Friday, August 27, 2010

How RP can Improve its Weather Forecasting

“A forecast is a prediction. Ang pagsasabing inaccurate ang isang forecast ay inappropriate,” said Dr. Josefina Argete, professor of meteorology and deputy director of the Institute of Environmental Sciences and Meteorology at the University of the Philippines Diliman.

Dr. Argete also said that to fire former Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) administrator Prisco Nilo was not justifiable. Nilo was fired by Pres. Noynoy Aquino because PAGASA was not able to warn the public that Basyang would hit Metro Manila.

“Konti na nga lang ang trained meteorologists sa bansa, sisibakin pa,” she added.
Dr. Argete believes that PAGASA’s skills are “above average”, especially that the Philippines has a tropical climate which is very hard to predict as compared with the countries along the middle latitude.

PAGASA’s Public Information and International Affairs Staff officer in charge Venus Valdemoro said that their equipment are not old and are continuously upgraded.
“Siyempre kailangan nating makipagsabayan sa standard ng World Meteorological Organization regarding equipment and human resources,” she said.

But Stephanie Abnasan, a junior public health student at UP Manila and secretary of Sibol-PH, a political party geared towards change and development, believes that PAGASA has old equipments and already needs to buy new equipment. This is from what she sees in the television whenever PAGASA’s equipment are shown.

“Government’s task here is to give PAGASA funds, “Abnasan added.

Valdemoro said that PAGASA’s ongoing project to improve their services is the Doppler Radar Program. The Philippines currently has five weather surveillance radars in Aparri, Cagayan; Baguio; Virac, Catanduanes; Baler, Aurora; and Guiuan, Samar to track the location of a typhoon and its wind speed. The radars in Baguio and Baler are currently being upgraded into a Doppler radar. The others will be upgraded with the help of the Japanese government through the Japan International Cooperation Agency. Two others are in Subic and Surigao.

Used in meteorological services in other countries, a Doppler radar can predict the amount of rainfall that will come which will be very helpful in warning the people for possible floods.
However, Dr. Argete said, “Kahit ano pang ganda ng technology natin, balewala din kung kulang ang trained personnel. So ang tendency, ‘yung equipment masisira din.”
She said this is due to “piracy” or our trained personnel’s choice to work abroad instead of working here.

Another factor that Dr. Argete and Valdemoro believe as a possible cause of the said “inaccurate” forecast is that PAGASA does not rely on just one tool but on many different instruments.

“Kahit pa sophisticated ang equipment natin, iba-iba pa rin ang forecast ng bawat instrument. Ina-average lang ‘yan ng PAGASA,” Dr. Argete said.
PAGASA’s current sources for weather forecasting are radars, surface data, synoptic observations, upper air data, numerical weather predictions, satellite receiving facilities.

Valdemoro said, “Dapat iniintindi ng public that it’s not 100 % accurate. Kaya nga forecast eh.”

She explained that for example, they predict the center of a typhoon to be 200 kilometers in radius and to hit Metro Manila. If ever the typhoon hits Bulacan the most but still passes over Metro Manila, their forecast is still considered accurate since Metro Manila is still within the 200 km radius of the typhoon.

PAGASA’s current plans are to improve their forecasting capabilities and to focus on their communication with the general public.

Valdemoro said, “Ang tingin kasi ng tao sa PAGASA technical, so we plan the make a separate bulletin in our website for the public para mas maintindihan nila.”
This bulletin would be different to the bulletin posted in their website where their 24-hour public weather forecasts are posted. PAGASA issues their forecast twice a day, 5 a.m . and 5 p.m.

After a forecast, the information goes first to the office of the president, then to the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), then to regional DCCs to provincial to municipal, down to the barangay level. The forecast is also relayed to the media for easy dissemination to the public.

Abnasan said, “Dapat laging on time magannounce ang media. Minsan wala ng bagyo saka pa lang sila magaannounce.”

PAGASA is conducting regional media seminar workshops annually to help reporters understand the terms PAGASA uses in its forecasts. This is also to improve PAGASA’s working relationship with the media.

Valdemoro said, “If media undergoes our seminar for 2-3 days, at least ‘pag nagcocover, ‘di na sila masyadong nosebleed.”

PAGASA is now planning to conduct the seminar at least twice a year in the National Capital Region.

Dr. Argete said that the government has always helped PAGASA with its equipment. Since PAGASA is the biggest agency under the Department of Science and Technology, it receives the largest budget from the DOST.

“Pero kahit maging 100 % accurate pa ang isang forecast, babaha pa rin. Ang flood ‘di lang naman dahil sa ulan o sa bagyo; nasa pagmamanage din 'yan ng lupa at mga basura. At ‘yun ang task ng government natin,” Dr. Argete said.

