1

The Cost of Saving Lives:

The Risks of Reporting on Typhoons in the Philippines
By Christian Joseph A. San Jose
J100 TRU
December 17, 2014
It is a given if not a curse for the Philippines to be a country prone to natural calamities
such as tropical storms. Being located within proximity of the Pacific Ocean, the largest body of
water on the planet honing the making of such phenomena as typhoons, puts the country in a
very compromising position belonging to an accumulation of areas called the typhoon belt.
Since 1970s, the Philippines has been hit by more tropical cyclones than any country on
earth except for China, according to the National Hurricane Center. A tropical cyclone is an allencompassing term that includes typhoons, hurricanes, and cyclones, which have different names
depending on where they form. Reports from Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) reveals that
annually, approximately 80 typhoons develop above tropical waters, of which 19 enter the
Philippine region and six to nine make landfall.
Government and political issues aside, disaster reporting has been known to be a vital
element in Philippine Press. Disasters are very big business for the media (Wenger, 1985), over
the years, news of typhoons have dominated the airwaves and the newsstands, which makes it
more important for media practitioners to responsibly deliver information even if it means
having to put ones life on the line. Information must be up to the minute and accurate to the very
minute details; a single slip can cost someones life, or worse, a thousand.
The media have roles to play before, during, and after a disaster. In many incidents,
journalists are among the first to arrive on the scene and report on events as they unfold; they are

first informers in the disaster zone. Media and communication technologies can greatly aid or
hinder efforts to prepare citizens for threats; convey important, lifesaving information during a
crisis; assist in rescues, reunions, and relocations; support relief efforts; and promote
accountability after the fact. At the same time, journalists are themselves vulnerable to the
hazardous situations on which they report. (First Informers in the Disaster Zone: The Lessons
of Katrina, Aspen Institute Communications and Society Program, 2006)
In the case of Typhoon Haiyan, locally known as Yolanda, recorded one of the strongest
tropical cyclones to ever hit the Philippines, news organizations sent out reporters to probable
areas in which Yolanda was most likely to make a landfall, this includes Leyte, Bicol, Bohol,
Samar, Oriental Mindoro, Aklan, and Masbate. The challenge was for journalists to deliver and
send out stories given the harsh conditions while trying to stay alive, themselves.
It was no easy feat, aside from power lines being shut down, reporters were also subject
to the same conditions as the residents of Tacloban, dubbed ground zero. Strong winds brought
down trees uproot, metal scraps from household roofs scattered everywhere and most areas were
inaccessible because the roads are flooded.
Adding up to the burden of newscasters who covered ground zero was the inadequacy in
the part of the government to provide efficient assistance, rescue and other basic necessities to
the affected areas and rehabilitation zones, which by the way, the reporters themselves are
depending on. Anderson Cooper from CNN upon seeing the situation cannot help but express his
dismay saying the scene was a miserable, miserable one. Cooper also criticized the response to
which the government was lacking, saying You would expect perhaps to see a feeding center
that had been set up five days after the storm. We havent seen that, certainly not in this area.

Some food is being brought to people here at the airport, some being distributed but these are
very, very difficult conditions for the people here on the ground and its not clear how much
longer it can continue like this.
Aside from delivering the latest updates on devastated municipalities, journalists were
also given the job of being the messengers of bad news after the disaster, death tolls and airing
missing persons lists. It was through them that locals were able to call out to their relatives in
other parts of the country to tell them of their situation, and report missing loved ones to
authorities.
Media was also the peoples mouthpiece in seeking for potable drinking water, food and
clothes which the storm took along with their properties from the government and other
concerned organizations. Not only did the media aid in calling out for help but they themselves
also became instruments in rehabilitation programs by asking help through various emergency
hotlines which they plugged on the news for those who are willing to collaborate and donate
material and monetary aids.
A total death toll of 5,235 which included the 1,774 bodies found was confirmed by the
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Center (NDRRMC) on November 11, 2013,
three days after Yolanda hit the Philippines, accompanied by P10.5 billion damage to agriculture
and P12 billion, damage to infrastructure.
Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) published Database on Media
Affected by Typhoon Yolanda (Tables 1 to 4) on November 15, 2013 which revealed the number
of media workers deceased/missing/wounded, media workers affected (homes destroyed,

wounded, etc.), media workers reported missing but found and destroyed stations/offices by
Typhoon Yolanda amounting to a total of 49 persons and 16 stations and offices.

