Dear Readers,
We need your input on an ethical dilemma we faced this week regarding social media and client privacy in disaster situations.
We hope you will chime in with your opinions in the comments.
Three tornadoes ripped through southeastern Virginia on Monday. Thankfully no one was killed, but many were injured and many more homes were destroyed.
When this sort of event happens, the American Red Cross Disaster Assessment team often has access to areas that even residents are not yet allowed to see.
This week, we took photos in a restricted neighborhood and posted them to Flickr and our blog immediately.
Later in the day we learned that residents might be seeing their homes for the first time through the photos we took. We felt nervous that these people would feel violated by us, so we took the photos down.
On Wednesday, we talked in a group and decided to put them back up, but we’re still not really sure how to handle restricted access photos in the future.
The benefit of doing this is that our photos & videos may serve to help people understand the scope of the event and may help those affected be prepared for what they’ll see when they’re allowed back in the area.
BUT
These photos and videos may also be disturbing for the very people we serve.
Question for you:
How much are you comfortable seeing? Where should we draw the line between providing information and violating the privacy of people affected?
12 responses so far ↓
1 Rita Brookshire // May 2, 2008 at 4:46 pm
The photos you took probably would available to the media and others with cameras. In this day and time, people use their cell phones for this purpose and email them to friends, family and media. Hopefully, the owners of the homes are in a shelter somewhere and the pictures would be useful to them. This is a hard call. Having a mental health team there to work with the possible residence when they receive the info or see their homes on tv would be very important. Good luck.
2 Wade Rockett // May 2, 2008 at 5:36 pm
If I were in a disaster, I’d want to know what sort of condition my home was in as soon as possible. A photo of my demolished home would be horrible to see, but at least I would know, and could prepare myself for the next steps.
But you say that residents are not “allowed to see” those areas - not allowed by whom? By posting the photos you are violating that restriction, and if you’ve agreed to respect it, then posting the photos breaks that agreement and is unethical.
3 Wendy Harman // May 2, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Thanks Rita and Wade. This is helpful.
Wade - I mean the local authorities have restricted access to the neighborhood because it may be unsafe. There’s no restriction against taking the photos as far as I know, but it might be a good practice for us to let the authorities know that we will be publishing them so they can voice any concerns they may have.
4 Meg // May 2, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Thanks for your question. As I’m sure you will, the best people to ask would be those affected. In answer to your specific questions: I would say I”m uncomfortable with all the images, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t want to see them. I do not feel like my privacy would be violated if this were my home, especially since you gave context in your posts. I did find the more “media” images problematic: the official looking people with news crews in the background felt out of place, especially with no explanation of who they were. I look forward to hearing how you sort this question out.
5 Wendy Harman // May 2, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Thanks Meg. You’re right - we do need to do a more thorough job in captioning these photos. They’re taken with a cell phone and emailed in to me, so I don’t have much info. We’ll work on a solution for this.
6 Rick Harman // May 2, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I, for one, am all for posting as many pictures as you can. During the 2004 hurricane season, the single most frustrating task was trying to assess what kind of damage there was to my house. I was not allowed in the neighborhood where the house was for several days after both Frances and Jeanne and those days were rife with anticipation.
I do agree with Meg, being able to tell the time and place of where the picture was taken is important.
7 Kevin Teale // May 2, 2008 at 9:18 pm
As long as we don’t violate private property…or somehow SELL the photos for personal or corporate gain, I don’t see a problem. News copter fly overhead and ground crews broadcast live showing the same pictures over and over…
8 Magi // May 2, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Locally, my chapter has asked that we not take pictures of clients or damage during our responses. We can (and do) take pictures of our ERV or communications vehicle, of volunteers doing things, etc.
DSHR does encourage staff going on deployment to bring cameras, and I bring mine. I restrict most of my photographs to things I can later use to explain my role to my classroom students, or to my chapter.
I think that developing a policy regarding photos posted via social networking would be a good thing. In some cases, these policies have been very restrictive and hindered the use of these services, so it will be necessary to find a balance.
I like the idea of posting pictures: there are too many people who forget what the Red Cross does because we don’t blatantly advertise our responsibilities. And when they forget about what we do, they forget that the money we need to provide the services doesn’t come from Congress, but as gifts from the people we serve.
9 Karen // May 3, 2008 at 1:19 pm
I’ve been a Red Cross volunteer for over six years and have thoughts both positive and negative on this.
On the positive side, I volunteered at the GET-INFO call center after Hurricane Katrina (and a few smaller disasters since), and one of the complaints I heard from callers was that they had no idea what condition their homes or neighborhoods were in and couldn’t get any reliable information. If they’d had access to photos from ARC (or some other organization), it might have helped prepare them for what they had to face when the returned home. It might even have helped us, as call agents, to assess the degree of need–is the caller waiting for an official OK to return to a slightly damaged home, or do they need to start preparing for longer-term assistance because their home (or entire neighborhood) was destroyed?
On the negative side, some of the photos I saw in the news (none that I can remember from ARC) following Katrina struck me as too personal, almost voyeuristic. Photos of the outsides of homes (or what remains of homes) may be useful to understand the extent and degree of damage. Photos of interiors are probably less useful and more intrusive. I was especially disturbed by photos of very personal items–wedding photos, water damaged and with their frames cracked, hanging on water-stained walls. I don’t think that contributes anything of informational value and is likely to be painful to the resident.
Personally, as a homeowner I would want to know as soon as possible what condition my house was in, and if that information came through an ARC or news photo that would be fine with me as long as it was done in a way that was not too intrusive.
10 Emily // May 3, 2008 at 7:22 pm
As a resident whose home is featured all over the news, I saw no problem with pictures being posted. The worst thing about being kept out for two days was the lack of knowledge about what state our homes were in. How horrible to wait outside a barricade for 48 hours not knowing whether your home was even standing. I did know the state of my home, but if I had not, I would have liked to know, even if that meant finding out through news and media.
11 Laurel // May 5, 2008 at 5:30 pm
The pictures at the onset might be disturbing to the owners of the homes, but may be valuable to them to substantiate their loss. Most may have lost their cameras and unable to document the event. I remember one haunting photo taken at the TN tornado deployment with a couple standing in front of their home. The expression on their faces told the whole story.
12 Frank // May 5, 2008 at 8:54 pm
A picture is still worth a thousand words. It also keeps people (the authorities) honest. How much impact on the help to the Katrina victims did the split screen of the President saying that everything was fine in New Orleans next to the images of people dead in the streets and stranded on roof tops help us to really understand the need there? The Red Cross workers are not journalist, but seeing is still believing and I’m sure, besides a few ‘hurt feelings’ you’d do a lot more good and get a lot more support if you posted the images. As long as you’re not breaking any laws, I’m all for it.
Leave a Comment
Remember, we encourage you to participate in this blog via comments. All viewpoints are welcome, but please be constructive. We reserve the right to make editorial decisions regarding submitted comments, including but not limited to removal of comments. The comments are moderated, so you may have to be a tiny bit patient in waiting to see them. We will review and post them as promptly as possible during regular business hours (Monday through Friday, 8:30 - 5:30).