Journal of Risk Exploration 8 (7–8), 679–691 (October–December 2005)
Greenpeace v. Covering: media fermage and the Social Amplification of Risk Construction (SARF) VIAN BAKIR* University or college of Glamorgan, Pontypridd, Wales
This paper investigates the effectiveness of the Interpersonal Amplification of Risk Structure (SARF) in understanding the media's role in risk communication. Since the SARF was created 23 years ago, it has been equally further created and critiqued for (amongst other things) its: static conception of communication; insufficient attention to how crucial actors use the media; deficiency of systematic focus towards the mass media as an amplification stop; and simplified assumptions showing how the mass media operate while an amplification station. A complex heavilymediated risk communication case study—the struggle between Greenpeace and Covering over the deep-sea disposal from the Brent Spar oil rig (1995)—is utilized to explore whether or not the SARF in its current stage of creation stands up to these kinds of critiques. It truly is concluded that these kinds of critiques are usually more a consequence of just how researchers have got used the SARF rather than a fault of the SARF by itself. Using the SARF framework which has a qualitative example methodology allowed systematic evaluation of the part of relevant multimedia in the interpersonal amplification of risk in the Spar concern, exposing how Greenpeace applied the press to effectively communicate three risk signs, together with the insufficiencies of Shell's reactions; and revealing the layering inside amplification stations, including the press itself. KEY PHRASES:
Social Extreme of Risk Framework, risk signals, Greenpeace, Shell, news media
This kind of paper looks at the usefulness of the Sociable Amplification of Risk Platform (SARF) in understanding the media's role in risk interaction. The SARF aims to examine contextually just how risk and risk incidents interact with internal, social, institutional, and social processes in manners that amplify or attenuate risk perceptions and problems, thereby surrounding risk behavior and outcomes (Pidgeon ou al., 2003; Kasperson, 1992; Renn ain al., 1992; Renn, 1991; Kasperson ainsi que al., 1988). The SARF borrows the metaphor of amplification via classical sales and marketing communications theory to analyse how social providers generate and mutate ‘risk signals'. In Stage One of the SARF, these kinds of risk signs are predictably transformed as they filter through various interpersonal and individual ‘amplification stations' leading to the social extreme or damping of risk. In Level Two of the * Publisher to whom correspondence should be addressed. Dr . V. Bakir, Field of Mass media and Traditions, Department of Society and Culture, College of Humanities, Law and Social Sciences, Forest Area, Room 230, Trefforest, Pontypridd, Wales, UK, CF thirty seven 1DL. Tel: 44(0)1443 654 520. E-mail: [email protected] air conditioning unit. uk. Record of Risk Research ISSN 1366-9877 print/ISSN 1466-4461 online # 2006 Taylor & Francis http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 15. 1080/13669870500166898
SARF, social exorbitance can produce resulting ‘ripples' (such loss of rely upon decision specialists or industry) spreading much beyond the chance event's preliminary impact (Kasperson, 1992; Renn et al., 1992; Renn, 1991; Kasperson et al., 1988). As its creation 23 years ago, the SARF has been greatly critiqued from a range of perspectives (e. g. Rayner, 1988; Grab, 1988; Svenson, 1988) and so further sophisticated (see Kasperson and Kasperson, 1996; Melts away et ing., 1993; Kasperson, 1992; Renn, 1992; Renn et 's., 1992; Kasperson and Kasperson, 1991; Renn, 1991; Can burn, 1990). This kind of paper addresses a number of critiques from the perspective of Multimedia Studies, particularly: (a) It is static pregnancy of connection (Murdock ain al., 2003, p. 158; Petts et al., 2001; Rayner, 1988, p. 202); (b) Their lack of interest towards just how key celebrities use the mass media (Petts ou al., 2001, p. 90; Rayner, 1988, p. 202); (c) The lack of organized attention towards the media because an amplification station (Murdock et 's.,...