What Should Have Been Done

Media coverage of an ongoing crisis such as hostage-taking incidents has always been a challenge to journalists. Though there are existing guidelines to help them decide what to do when placed in that kind of situation, it’s always not easy to stick what is said. It’s different when you have time to think and when you’re put on the scene, live.

But what really could have the media done to minimize the possible harm their coverage could have caused to all the people concerned, especially the hostages?
Two of the principles journalists adhere to have been in conflict here. First, seek truth and report it, and second, minimize harm.

Even though it is the media’s job to convey vital information to the public, media should have taken into consideration what possible consequences disclosing that information may cause to the people involved.

In my Journalism Ethics class, we have recently studied about coverage of sensitive topics and vulnerable groups. In covering an ongoing crisis such as what happened when dismissed Senior Inspector Rolando Mendoza hijacked a busload of Chinese nationals from Hong Kong near the Quirino Grandstand on Monday, August 23, media should always be careful.

Media should have fought the urge to go live from the scene of the hostage taking crisis and withheld valuable information such as the tactics and the positions of the SWAT members. Reporters should have thought first that Mendoza may have had access to their reports through radio or television. Since Mendoza did have access, he knew exactly what was happening around him through the media’s blow-by-blow accounts of what the policemen were doing and planning to do.

They should have simply told the public the reason why it was necessary to withhold some information, the primary reason being to protect the hostages and to not interfere with the SWAT’s actions. If they did that, I believe the public would have understood why they were doing it.

Also, they should not have shown the arrest and handcuffing of Mendoza’s brother. Many believe that this was the one that caused Mendoza to be outraged, thus fire his gun and start killing some of the hostages. Who would not be outraged when you see your loved one being dragged and handcuffed anyway? It is also very important for media to be extra careful when interviewing family members of the hostage taker.
But media isn’t only the one that should be criticized; there are also the police and SWAT.

The article, Ten things the Philippines bus siege police got wrong, by BBC said it all. Our policemen really lacked both training and equipment.
It seemed as if the policemen were still waiting for Mendoza to shoot someone before they would start taking action. The lack of equipment was clearly shown in their attempt to smash the windows of the bus.

The police also obviously didn’t properly control the crowd. Many bystanders were near the scene; they should have created a barrier or even at least used the yellow tape to make it clear to the public and even to the media that crossing that line wouldn’t be allowable. This action could have at least prevented a bystander from getting shot.
The police should also have set rules on what media could cover and what they should not. This could have controlled the media from interfering with their tactics.
Lastly, one thing that has been going in my mind since that hostage-taking crisis is… Who really shoot the people?

Was it hostage taker Mendoza? Or were the shots from the guns of the policemen themselves?

I believe these questions have been in other people’s minds too. So I believe an investigation is necessary for the said crisis. I line with that investigation, I think it was also acceptable that Manila Police District director Chief Supt. Rodolfo Magtibay requested to temporarily leave his post. Since he was the one who led and gave the assault order, his leave was to ensure impartiality in the investigation.

Many fingers also point to President Noynoy Aquino- his said absence while the hostage-taking crisis was ongoing. It did seem as if Pres. Noynoy lacked competence in this incident. Many people were looking for his leadership in what happened. Now, many are expressing anger over how Noynoy handled the crisis in his fan page.

It may be acceptable that the public is currently outraged. Who would not be?

But come to think of it, what’s been done has been done; no one could really go back and undo what has been already done.

What’s in our hands now are the present and the future. We just got to learn from the past, start moving on, and do better next time.

Friday, August 6, 2010

Should We Continue Reading and Writing about Science?

This question has been circling in the minds of journalists and readers alike. As a reader and a soon to be journalist (hopefully), I believe science has always been important and that people have always needed science for their everyday lives.

It's just that journalists nowadays don't focus too much on science and also, readers are starting to take science for granted. But one thing I'm sure of is when the time comes that science writing is gone already, that would be the time people will realize the importance of science. People would ask themselves...

Why haven't I read about science when science articles were still alive?
Why haven't I written about science when no one else were writing about it anymore?

Not all bloggers can be considered journalists. Still, some of them can be considered journalists as long as they also adhere to the principles journalists adhere to- some of which are truthfulness and accountability.

Now that the number of journalists writing about science continues to decline, it is sad to know that even science bloggers are now stopping writing about science.

Though scientists can of course write about science, still not all of them can communicate well with their readers. They are so used to complex ideas and complicated terms that they seldom realize that the world they are writing for is not exactly the same with the world they are working in.

Here enters the job of journalists. That is to know for whom to write, how to write it, and how to connect what they write to the people they are writing for.

All of this is just a matter of connection. How to make it work? It's up to us.