A crash course in changing the world.
Well, I have gone through all the five points. While going through those weblinks, I have posted my comments (given in the paranthesis after each section) that I feel summarises my learning and the same I am giving hereunder.
In my opinion, one of the most important aspects is response time to counter a rumour on pandemic which will create a brand name for any Institution. Another important aspect for pandemic reporting is not to have an activism approach (other consideration than reporting the truth) on the part of reporter. More often than not, this activism is observed in press.
From Peter Sandman's provoking analysis on "Covering Risk", I have arrieved at my own equation: Risk = Potential + Response
From Glen Nowak and D*** Thompson's presentation I have concluded that the response time is very important for pandemic reporting. Another important aspect is striking a balance between transparency and fallout.
Dori Reissman has lucidly raised the issues related to 'Managing Panic in a Pandemic'. My one line summary: Be cool and strike a balance while reporting pandemic.
In my opinion, the overreaction is usually not due to fear factor per se. Many a time than not, it is related to activism which neutral journalism can offset.
After going through all above, I thing "covering risk" is most surprising and important. It not only confounded by two unrelated components of hazard and outrage.