'Fake news' about volcanic eruptions could put lives at risk

October 12, 2018 by Kate Smith, The Conversation
Katla last erupted in 1918 – but there is no evidence to suggest that it will erupt again soon. Credit: ICELANDIC GLACIAL LANDSCAPES / wiki

The Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull made worldwide headlines in 2010 when it erupted ash that was blown towards Europe, so that air traffic was grounded across the continent. More recently, the volcano's bigger sister and neighbour, Katla, has also been in the news. First the papers said the "giant volcano" was ready to blow, yet within days articles were appearing to say it was all a mistake and the eruption news was premature. What is going on?

Over the past 1,100 years, Katla has erupted at least 21 times—an average of around once every 50 years or so. It is exactly a century since the volcano's last through the ice, which produced a 14km high column of fragmented volcanic rocks and gas, as well as enormous floods of meltwater, sediment and ice. But this doesn't mean that another is "due". Volcanoes don't erupt to schedule. So why do headlines regularly appear to suggest this is the case?

This latest news flurry was triggered by the publication of an academic paper by a team of scientists lead by Evgenia Ilyinskaya at the University of Leeds. They had carried out gas-monitoring surveys at Katla in 2016-17, which showed it emitted much more CO₂ than previously estimated. One of the exciting parts of this research was the recommendation that gas monitoring becomes part of the regular observations of volcanoes that are hidden under glaciers or ice sheets. However, many news outlets incorrectly suggested that the observation of these meant an eruption was imminent, and sounded the alarm.

This sensationalist approach causes more damage beyond merely being incorrect. From a distance, readers and viewers might be interested in the science, the human story, or because even faraway eruptions can have economic or health costs. But for those living in the shadow of the eruption, the immediate impacts are far more pressing, or even life-threatening. Evacuating from a region, moving family and animals, or leaving your house behind all require a degree of certainty that this is real and that it should be avoided. To believe a risk is real, information needs to be trusted and thus information providers need to be trustworthy.

Katla is in the background…under the ice. Credit: danielmoreira02 / shutterstock

It should therefore be clear that accurate information is essential. Effective risk communication is needed before, during and after a hazardous event, aiming to prevent and mitigate disaster harm, ensure preparedness and aid recovery.

Inaccurate information will of course mean people will have less faith in scientists and news sources next time round. But it can have more immediate effects too. In July 2018, the New York Times reported how exaggerated coverage of the ongoing Kilauea eruption in Hawaii lead to a vastly inflated which saw tourism bookings decrease, which in turn led to loss of income and fears about job losses. In the worst instances, poor information can cause people to ignore evacuation orders.

The risks aren't easy to communicate. Hazards do not occur in an easy to predict way, they can happen with little warning, and risk assessments virtually always deal in probabilities rather than absolute certainty. Concepts such as 100-year floods are famously challenging to understand or relate to. In addition, risks to people are influenced by factors such as wealth, age, health, physical ability, whether you own a car, or which floor your apartment is on, so they can vary from person to person, house to house.

Communicating this information therefore comes with responsibilities. By crying wolf too many times, even if the warnings aren't directly from scientists or the authorities, the media can strongly influence risk perception and create a warning fatigue.

Eyjafjallajökull (left) and Katla from above. Credit: Kate Smith, Author provided

Journalists and editors must consider the ripple effects from an overly sensational news article, and the potential consequences for lives. It doesn't take long for inaccurate news to spread and multiply across the internet: see, for example, the volcanologist and science writer Robin Andrews having to call out and correct reporting of the recent earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia which often conflated it with an unrelated volcanic eruption 600 km away on the same island of Sulawesi. The flip side of this is that competent, reliable communications can boost public trust and reduce fear and panic, helping people to take well-informed actions.

The International Journalist's Network published an article on disaster journalism that presents some useful guidelines, much of which emphasises accuracy. I'd also suggest that journalists checks their facts with the scientists doing the work, or with the local organisation responsible for monitoring the hazard. Journalists should also avoid simplifying the forecasting process too much, ensuring that a possible scenario or timeframe is not presented as something of certainty. Readers should always be referred to a reliable source of further information.

These simple measures can be used as a blueprint for strengthening reporting accuracy, and so help regain trust in science communication and the media.

Explore further: Volcano erupts on same Indonesian island as earlier quake

Related Stories

A volcanologist's take on Fuego eruption

June 4, 2018

The eruption of the Fuego volcano in Guatemala was likely a "pyroclastic surge" similar to the one that destroyed the ancient city of Pompeii, says volcanologist David Rothery of The Open University in England.

Recommended for you

Evidence of earliest life on Earth disputed

October 17, 2018

When Australian scientists presented evidence in 2016 of life on Earth 3.7 billon years ago—pushing the record back 220 million years—it was a big deal, influencing even the search for life on Mars.

Arctic greening thaws permafrost, boosts runoff

October 17, 2018

A new collaborative study has investigated Arctic shrub-snow interactions to obtain a better understanding of the far north's tundra and vast permafrost system. Incorporating extensive in situ observations, Los Alamos National ...

Arctic ice sets speed limit for major ocean current

October 17, 2018

The Beaufort Gyre is an enormous, 600-mile-wide pool of swirling cold, fresh water in the Arctic Ocean, just north of Alaska and Canada. In the winter, this current is covered by a thick cap of ice. Each summer, as the ice ...

2 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Doug_Nightmare
1 / 5 (1) Oct 12, 2018
Forecasts by prognosticators are moot and usually hysterically anile without doxastic comittment, skin-in-the-game, like Damocles Sword hanging overhead, hanging by the fraying Thread of Truth.

When a failed forecaster is fired then perhaps some trust can develop. Until then it is #FakeNews and mere virtue signaling.
rrwillsj
not rated yet Oct 12, 2018
Well then doug, you are saying that failed prognosticators, such at yourself, should be fired for their mistakes of judgement?

I'm sure trumpella could arrange with his kissing bro, kimmy, to have you fired out of a cannon.

I think it's stupid to shoot the messenger for bringing you news you do not want to hear.

But that is why all you deniernazis and altright fairytails are actively suborning The Constitution with seditious zeal.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.