Boston Marathon Bombings: Coverage Resources
Chaos descended on Boston Monday as the city's storied Boston Marathon was rocked by two bombs near the finish line. As the facts emerge, journalists can draw on lessons drawn from other large-scale terrorism and disasters.
Chaos descended on Boston today as the city's storied Boston Marathon was rocked by two bombs near the finish line. Three people were killed and dozens were injured. Fearing further explosions, authorities severed cell service in the area to prevent remote detonation of additional bombs. Many of the city's institutions, including Logan Airport, were shut down and people were urged to stay inside.
The first two bombs went off in quick succession around 2:50 pm, about two hours after the winners had crossed the finish line but while thousands of runners were still on the course and large crowds of people cheered them on. (An interactive map of the incidents can be viewed here.) Immediately, the 116th running of one of the world’s most famous marathons turned into a scene of graphic carnage. "Somebody's leg flew by my head,” spectator John Ross told The Boston Herald. “I gave my belt to stop the blood."
The Dart Center has a host of resources for journalists covering large-scale attacks, including tips for working with emergency services and lessons from incidents like the Virginia Tech shootings, the Oklahoma City bombing and the Oslo/Utoya bombing and mass shooting in Norway.
Following the Tucson shootings of 2012 the Dart Center assembled tips from journalists covering a wide range of terrorist attacks and large-scale violence. As the facts about the Boston Marathon bombings emerge these lessons from past atrocities provide a valuable roadmap for reporters and editors:
Steven Gorelick, professor of media studies, Hunter College, City University of New York:
Be very careful about the experts you select as sources. These kinds of high-profile stories are magnets for everyone from legitimate scholars and practitioners to self-proclaimed “profilers.”
Serious experts are almost always quick to admit that there is no easy explanation for why and how something happened, especially before even the most basic information is released. Beware of the expert source who is just dying to be helpful. And perk up your ears when someone tells you: “I really need to get more information before I have anything useful to say.”
Scott Wallace, freelance journalist:
Despite the fact that we are all on deadline, you must take the time to breathe, empathize and feel the pain of survivors and loved ones whom you interview and come in contact with. You need to process that pain yourself. Take time to consider the significance of this event for you as a person, as well as a journalist. Do not rush interviews. Be careful about cutting your subjects off. Be respectful of their need for privacy.
Above all, forget trying to "scoop" your colleagues on this story. A spirit of cooperation should reign among the reporters, photographers and producers on a story like this. It may be useful to work in tandem with a colleague or two from some other media outlet, sharing the material and the experience of the interview rather than putting the same subject through it multiple times.
Lena Jakobsson, televison producer:
Stop and listen to your gut. This is the sort of story that introduces many of us to the TV news circus for the very first time — a world that's equally frenzied whether we're covering Anna Nicole Smith or a tragedy of these proportions. It presents all sorts of ethical dilemmas, but almost no time to weigh them. (I learned this eight years ago, on a muddy lawn outside Columbine High, when I was handed a list of dead children's families and told to start calling.)
Chasing victims' family members down the street seems like a far more reasonable idea if CNN and MSNBC and FOX and all the nets are doing it, too, and you're about to get yelled at if you don't get that video. But you always have at least a few seconds to stop and listen to what your gut is telling you. Ratings come and go. The impact on your integrity, and on the people you're covering — that stays.
Philip Williams, Australian Broadcasting Corp.:
I was sent alone to cover the Madrid Bombings in which 200 people were killed in a series of explosions set by terrorists in trains. Reporting for both radio and TV, the deadlines and demands were relentless.
For five days, I averaged one hour's sleep a night. By the end of the assignment I was a physical and emotional wreck — the long hours combining with the harrowing interviews with survivors and the relatives of those killed.
On day five, my speech was beginning to slur and my thought processes were so slow I could barely function. In short, I was exhausted — and so was my capacity to work properly. If I'd just said I need a decent sleep to continue, I would have been able to stay on the job.
My mistake was I didn't want to admit I needed a break. No doubt in the coming days editors will be demanding continuous coverage, but it is in both the organisation's and your own interest to rest. If you don't, something will give. Don't stay out late, don't overwork ... get to bed. You'll be a better reporter for a good nights sleep.
Joe Hight, managing editor, The Oklahoman, and former president of the Dart Center's Executive Committee:
Journalists should understand that their coverage ... must be about facts, not speculation and conspiracy theories that stir people into irrational action. They also must remember that their coverage affects people — the families of the victims, the survivors and the community.
They also should consider that their interview approaches to those family members must be sensitive and respectful. That they should be careful not to intrude upon private property and personal grieving space where they are not welcome. That it's OK to say "I'm sorry."
If they do, then those journalists will be remembered as ethical and credible in their coverage.
Liisa Hyvarinen, Adjunct Professor in print, web and TV journalism at University of South Florida in Tampa, Fl.:
1. TV people: Leave the camera in the car when first approaching victims' families at home, especially when they don't know you are coming. Having the camera point straight at their faces as you ask for the interview makes it less likely that you'll get the interview.
2. TV people: If possible try not to chase after the victims in a "perp walk" mob scene. Being chased and having questions yelled at you when you've just survived or witnessed a shooting, or when you've just lost your best friend, is understandably hard.
3. Ease into the most difficult interview material to give the victims time to collect their thoughts, and don't rush them. Don't start with the most traumatizing or horrible question.
4. In the weeks and months to come, write letters and e-mails and leave notes on doors to find interviews and let the interview subjects come to you, rather than staking out their homes, dorms or workplaces.
Trina McLellan, sub-editor, The Courier-Mail (Queensland, Australia):
Take a moment to acknowledge the grief and the assistance of those who speak to the media in an official or unofficial capacity, especially in the early days. They, too, are under enormous duress as the circumstances unfold and may themselves still be in shock. When facts are unclear and/or dynamic, pushing these people harder rarely uncovers the truth but simply further exhausts these people who are trying to do their best in awful circumstances.
Kathryn Eastburn, contributing editor, Colorado Springs Independent:
Buried within all the hype of human drama — how you responded, what you did when you heard the gunshots, riding it out, getting shot, losing your sons and daughters, etc. — is one common denominator: the inevitable impact of gun shots. Trace the history of all these massacres in America and you can't find any common denominator among the perpetrators beyond their inexcusably easy access to lethal weapons.
Scott North, reporter and assistant city editor, The Herald (Everett, Wash.):
In the race to get it first, don't forget the long view. It often helps to think less about gathering fact and more about creating relationships. Some of the best stories won't be told for days, weeks, months or, in some cases, years.
People in grief have long memories. You will want to be able to return to these people when they are ready to tell you what they've learned, not just what they know. The golden rule can't hurt you here. Approach people the way you'd want to be approached. Give them the respect and space you'd expect in the same situation.
If they talk with you, make this promise: No surprises. Read the quotes they've supplied back to them. Summarize how you may use the information. Make sure they have your contact information, and make sure you have theirs. The point is to start a conversation, and to continue it as time passes.