References: Bate, R. (1999) The Environment: Greenpeace Provides Simply no Public Advantage, Economic Affairs 19(4), 52. Bourdieu, L. (1998) On tv and Writing, London: P1uto. Burns, Watts. J. (1990) Introducing Strength Models and Influence Layouts into Risk Perception Exploration: Their Benefit for Theory Construction and Decision-Making, Unpublished doctoral feuille, Department of Decision Savoir, University of Oregon. Burns, W. M., Slovic, G., Kasperson, R. E., Kasperson, J. Back button., Renn, Um. and Emani, S. (1993) Incorporating strength models in to research on the social exorbitance of risk: implications pertaining to theory structure and decision making, Risk Examination 13(6), 661–623. Cracknell, T. (1993) Issue arenas, pressure groups and environmental agendas, in A. Hansen (ed. ) The Advertising and Environmental Issues, pp. 3–20. Leicester: Leicester College or university Press. Dale, S. (1996) McLuhan's Kids: the Greenpeace Message and the Media, Barcelone: Between the Lines. Dickson, T. (1996) Covering, the Brent Spar and Greenpeace: a Doomed Tryst? Environmental National politics 5(1), 122–129. Eldridge, M. and Reilly, J. (2003) Risk and relativity: BSE and the English media, in N. Pidgeon, R. Elizabeth. Kasperson and P. Slovic (eds) The Social Hyperbole of Risk, pp. 138–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Financial Instances (1995a) UK Under Fire On Essential oil Platform Fingertips, Financial Occasions, 9 06 1995. Financial Times (1995b) Brent Spar Dents Petrol Giant's Pleasure Rather Than The Profit, Economical Times, 20 June 95. Financial Instances (1995c) Business struggles to simply accept disaster, Economic Times, 21 June 95. Gee, D. (1996) Position of the EEA and the Press in Framing Perceptions. Credit reporting the Environment Conference, Centre for Journalism Studies, University of Wales, Cardiff, 19–21 Might 1996. Greenpeace (1995) No Grounds pertaining to Dumping: the Decommissioning and Abandonment of Offshore Coal and oil Platforms, Greenpeace. Guardian Education (1997) The Guardian, 10 February 97. Hansen, A. (1991) The media and the social construction of the environment, Media, Lifestyle and Contemporary society 13, 443–458. Kasperson, Ur. E., Renn, O. and Slovic, S. (1988) Interpersonal amplification of risk: a conceptual platform, Risk Research 8, 177–187. Kasperson, 3rd there�s r. E. and Kasperson, M. X. (1991) Hidden problems, in M. C. Mayonaise and 3rd there�s r. Hollander (eds) Acceptable Facts: Science and Values in Risk Management, pp. 9–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kasperson, R. Elizabeth. (1992) The social extreme of risk: progress in developing an integrative structure, in S i9000. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds) Sociable Theories of Risk, pp. 153–178. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Greenpeace versus. Shell
Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D. and Tuler, G. (1992) Sociable distrust as being a factor in siting hazardous establishments and communicating risks, Log of Interpersonal Issues forty-eight, 161–187. Kasperson, R. and Kasperson, T. (1996) The social hyperbole and damping of risk, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 545, 95–105. Kasperson, T. X., Kasperson, R. Elizabeth., Pidgeon, N. and Slovic, P. (2003) The social amplification of risk: evaluating fifteen many years of research and theory, in N. Pidgeon, R. Electronic. Kasperson and P. Slovic (eds) The Social Extreme of Risk, pp. 13–46. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Knight, G. (1998) Income and Principles—Does There Have to be a Choice? The Shell Statement, Shell Foreign Limited. Layder, D. (1998) Sociological Practice: Linking Theory and Sociable Research, London: Sage. Lofstedt, R. At the. and Renn, O. (1997) The Brent Spar controversy: an example of risk communication ¨ gone incorrect, Risk Analysis 17(2), 131–135. Murdock, G., Petts, L. and Horlick-Jones, T. (2003) After amplification: rethinking the role with the media in risk communication, in N. Pidgeon, 3rd there�s r. E. Kasperson and L. Slovic (eds) The Interpersonal Amplification of Risk, pp. 156–178. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Neale, A. (1997) Organisational learning in contested environments, lessons from the Brent Spar, Business Strategy and the Environment 6, 93–103. OSPAR Convention (1992) Annex 3 of the Reduction and Removal of Polluting of the environment and Reduction of Polluting of the environment from Just offshore Sources. Petts, J., Horlick-Jones, T. and Murdock, G. (2001) Interpersonal Amplification of Risk: the Media and the auto industry. HSE Literature. Pidgeon, In., Kasperson, Ur. E. and Slovic, G. (2003) Intro, in And. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson and P. Slovic (eds) The Interpersonal Amplification of Risk, pp. 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rayner, S. (1988) Muddling through metaphors to maturity: a commentary about Kasperson ou al, ‘The Social Exorbitance of Risk', Risk Examination 8(2), 201–204. Regester, M. and Larkin, J. (1997) Risk Problems and Catastrophe Management: a Casebook of Best Practice, London: Kogan Page. Renn, O. (1991) Risk communication and the interpersonal amplification of risk, in R. Electronic. Kasperson and PJ. Meters. Stallen (eds) Communicating Hazards to the Community: International Points of views, pp. 287–324. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Renn, To. (1992) Risk communication: To a logical discourse with all the public, Log of Unsafe Materials up to 29, 465–519. Renn, O., Melts away, W. L., Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E. and Slovic, P. (1992) The cultural amplification of risk: assumptive foundations and empirical applications, Journal of Social Problems 48, 137–160. Rip, A. (1988) Should certainly Social Hyperbole of Risk be Counteracted? Risk Research 8(2), 193–197. Rose, C. (1998) The Turning in the Spar, Greater london: Greenpeace. Went up, C. (1993) Beyond the Struggle to get Proof: Factors Changing environmentally friendly Movement, Environmental Values two, 285–298. Rudall Blanchard Affiliates (1994) Brent Spar Desertion BPEO. Layer Exploration & Production. Shannon, C. E. and Weaver, W. (1949) The Numerical Theory of Communication, Urbana, IL: School of The state of illinois Press. Svenson, O. (1988) Mental types of risk, communication, and action: reflections upon social exorbitance of risk, Risk Examination 8(2), 199–200. The Battle for Brent Spar, BBC2, 3 September 1995. The Economist, 24 June 1995. Tsoukas, L. (1999) David and Goliath in The Risk Society: Producing Sense from the Conflict Between Shell and Greenpeace inside the North Sea, Organisation: Professional Network Theory and Managerialism 6(3), 499–528.