Media coverage of disasters is often pervasive, continuous and intense (Houston,

Pfefferbaum & Reyes, 2008) which begets the question of safety among media practitioners who
went out of their way to deliver essential information that can possibly save thousands of lives,
but in the process may risk one of their own during times such as Typhoon Yolandas landfall.
Atom Araullo, a popular news personality from ABS-CBN during Typhoon Yolanda
reported live for the networks morning news show on November 8, 2013 despite sturdy winds
which threatened to blow off his team.
Araullo was lauded for his daring reporting about the magnitude of the storm even if it
meant going out there to experience it himself. It was in a way, trying to give the viewers outside
of Tacloban a glimpse of what was happening in there. Subtle as it was, all the report needed was
to convey the message clearly as the prevalence of the storm justified itself as shown by how
strong and persistent the winds were.
In an interview for a magazine late November last year, Araullo admitted that he refused
to be featured for reasons that he [has] to be mindful not to drag attention away from important
issues and events, especially because the situation in Tacloban still remains critical.
However, CMFR has pointed through their Guidelines for Coverage of Disasters and
Catastrophes that Crisis coverage must be devoid of posturing, playing the hero and other kinds
of grandstanding on the part of the media.

5
Reports on TV Patrol showed how Araullo helped residents cross deep floods to reach
the stairs of a building in Tacloban and how Failon helped in carrying dead bodies and
consoling sobbing victims of the typhoon. These reports were put the reporters in good
light. But their actual report could have been more meaningful if given the context of the
critical need for immediate rescue and relief operations.

Guidelines for Coverage of Disasters and Catastrophes also explicitly states that
reporters and photojournalists cannot interfere with the saving of lives and prevention of
injury and that they cannot be too sensitive to the plight of victims and their families and
friends. In the same interview aforementioned, Araullo responded to issues that he went beyond
the code of ethics which applies to journalists in lieu of disaster reporting by directly intervening
in rescue operations, saying There is no way you can separate the journalist from the human
being, as any reporter will tell you . It is not only impossible, it is inhuman. When people are
hungry, thirsty, desperate, despairing, looking to you for help, how can you stand behind an
imagined force field of ethics and neutrality? At the same time, however, you have to be
reminded that the best way you can assist them is by doing your job as a journalist. It is our
responsibility to tell their stories, to share what we see and perhaps as importantly what we dont
see. In this way, we hope to move people into action.

Not only does media risks their lives in reporting on typhoons but they also put their
credibility at stake. If they report early on and the disaster does not take place and if on the other
hand they fail to convey information effectively causing a number of casualties, either way these
both undermine their credibility.
Evidently, during the occurrence of Typhoon Yolanda, the public was not made fully
aware of the implications that the typhoon may cause including the threat of storm surge which

may cause waves from varying heights of 6-7 meters. The term was relatively new to general
public and there was a failure in the part of both the government and the media who despite
announcing beforehand the possibility of such phenomenon failed to put emphasis on the
dangers it may pose (CMFR).

It is expected of journalists to come through even under harsh conditionsand by harsh

conditions, typhoon-induced ones are the least of their worries. It was recently put to light that
most reporters considered talents get zero benefits and incentives from their employers despite
their risky coverage.
In an infographic provided by Buhay Media (Figure 1), an independent group of media
practitioners in the Philippines, it was revealed that most talents, non-regular employees in the
major television networks (cameramen, researchers, editors, transcriber, segment producer, etc.)
receive little to no benefits at allnot even insurance policies covered by government agencies
such as SSS, PAGIBIG and GSIS to ensure that if ever they found themselves in bad faith under
circumstances which they have no control of when covering such scenarios as disasters, they
wouldnt have to worry about not being able to afford immediate medical care.
It is also worth noting that in most networks, talents are not entitled to basic employee
privileges which are granted to regulars (VP, AVP, executive producers, associate producers, etc.)
such as overtime pay, leave with pay and 13 th month pay, which is mandatory under Presidential
Decree 851.
In light of recent typhoons which these talents are obliged to cover not only under their
responsibility corporate employees but also under that of being journalists, debates ensue on

whether or not they be granted hazard pay which the United States Department of Labor
explicitly defines as additional pay for performing hazardous duty or work involving physical
hardship. This may be a long and tedious process in the making petitioning such rights for
employees considering the harsh conditions under which these talents are working.
There isnt always a guarantee that any job is safe; any job is as good as any other in
matters of safetyno job is not worth risking your life. It is only so that it is a given in the
professions of journalists that there will always be lives at stake and the latter is always
dependent on the other and vice versa. The tasks that a journalist takes on are frequently a matter
of staking their lives in order to deliver what is essentially true and relevant at a given time.
In a way, the task endowed to journalists to convey the situation in disaster-ridden area is
comparable to that of the trolley dilemma where a man rests on one side of the tracks and a
number of people on the other. Only in this situation the media is both the controller and a
theoretical man on one side of the road; he gets to call who gets run down by the speeding
trolley: himself or a number of people? It is in laymans terms sacrificing for the benefit of the
others. The only way to stop the trolley is putting himself before it, for it to stop. He has to run
the risk of having the trolley run over him to stop it from killing the others.
If we look at it in a way as if putting a thousand lives before their own then we can say
that a media practitioners job, if it doesnt measure up to that of a policemans, it may as well
exceed it. But if a policemans job is incorporated with putting ones foot on the grave then a
journalists would be having to put both feet on the ground considering threats other than safety
from the risks of reporting which is a working environment devoid of their basic rights as
employees.