza protected you against the COVID‐19 virus; that eating garlic could prevent COVID‐19; and that spraying and introducing bleach or another disinfectant into your body would protect you against COVID‐19.4
Researchers are testing various strategies
