# data[].attributes.body
Zahid/Gabriel. He did not minimize harm since they did not make sure everyone knew the radio drama was not a real event and should have continously reminded the listeners

# data[].attributes.body
JP/Jeremiah

No. The broadcast was meant to entertain. However, they should have issued more warnings in the broadcast to prevent unnecessary chaos.

# data[].attributes.body
No, they did not. The broadcast was not a true story, and the announcer was not to blame for the people who failed to realise that the story was fictional. What's more, the announcer did state at the start of the broadcast that it was just a story and he was not to blame for those who tuned in late.

# data[].attributes.body
There was no violation of the code of ethics. There was already an announcement before the start of the radio play that it was make-believe, but they could repeat the announcement at intervals for those who had just tuned in.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes.

The announcer didn't minimize harm. He didn't warn the listeners who had just tuned in to the radio channel. Because of this, there was public outrage and overreaction.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes.
Jing Han/Lorraine.
The announcer has violated the Code of Ethics by not minimizing harm. By not constantly reminding the report was only a play, and he has cause anxiety and panic for the listeners

# data[].attributes.body
They Violated at least two of the code of ethics, which are minimizing harm and seek truth and report it.
 This is because what they reported was a lie and not the truth, and 
this caused widespread panic among the audience, which in turn caused 
harm to them.<br>

# data[].attributes.body
Cheng Feng & Jericho

He did not minimize harm since he did not repeat the announcement that the story was all part of a halloween play. Also, he was not accountable for their mistakes, as they caused harm to the public.

# data[].attributes.body
Tan Zhi en, Muhammed Danish Bin Massuryono, Alyssa Siow Shu Yin

Minimize harm. They caused harm. They did not reinforce the announcement that the broadcast was not real at regular intervals, he only mentioned it twice at the start and end of it which was unfortunately not sufficient. The listeners who started panicking to run for their lives did not stay tuned to listen the end of the announcement. Be accountable.They were not accountable for the damage. As

They did not clarify and explain their news coverage.

# data[].attributes.body
No.

Lim Chin Yong/Ian Hong Yi En

There was an attempt to minimize harm but it wasn't done as well as it should have been.

# data[].attributes.body
Minimizing harm was not done as the listeners thought it was for real.

They should have reminded listeners throughout

the broadcast that it was actually part of the radio play

show so that those who tuned in later would be

aware that it is just a play not a real broadcast

However since at the start of the broadcast they announced it was not for real, technically they did not make any mistake

Jun Yang

# data[].attributes.body
Marco, Danish M

No violation, it was clearly stated before the video that the broadcast was fictional. Even if people had tuned in late the smart thing would have been to contact the local news station instead of going into mass panic. Besides this was not even journalism, but an entertainment broadcast. Therefore it is not applicable to the code of ethics. As they made a point of informing the public of the fictional nature of the broadcast and were therefore covered in terms of accountability. The mass panic was solely the fault of the public and faulty information spread by neighbours.

Marco, Danish M

# data[].attributes.body
Was there a violation of the Journalist's Code of Ethics for this radio broadcast? If so, why? Or, why not?