Considering the Media's Framing and Agenda-Setting Roles in States' Responsiveness to Natural Crises and Disasters

In this 27-page document, the author, Susan Moeller, discusses the role of the media in both creating images of the developing world and choosing where to focus public attention, particularly during times of crisis. She builds evidence of the need for development agencies to "think more innovatively and more strategically about their goals" and how to reach those goals, particularly in choosing media, including new technology, to communicate with the public. The document is part of the publication of papers for a conference on “The Role of the News Media in the Governance Reform Agenda", which was co-sponsored by the World Bank Communication for Governance and Accountability Program (CommGAP) and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Boston, United States (US).


Moeller traces the arguments of Paul Collier on the power of public opinion to drive aid agencies and then explores the media role in opinion formation and agenda setting, both within communities and on the regional and international level. Media, being a non-monolithic entity, vary in their degree of public service or civil society engagement, for example, in reporting on Millennium Development Goal (MDG) efforts or efforts in the wake of natural disasters and crises stemming from conflict. The dynamic nature of media ownership, financing, and mode of dissemination, including new technologies, combined with demographic changes in news consumption creates a shifting media development environment.


Moeller points out that media choices to report or not report on issues raised by development organisations may reflect a perception that the organisations have a partisan perspective or a belief that running their press release represents advocacy for the organisation. According to the author, this can result in "[l]ittle coverage, little informed coverage and missed opportunities on the part on [non-governmental organisations] NGOs and other agencies to communicate with journalists on the development and humanitarian crisis beats, especially through what should be the expedited pathway of new media. This is not good."


Moeller poses the question: "What does get a story onto the global news budgets?", observing that "[w]ho evaluates the world’s disasters significantly influences what gets noticed as well as how much notice a given disaster receives." She cites the following as attracting media attention: name calling, such as "ethnic cleansing"; sensation, such as huge death tolls, rescue of innocents, key security interests, violence, scandal, breaking (as opposed to chronic) events; and sending someone famous to the afflicted region. In considering what keeps stories out of the news, the following are some possibilities: lack of budget or logistical problems in reaching the location or conveying the news back to the editor; an intervening crisis elsewhere; lack of attention from the White House or a Foreign Service office; or attention given instead to a subject closer to home. In a field of competing news stories, news agencies and humanitarian relief agencies have different agendas and are working on time frames that are rarely synchronous.


In problematising news interest in natural disasters, Moeller identifies the lack of a "news peg" or attention-capturing name. This is particularly true in trying to sustain coverage beyond the earliest reporting. "...[A]s far as the media are concerned, there is only a short-term difference between “simple” emergencies and “complex” ones." Because of the power of the framing of stories to direct the news audience to consider an event in a certain way, words can become euphemistic symbols for stereotypes or for ideas, political positions, and potentially popularised notions, which might "go viral" in their influence of public perception. To avoid polarising cliches, the document encourages going beyond regular sources because "look[ing] past popular demons can help usefully reframe events and issues." Also, the public can be made aware of multiple media sources through media literacy techniques. Media literacy can foster understanding of the connections between freedom of expression and good governance, and between economic development and playing a role in civil society to motivate better, broader media coverage.


The document focuses on information and communication technology that is based in internet communication and mobile telephony. Moeller distinguishes between the "push" of messages by traditional media, and the "pull" of new media in which users determine their usage and involvement in issues of their choice. The document describes Twitter reporting of earthquakes and arrests; short messaging service (SMS) technology to pass on disaster- and conflict-related news and information; Google maps; citizen-sourced crisis data through email and telephones; and internet weblogs, podcasts, photos, video, wikis, tags, aggregators, and online chats. "The lesson here is that bilateral and multilateral development agencies need to think more innovatively and more strategically about their goals and what and who they need to target to reach those goals."