Media companies like AFP, CNN and others are increasingly capturing dramatic aerial footage following major disasters around the world. These companies can be part of the solution when it comes to adding value to humanitarian efforts on the ground. But they can also be a part of the problem.
Media teams are increasingly showing up to disasters with small drones (UAVs) to document the damage. They’re at times the first with drones on the scene and thus able to quickly capture dramatic aerial footage of the devastation below. These media assets lead to more views and thus traffic on news websites, which increases the probability that more readers click on ads. Cue Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, my favorite book whilst in high school.
Aerial footage can also increase situational awareness for disaster responders if that footage is geo-located. Labeling individual scenes in video footage with the name of the towns or villages being flown over would go a long way. This is what I asked one journalist to do in the aftermath of the Nepal Earthquake after he sent me dozens of his aerial videos. I also struck up an informal agreement with CNN to gain access to their raw aerial footage in future disasters. On a related note, I was pleased when my CNN contact expressed an interest in following the Humanitarian UAV Code of Conduct.
In an ideal world, there would be a network of professional drone journalists with established news agencies that humanitarian organizations could quickly contact for geo-tagged video footage after major disasters to improve their situational awareness. Perhaps the Professional Society of Drone Journalists (PSDJ) could be part of the solution. In any case, the network would either have its own Code of Conduct or follow the humanitarian one. Perhaps they could post their footage and pictures directly to the Humanitarian UAV Network (UAViators) Crisis Map. Either way, the media has long played an important role in humanitarian disasters, and their increasing use of drones makes them even more valuable partners to increase situational awareness.
The above scenario describes the ideal world. But the media can (and has) been part of the problem as well. “If it bleeds, it leads,” as the saying goes. Increased competition between media companies to be the first to capture dramatic aerial video that goes viral means that they may take shortcuts. They may not want to waste time getting formal approval from a country’s civil aviation authority. In Nepal after the earthquake, one leading company’s drone team was briefly detained by authorities for not getting official permission.
Media companies may not care to engage with local communities. They may be on a tight deadline and thus dispense with getting community buy-in. They may not have the time to reassure traumatized communities about the robots flying overhead. Media companies may overlook or ignore potential data privacy repercussions of publishing their aerial videos online. They may also not venture out to isolated and rural areas, thus biasing the video footage towards easy-to-access locations.
So how do we in the humanitarian space make media drone teams part of the solution rather than part of the problem? How do we make them partners in these efforts? One way forward is to start a conversation with these media teams and their relevant networks. Perhaps we start with a few informal agreements and learn by doing. If anyone is interested in working with me on this and/or has any suggestions on how to make this happen, please do get in touch. Thanks!