Accidents as spectacle

In a world saturated with instant information, communication during times of crisis is suffering a worrying decline. It seems that what should be a public service is becoming a consumer product laden with sensationalism and misinformation. What should be an aid to understanding and managing uncertainty too often transforms into something that disorients, speculates, and further wounds not only those experiencing a traumatic situation, but also the general public. Unfortunately, we have recently witnessed extreme cases—the train accidents or the torrential rains in the Girona region—in which some elements journalistic They opted for sensationalist interviews, constant unverified speculation, and clickbait-driven headlines that sacrificed ethics and responsibility.

In crisis situations, communication is fundamental: it helps to understand a tragic situation, to transmit vital information, and above all, to minimize widespread anxiety at a time when uncertainty overwhelms, even though there are often victims to mourn, with all the associated pain. Communication can accompany and drive the care and even recovery process, or it can inflict the greatest and deepest wound. Crisis communication expert Timothy Coombs argues that transparency and empathy must be the cornerstones of any message in critical situations because, when these are lacking, fertile ground is created for misinformation and speculation that not only confuses the audience but can intensify the pain of affected families and delay the response.

Exaggerated headlines about the victims, alleged errors that are not actually verified, and interviews with people without context or factual backing create a narrative that doesn't help us understand what happened, but only fuels chaos and seeks to hold attention at any cost—a painful phenomenon now amplified by social media. Out-of-context interview snippets, rumors, and conspiracy theories spread rapidly, immersing the audience in a barrage of information filled with distress and confusion.

As consumers, in times of crisis, we must contribute by disseminating only truthful information from reliable media outlets, from verified and expert sources, and that incorporates empathy and respect for the victims and their families. Viralizing invasive interviews or headlines that emotionally exploit the suffering of others helps no one. In times of crisis, it is necessary to accept uncertainty and understand the value of clearly explaining what is known, what is unknown, and what is being done to find out. The media must adhere to the strictest ethical codes, and the public must be aware of the risks that unverified information poses in times of social vulnerability and grief. We have a collective responsibility, and accidents are not entertainment. "Anything for ratings" cannot supersede human dignity.