Blog Post #1: Mock Press Conference Reflections

The Mock Press Conference that we conducted was meant to simulate the press conference that took place in 2004 regarding lead in the DC water supply. The main takeaways that I gained from this exercise included an increased understanding of how bad the problem had gotten and the role that the agencies played in this crisis.

When I had first read the Washington Post article from January of 2004, the issue of lead in the DC water supply seemed like a recent discovery. Many of the public officials and agencies quoted in the article told reporters that they were not aware of the issue. Several of the sources even stated that they were “shocked” and that this issue was “unusual”. Others pointed to lead paint as a potential source for lead contamination in houses. From this article, it seemed as if the public agencies and officials were not aware of the crisis surrounding lead in the DC public drinking water. After viewing some of the information that the agencies knew prior to our Mock Press Conference I realized that many of the agencies and public officials were aware of the issue. It was difficult to conduct the Mock Press Conference without continuing the lie under oath or openly admitting that the officials had lied and misled the public. During the simulation, it was difficult to keep track of all of the information and the timeline of the crises. The mock conference was a small representation of a much larger issue and longer timeframe so it was difficult to remember which information was publicly available at the time and which information the agencies knew internally. I definitely felt that at the time of the conference many of the agencies were quite far entrenched in the issue which made it difficult to give clear answers. Being so entrenched in contributing and covering up the issue led to competing statements from different agencies and made it difficult to give the public a clear unified answer. This experience gave me a deeper understanding of how complicated the problem was at the time and how difficult it was for the public to get clear information.


Additionally, this exercise gave me perspective on the role that the agencies played in this crisis. The Washington Post article that led to this press conference warned the public about the lead crisis, however, at the time the media and general public were not very aware of how the agencies contributed and attempted to cover up this problem. After receiving some of the materials in preparation for the Mock Press Conference I realized how much information was hidden from the public and the lengths that many of the organizations including the EPA, Department of Health, the DC Water and Sewer Authority, and the Washington Aqueduct had gone to cover up this issue. Many of these agencies had a public duty to uphold and they still acted in ways that did not reflect the public’s best interest. It was difficult to simulate the press conference balancing the knowledge that these agencies already had with the knowledge of the public.


Overall, this Mock Press Conference allowed us to put ourselves in the positions of the public officials and agencies that spoke regarding the DC Water Crisis. It allowed me to gain a deeper understanding of how bad the issue was at the time and how involved the agencies were in the crisis. It was difficult to simulate this press conference due to how far the problem had gotten at the time and I now have an increased perspective of this situation.

Comments

  1. rf2021September 21, 2021 at 11:00 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. rf2021September 21, 2021 at 11:03 AM

    I was also surprised by the discrepancy between what the agencies said that they knew or did not know in the Washington Post article and what the agencies knew according to the documents we received for the mock press conference. I had been mostly thinking about how hard it was for the agency representatives at the press conference because of all of the confusing information and lack of communication, but I appreciate your point about those same factors making it tough for the public to get accurate information as well. I can’t imagine being in this situation and not knowing whether I could use my tap water or not. I remember traveling a few times and finding it annoying to not be able to use the tap water, but at least I knew for sure and it was for a short amount of time. The uncertainty about whether the tap water was safe, what activities it was or was not safe for, and for how long the situation would last would be so stressful.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog Post #2: The Botanist Who Defied Stalin

Whilst reading this article that discussed the life and contributions of botanist Nikolai Vavilov, I had several reactions. Vavilov and his team prioritized science at a time in their country where science merged with politics. Their views of science and botany were not in alignment with the politics taking over their country which lead to Vavilov himself being jailed. Furthermore, his team was left to protect the scientific contributions and seed repository. The repository was under attack from opposing political figures and starving citizens.  This article really challenged some of my views of scientific ethics. Vavilov and his team pledged their commitment to science over politics. This is similar to the challenges that scientists faced in other totalitarian regimes at the time. However, I find challenging that in a country where millions were starving, even several of the members themselves, they placed the upkeep seed repository above the well-being of the public. While ...
Read more

Blog 5: Boeing 737 Case Study

In this blog post, I will discuss background information related to the context I have selected for my final project. I will be exploring the Boeing 737 Max crashes and subsequent groundings which occurred between 2018 and 2020. This case is a current, real-world controversy that involves engineering, public policy, the environment, and members of the public.  In 2018 and 2019 the Boeing 737 Max passenger aircraft was involved in two major plane crashes which resulted in the death of 346 people. Following these crashes the aircraft was grounded from all travel across the world from March 2019 and December 2020. This 20-month grounding by the Federal Aviation Association (FAA) was the longest recorded for a U.S. airliner and cost Boeing $20 billion in direct costs and an estimated $60 in indirect losses (Isidore, 2020). While the plane was grounded, a series of investigations were conducted by the FAA, Congress, and multiple other government agencies. Reviews by engineering panels ...
Read more

Blog 6: The Young Professional's Survival Guide & Why Things Go Wrong

One of the chapter's that we read this week from the Young Professional's Survival Guide focused on the topic of "Why Things Go Wrong". Related to ethics in the workplace, there are common pitfalls one can avoid in order to try to keep things from going wrong. Oftentimes ethics can be a slippery slope and avoiding these pitfalls can help keep a professional on the "right" track. In the chapter, the authors introduced several dangers that lead professionals to cross the boundary into unethical actions. Some of these dangers included incrementalism, rationalization, and pressure from outside sources. I found several of the psychological experiments used as examples of dangers to be quite interesting and it lead me to consider the overlap of ethics in academic science and the workplace. The two experiments that were used as examples and that stood out to me in this study were Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment and Milligram's electric shock study. Th...
Read more