There is a major difference in how information is portrayed depending on the audience. Often times, when informing the population of terrible news the audience is looking for as many facts as the Journalists will put out there. The miners and the families of the miners trapped in the Chilean copper mine collapse wanted to know everything that was going on and exactly what was going to be done in order to rectify the situation as well as how soon the workers could come home.Juan Week, who wrote the article “Over 30 Workers Trapped After Chilean Copper Mine Collapse,” sent out nothing but facts. There was no emotion, no sympathy, but enough facts to let the scared families know what had happened, what was being accomplished, and that investigations were being carried out to gather more information. Week did not have all of the facts, but he did not assume facts either. His message was basic, an incident occurred, rescue attempts are being made, there was no confirmation of survivors, and investigations were being made into the company that owned the mine.
In another article reporting the incident, Wayne Parry and Rachel Rottener reveal acts about mining allowing families to better understand what might have happened, the rescue attempts being made, as well as the amount of stress the workers must have been under. Parry also explained the need from the families to write messages in order for the workers to survive. This article was written after the fact and reported on the survival of the 33 workers. There were more discoverable facts, testimony from experts, and conclusions drawn from questions that a lot of people were probably asking.Journalists had to be careful how they wrote their articles. If they wanted to cater o the families needs, they needed to let them know what was being done in order to save their loved ones.
They needed to let them know that the workers were alive and rescue attempts were being made. Parry and Rottener were able to describe the conditions of the mine, what possibly caused the collapse, and why only certain rescue attempts could be made. Releasing this information allowed for everyone to have a better understanding of what happened and possibly lessened any possible outrage trot the timeliest.Week’s article may or may not nave created outrage by exploiting the investigations into the mining company and their failure to install feet precautions that would have prevented this cave in. The workers in the mine wanted to know how long it might take before their rescue but for their safety, this information was kept from them. The article by Parry and Rottener tells explains that the families sent messages to the workers giving them bits and pieces of information. They were sent lights and food supplies that they managed to ration out equally with enough to keep in reserve because they were unsure of their demise.The best news that the workers received was that they were capable of being reached.
This news reached the workers when a message was sent own to them via a hole that was dug in search for survivors. The fact that the rescuers were able to reach the survivors sent a plethora of messages in one action. 1) That the collapse was known of, 2) rescue attempts were being made, 3) information could be transferred, 4) supplies could be sent down, and 5) all of them could survive.When telling the employees of the incident, the employees would need be aware of the cause and how the were going to be rescued.
They needed to know that they were all going to be okay in the end and that they were not going to be stuck down in that mine forever. The difference between the information given to the employees and their families is that the families were given more information than they wanted. They were given information that was not always pertinent to their needs because they had more access to more information. The employees only received what was sent down to them.The employees only needed to know that help was on the way.
Had they known of all the little difficulties there was a chance they would have given up hope (Parry, 2010). The families were able to watch as everything went down giving them hope that their loved ones would come home soon. All the messages sent back and forth were important in giving both sides hope. MEMO Date: August 9, 2010 To: All Mineral San Eastern Primmer Employees From: Josh Van Sampan, Chief Executive Officer On August 5, 2010, a copper mine in San Jose suffered a cave in. 3 of our employees were trapped inside.
Rescuers drilled holes and have located all 33 of the employees. The employees are trapped at a depth tot about 3 meters. The rescuers are now attempting to carve a hole 26 inches in diameter in order to pull the employees out. This involves drilling through a lot of rock.
This may take from approximately 30 days o four months. A second cave in has occurred and we are asking that all work in the Northern Chile area be suspended. All other mining projects are still in operation.Despite ongoing investigations into this company by the Federal of Chilean Mining Workers (FMC) and the Confederation of Copper Workers (CT), all employees are to adhere to the new safety procedures and protocols in the attached pamphlets. Updates will follow as more developments occur. I think written communication would be best for the company in this situation. It would show that the company is making attempts to better their safety protocols in order to prevent another incident. To: All Mineral San Eastern Primmer Employee Families The employees are trapped at a depth of about 300 meters.
The rescuers are now This involves drilling through a lot of rock. This may take some time as we may run into problems such as broken bits. Rescuers were able to send down a small supply of food and water before a second cave in occurred. The employees and the rescuers have retained a meaner of communication and we have been told that the workers have rationed their supplies to stretch for more than two weeks. Rescuers are now allowing families to send messages to their loved ones. A tact-to-tact or public announcement tot the company would be the best tort tot communication in this instance.
The families want to know as much information as possible and being that the company is responsible the families will want to hear it straight from them.
