Yesterday’s enthusiasm over the Senate hearing is tempered somewhat by a careful reading of the prepared testimony presented for the committee’s record.
For example, although there've been five weeks of public comment and criticism of NOAA and the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center for not issuing an effective tsunami warning via the news media, the word “media” appears exactly once in the prepared testimony of NOAA Administrator Vice Admiral Conrad Lautenbacher, Jr. (U.S. Navy, Ret.). The testimony refers only to “international media” reports on the tsunami’s destruction. (Among all the witnesses, only the prepared testimony of Eileen Shea of Honolulu’s East-West Center mentioned “media” as a participant in disseminating warnings: “As we move forward, we also need to more effectively engage the media as a critical component of an effective, comprehensive risk management information system.”)
“News” shows up once, also referring to post-tsunami “news reports”. Perhaps the world’s most ubiquitous communications tool -- “radio” – appears nowhere in his testimony. It’s ironic to note that when witnesses and experts speak of “wireless” communications, they’re referring to the relatively recent technologies of cellular phones and digital communications devices. Our grandparents called radio the “wireless”.
“Television” also is a no-show even though CNN, BBC and News World International among other networks transmit news to television sets all over the planet. “Cable” refers in three places to “cabled buoys” anchored in the ocean to detect tsunamis.
In his testimony, Lautenbacher bangs away on the theme that sending a warning to the Indian Ocean isn’t NOAA’s job. Page 4 alone contains the following within the space of four paragraphs: “It is not the Center’s responsibility to issue local tsunami warnings from seismic events outside of the United States.” “NOAA Tsunami Warning Centers have no authority or responsibility to issue tsunami warnings for the Indian Ocean basin.” “As the Indian Ocean is outside the NOAA tsunami area of responsibility, NOAA Tsunami Warning Centers have no procedures in place to issue a warning for this region.”
The last statement is why this web log was created on January 2. It was apparent from media reports immediately after the tsunami that no procedures exist to issue warnings to far-flung areas of the world.
Yes, local education is critical for populations to know what to do when a warning arrives, and yes, an effective tsunami warning system requires “an established local communications infrastructure for timely and effective dissemination of the warning and evacuation requirements” (page 5). But who else besides NOAA is qualified to get the word to those “local” communicators by engaging the international news media?
“It’s not my job” may have been the Rodriguez family motto on “Chico & the Man”, but that mentality doesn't contribute to saving lives. NOAA should consider shifting from its inside-the-Pacific-Rim-box thinking and accept responsibilities that it alone apparently is capable of assuming.
That would be an inspiration to the world.
Doug Carlson
Honolulu, HI
February 3, 2005
This web log was created one week after the December 26, 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Media reports blamed the staggering death toll on the lack of a high-tech early-warning network similar to the Pacific Rim system. Missing was any mention of whether scientists called the media to sound an alarm once they suspected a tsunami had been generated. This blog will focus on the crisis response preparedness of U.S. agencies and their readiness for low-tech, fast-reaction response to future tsunamis.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment