[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Suggestions? and MSC story to be on CBS- Misuse of language
Dear Colleagues,
Public, of all social scale, have doubt to understand the difference among
irradiation, exposition and contamination. In most cases it would seem to
be a "fear of the unknown. Media has part of the responsibility of producing
this deeply implanted fear of nuclear technology. Also the Competent
Authority, due its weak relationship with the media. International and
National Organization and nuclear industry have the main responsibility to
eradicate those fears through education.
Better communication, and greater comprehension, of radiation safety will
require a concerted effort among scientists, journalists, decision-makers,
and the public.
Communication of radiation safety differ from country to country. Moreover,
actions to improve the situation need to be implemented to prevailing issues
of national debate -- for example, discuss with the society after each
general exercise on reactor emergency. Who among any social type of public
or among many of our colleagues know about The International Event Scale
(INES)? -- Nuclear Reactor, Power Reactor, both are typical name -- there
is no difficulty for public understand such names. The public confusion is
related with the hazard and if a reactor can explode like a bomb.
Let's consider another point on communication: The difficulty to explain to
Society and also to many organizations the meaning of Radioactive Waste and
disposal:
Waste disposal cannot be justified by itself, but only as part of the
benefits of the uses of nuclear energy. In terms of communication this is
a very difficult task for many reason and public and political expectation,
mainly:
1 - Public aversion and hostility to radioactive wastes of all kinds;
2 - General public does not distinguish the different IAEA classification
of groups A, B and C. They make Confusion about the terminology used in its
description;
3 - Active political opposition due the hostility of public acceptance to
accept disposal sites, especially the intense local opposition
4- Argument against reprocessing due the increase amount of radioactive
waste that has to be disposed;
5 - It is assumed by the society to be an unsolved problem
6 - Well organized ante-nuclear groups, acting much more in the
psychological attitude of the population rather to discuss technical
solution for public acceptance.
An important role of the scientist is to supply reliable information,
without speculation, to build trust. Since openness is a prerequisite for
credibility, scientists should provide simple information and make more
detailed backup material available for further reference. The success of
the nuclear industry in France is the media and population understanding
and support for their nuclear programme.
Last year I did the following formal suggestion to IAEA:
In order to achieve the Communication objective the IAEA should encourage to
convene meetings to objective progress in this area and to introduce a
special Module in all the IAEA training Course, specially dealing with
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety as well as Emergency Planning and
Preparedness.
The following syllabus is proposed as a guide for the preparation of a
training programme and seminar on communication of nuclear issues:
- Psychology of public with respect nuclear programme
- Spokesperson ideal for nuclear issues communications
- Psychological Concerns among communicators
- Mental Exercise
- Realistic Approach for communication
- Risk communication strategies
- Practical experience in a TV Studio
- Practical experience in a Press Workroom
- Visit to relevant facilities and organizations
-.............................
Topics for discussion in the training:
-- Reasons for limiting understanding
-- Controversial about low doses
-- Limitations of epidemiological data about effects of low doses
-- Limitations of Government information about Nuclear Programme
-- Lack of trust and credibility
-- Lack of sensibility
-- Lack of adequate coordination
-- How should the information be given?
-- Public Concern
-- unknown and unpredictable risk
-- involuntary risk
-- Controversial about low doses
-- children at risk
-- future generation
-- Population Perception of Risk
-- Comparisons of risks
-- Early and delayed effects
-- Environmental effects
-- Food products effects
-- Overview of the last accidents
-- Security of properties
-- Lessons learned from past errors
-- Spokesperson and Media
-- Presentation and interactive skills
-- Barriers
-- Technical language: complexity and simplicity
-- Media main request
-- Media deadlines for information
Jose Julio Rozental
rozental@unisys.com.br
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
I'll be back to Israel next February 22
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy Perle <sandyfl@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 7:34 PM
Subject: RE: Suggestions? and MSC story to be on CBS- Misuse of language
> There are many reasons why the general public today has perceptions
> about anything nuclear cemented in stone. I have to agree with Bill
> Lipton when he says that we, the industry, are mainly to blame for
> this perception. Granted, there is the LNT association which leads to
> fear and misrepresentation of the real risks. However, it's the
> industry's past communication methodology, leaving the public and
> politicians out of the loop, with the firm belief that they were not
> intelligent enough to understand the new technology, and therefore,
> had no real reason to be told anything. Tack on all of the industry's
> miscues over the years, and those that continue today, and it is not
> unreasonable for the public to simply not believe anything we say
> about what the real risks are, and how to deal with the perceived
> risks.
>
> As stated many times, the answer to our current state lies in
> education at the earliest age and grade levels. We also have to find
> some science teacher groups who are willing to listen to us today,
> since they are still the teachers of our young. If they are not
> convinced, there is no one to teach the kids. The reality is we will
> have to wait a generation before we can start a new attitude towards
> the nuclear option. The question remains, do we have the necessary
> time to allow that to happen?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sandy Perle Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100
> Director, Technical Extension 2306
> ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division Fax:(714) 668-3149
> ICN Biomedicals, Inc. E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
> ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
> Costa Mesa, CA 92626
>
> Personal Website: http://www.geocities.com/scperle
> ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html