Media probe risks and rewards of tourism

Once again, the media were in emergency mode this week when Whakaari / White Island erupted. They raised important questions about risks and rewards of tourism - and some got involved in the emotional push to recover the missing. 

This week, once again, we saw a prime minister in the media talking about a tragedy on our soil in which citizens of several nations lost their lives. 

It was an echo of Christchurch in March this year - and, come to think of it - Christchurch back in 2011. 

"White Island is about to take on a new and terrible resonance. The first thing it'll mean when we hear it mentioned - like the rollcall of names Tangiwai, Erebus, Aramoana, Wahine, Pike River – is death,” wrote Steve Braunias in the New Zealand Herald.  

This disaster also reminded some people of the Pike River Mine disaster in 2010 for a more specific reason - the particular distress over delays in retrieving those who died because the environment was still considered too toxic and volatile to approach. 

Reporters across the media - many of whom are now experienced at emergency journalism - did a fine job bringing what was known to be true to the information-hungry public - and they also conveyed the lack of clarity in what had yet to be confirmed. 

In the absence of some key facts from official sources - even two and three days after the eruption - most media did not speculate on what was not known or play fast and loose with people's emotions.

The Project on Three last Tuesday allowed several witnesses to tell their stories in their own words and showed how Whakatāne - and specifically Ngāti Awa - responded to the crisis. 

But on the same programme, Mark Inman - the brother of dead tour guide Hayden Marshall-Inman - criticised “red-tape”and “bureaucrats” delaying the recovery of bodies - as he praised the chopper pilots who bravely scrambled to try to save his brother and others.  

“I’d rather break a few rules and save some lives than sit here wondering what we could’ve done," one of those pilots, Tom Storey, told The Project that night.

“I'm told (the eight bodies) could be retrieved in 15 minutes by the pilots who know where they are," a sympathetic Patrick Gower told viewers. 

At the end of a 14-minute interview on RNZ’s Checkpoint on Wednesday pilot Tim Barrow was more reluctant to condemn the decision-makers.

"I appreciate people making decisions that they think are the right ones, however I also believe that sometimes you've just got to act," he said.

Shortly after that on Wednesday, viewers of The Project saw Newshub’s Patrick Gower take to the air with Mark Inman and chopper pilot Tom Storey, who aired their grievances about what Patrick Gower called “a government refusal to get the bodies back”.

Hovering at the edge of the no-fly zone around the island, Patrick Gower asked Mark Inman to send a message to Jacinda Ardern and officials. 

“Pull your finger out," said Mark Inman.

 "I challenge Jacinda Arden to come out and have a look for herself," Tom Storey told Patrick Gower. 

Tom Storey also said he took the PM’s partner Clarke Gayford to Whakaari /White Island to film for his TV fishing show last year.  

“I got her husband off safely. Let me get the rest,” he said on The Project. 

Patrick Gower then insisted "toxic sort of fumes" and gas venting from the island were no problem for a recovery mission.

On Twitter, Patrick Gower copped criticism for dragging the PM’s family into the issue - and for stirring the emotions of people in grief and shock, including the chopper pilots who’d been through the worst of times 48 hours earlier.  

The former political editor crossed over into campaigning when he urged the PM to disregard expert advice and police instructions.  

When the Defence Force-led recovery mission did get underway on Friday morning it took several hours - not 20 minutes - and it could not recover all eight missing people. An SAS soldier taking part described being "past the limits of endurance".

It was only natural for people to want to retrieve friends and loved ones in spite of the danger highlighted by experts and the authorities. Those with rescue skills and the requisite courage were inevitably frustrated at being unable to help.   

But it wasn't just desk-bound health and safety types who believed Whakaari/ White Island was unsafe for improvised retrieval missions. 

As we know from previous disasters, assessing risk and issuing good advice is complicated - and the reasons why caution was exercised were not well explained.

While the mounting frustration of those who wanted to ‘get the job done’ was aired over two nights on The Project, the show aired barely two minutes of University of Canterbury volcanologist Tom Wilson on the show on Tuesday to explain the dangers.

