Abstract. Population information is a fundamental issue for effective disaster risk reduction. As demonstrated by numerous past and present crises, implementing an effective communication strategy is, however, not a trivial matter. This paper draws lessons from the seismo-volcanic “crisis” that began in the French overseas department of Mayotte in May 2018 and is still ongoing today. Mayotte's case study is interesting for several reasons: (i) although the seismo-volcanic phenomenon itself is associated with moderate impacts, it triggered a social crisis that risk managers themselves qualified as “a communication crisis”, (ii) risks are perceived mostly indirectly by the population, which poses specific challenges, in particular to scientists who are placed at the heart of the risk communication process, and (iii) no emergency planning or monitoring had ever been done in the department of Mayotte with respect to volcanic issues before May 2018, which means that the framing of monitoring and risk management, as well as the strategies adopted to share information with the public, has evolved significantly over time. Our first contribution here is to document the gradual organization of the official response. Our second contribution is an attempt to understand what may have led to the reported “communication crisis”. To that end, we collect and analyze the written information delivered by the main actors of monitoring and risk management to the public over the last 3 years. Finally, we compare its volume, timing, and content with what is known of at-risk populations' information needs. Our results outline the importance of ensuring that communication is not overly technical, that it aims to inform rather than reassure, that it focuses on risk and not only on hazard, and that it provides clues to possible risk scenarios. We issue recommendations for improvement of public information about risks, in the future, in Mayotte but also elsewhere in contexts where comparable geo-crises may happen.

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends directly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media should play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of earthquake media coverage by the international press reveals systematic biases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32 worldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that the press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559 of magnitude 5+). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a typical framing of the <q>earthquake news</q>. Except for the <q>Nepal quake</q>, the duration of the coverage is usually very short. The news thus tends to focus on short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses, material damage, and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the recovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely addressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news on impacts show a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage estimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the role played by the international community in helping the <q>poor and vulnerable</q>. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to mentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being largely ignored. The notion of the <q>seismic crisis</q> also seems unclear, with aftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards are barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these biases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented. If scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a few hours after an event. Why not taking that opportunity to familiarize people with the real timeline of seismic disasters?</p>

Abstract. On 10 May 2018, an active seismic crisis began on French island of Mayotte, which a year later will be shown to be related to offshore volcanic activity. It affects a vulnerable territory exposed to risks of many kinds (poverty, violence, lack of basic resources). In the absence of known events in human memory, the population is naive with regard to seismic and volcanic hazards. The concern is therefore very strong. In spite of a large number of publications, the communication set up by the main actors of the risk chain does not answer the population's concern. To understand why, we analyse a large corpus of the textual communications (press releases, web pages, scientific bulletins, reports, etc.) issued by the authorities and scientists from May 2018 to April 2021. We draw lessons on the communication strategy put in place in the first three years of the crisis; and we issue recommendations for improvement in the future, in Mayotte, but also elsewhere in contexts where comparable geo-crises may happen. We notably stress the importance of ensuring that communication is not overly technical, that it aims to inform rather than reassure, that it focuses on risk and not only on hazard and that it provides clues to possible risk scenarios.

Cet article analyse les flux RSS internationaux émis par 37 quotidiens d’information situés dans 16 États différents en se focalisant sur les mentions des États. Trois aspects sont étudiés : la hiérarchie entre États, les cooccurrences toujours présentes et enfin les effets de voisinage. Les résultats montrent une très forte concentration de l’actualité internationale, 20 % des États assurant au minimum 80 % des mentions pour l’ensemble des journaux du corpus. Quel que soit le point d’observation retenu, les États-Unis occupent une position prépondérante. L’étude des cooccurrences place aussi les États-Unis au centre, mais permet de révéler les principaux couples étatiques, qu’ils soient coopératifs ou conflictuels. Enfin, l’étude de sous-corpus nationaux permet de révéler des logiques éditoriales et spatiales spécifiques : si l’actualité internationale est d’abord celle des États-Unis, elle est ensuite celle des États voisins et culturellement proches. Inversement, le stato-centrisme souvent évoqué dans les études médiatiques précédentes n’apparaît pas comme une règle systématique.

Abstract. The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends directly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media should play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of earthquake media coverage by the international news reveals systematic biases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32 worldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that the press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news about seismic events was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559 magnitude 5+ events). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a typical framing of the “earthquake news”. Except for the “Nepal quake”, the duration of the coverage is usually very short. Thus, the news tends to focus on short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses, material damage and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the recovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely addressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news on impacts shows a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage estimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the role played by the international community in helping the “poor and vulnerable”. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to mentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being largely ignored. The notion of the “seismic crisis” also seems unclear, with aftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards are barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these biases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented. If scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a few hours after an event. Why not take the opportunity to familiarize people with the real timeline of seismic disasters?