Shortly before that on Newstalk ZB’s Drive show the same day, Heather du Plessis Allan had her own first take on the role of first responders. 

“If the private citizens hadn’t gone to rescue the injured, would they still be there? Would police have gone for them? We’re going to have to make a decision as a country about what we want our first responders to do,” she told her listeners.

Are we going to have redefine the job description of first responders? On what grounds?

She didn't say, in a comment piece that was mainly a series of unanswered questions. 

While the recovery operation was under way, the AM show host Duncan Garner told his viewers it wouldn't be without the outcry - as seen in the media. 

"I am in no doubt it's only going ahead because of the community and whānau pressure following the powerful words of chopper pilot Mark Law, who said to us on Wednesday: 'Let's go bring these fellas home'," he said. 

(He also claimed there was "a 50 percent chance of an eruption at any time" which was incorrect and misleading).   

On Saturday - after the recovery operation - fellow ZB host Jack Tame said criticism of the police was “irresponsible, unreasonable and totally misplaced”.

“It is one thing for rescuers to risk their lives to save living people, but to risk their lives to collect bodies, when the relevant experts say there is a significant risk of another explosion, would be reckless beyond belief,” he said. 

“Everyone tut-tutting at health and safety procedures should keep in mind that in months to come, a lack of red tape may prove to be the cause of this disaster in the first place,” he added. 

Is adventure tourism's red tape too loose?

While politicians repeatedly said it was too soon yet to ask such questions, it is entirely legitimate for media to ask if a risk-averse culture influenced the decision makers’ choices - and if the prospect of an official inquiry picking over people’s actions on the day had an influence too. The confusing claim that a criminal investigation was under way - later retracted - could also have been a factor.  

On Scoop.co.nz, Gordon Campbell looked back at the Pike River inquiry for pointers. 

“It is worth recalling that the Royal Commission dismissed the criticism that a rescue attempt might have been possible between the first explosion  . . . .and the second explosion five days later. However, the Commissioners also criticised the ‘cumbersome’ nature of the emergency response ‘which could have impeded a rescue had one proved possible’,” Gordon Campbell reported. 

Difficult and raw questions about whether people should have have been in harm’s way on the island were also raised in the media - here and overseas. 

The Washington Post quoted the mother of newlyweds from the US as saying she was “livid” they were allowed to visit such a dangerous place 

Monash University volcanologist Ray Cas called White Island “a disaster waiting to happen for many years” and our media followed up on that. 

The whole concept of ‘adventure tourism’ is now being debated by the media.  

Scoop’s Gordon Campbell pointed out regulations often allow commercial operators to make the day-to-day risk management judgments. 

He reckoned the ‘fine print’ letting customers know about the risks can also serve as a kind of marketing.  

“Until an accident happens, such warnings readily become part of the sales package, and get treated as a marginal thrill factor,” he said. 

“They don’t get portrayed as a palpable danger that’s likely to kill any customers who happen to be in the vicinity at the wrong moment, and without any warning,” he said. 

The same could be said of media reports of adventure tourism attractions. 

For instance last Tuesday under the headline Why were tours still operating? Stuff travel writer Broke Sabin - a former political reporter - said “the decision-making (should be) taken away from those who also have a financial interest - and into the hands of experts who know more than anyone.”

Back in June Brook Sabin himself wrote about a trip to White Island at a time it was on alert level 2 and tour company staff were going ahead of tour groups to assess conditions.

While he mentioned the apparent dangers in his article and questioned the safety of visits, it also served as an endorsement. 

“Travel is ultimately about creating moments you'll never forget - just like this one. None of us will ever get to Mars, but this is the next best thing,” he wrote. 

But it now seems unlikely tourists will get to Whakaari/ White Island in the foreseeable future.

The media play a big part in publicising the rewarding experiences of adventure tourism. 

Now they’ll have to scrutinise the renewed efforts to weigh up the risks as well.