CAS553:

Defining Disaster Communication

Overview

Welcome to HLS/CAS 553. This course provides an integrative perspective regarding communication as part of Homeland Security and Public Health Preparedness. Many of you are or will be enrolled as degree or certificate students in the Public Health Preparedness program. Many of you are professionals or practitioners working in public health. A few of you are likely to be undergraduate or graduate students interested in learning about disaster communication. Students in this course thus will be coming from varied backgrounds which will enhance the educational experience.

Objectives

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

• Describe the overall course objectives
  • Define three core types of communication that comprise disaster communication and their role in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery
  • Identify historical trends in crisis, risk, and emergency communication
  • Discuss the roles, rules, and relations that distinguish several groups who will be key audiences to consider in disaster communication
  • Define disaster communication forms and functions
  • Discuss several barriers to effective disaster communication.

Defining Disaster Communication: Road Map

Note: The purpose of the Lesson Road Map is to give you an idea of what will be expected of you for this lesson. You will be directed to specific tasks as you proceed through the lesson. Each activity in the To Do: section will be identified as individual (I), team (T), graded (G), ungraded (U), or pass/fail (P/F).

To Read

• Required
  • Textbook Chapter 11: Communication and Risk
  • Hughes, J. M, & Gerberding,  J. L. (no year) Anthrax Bioterrorism: Lessons Learned and Future Directions, Emerging Infectious Diseases 
• Optional
  • Communicating during emergencies: FCC consumer facts (http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/emergencies.html)

To Do

In this lesson you will complete the following activities:

1. Student Questionnaire Form (I, U)
2. Initial Team Activity (I, U)
3. 2001 Anthrax Attack Communication Issues (I, G)

Topics

• Defining Disaster Communication
  
• Framing Disaster Communication as Group Communication  
  
• Framing Disaster Communication as Audience Analysis and Group Communication
• Integrating Risk, Crisis, and Emergency Communication as Disaster Communication
• Passive versus Active Exposure to Disaster Information: Disaster Communication Forms
• Barriers to Effective Disaster Communication
• Summary
  

Defining Disaster Communication

Disaster communication is an interdisciplinary topic focused on explaining, predicting, and describing the use of verbal, nonverbal, and visual communication forms to prepare, respond, and recover from natural and unnatural disasters. Seeger et al. (2003) indicate that natural disasters often involve large scale disruptions in the environment. Despite the chaos they create for the daily lives of humans, natural disasters mostly occur as a result of normal phenomenon, such as hurricanes or tornadoes. Unnatural disasters, including terrorism, may also involve large scale disruptions in the environment, but the origin is not the result of normal phenomenon. Thus, it adds a dimension to communication that may turn fear into anger, and bring the realm of uncertainty and lack of control to the forefront of efforts to communicate.

What to do, when to do it, how to prepare, when to respond, how to prevent events in the first place — all of these messages and more are part of our everyday lives relating to disasters. They come from a seemingly endless array of sources that include health care organizations, elected officials, volunteer organizations, the media, friends, family, entertainers, and even those individuals who threaten to harm us. They are delivered via multiple modes that include face-to-face conversations, television, radio, newspapers, and internet. The contexts in which such messages occur vary as well, as work places prepare for both natural and unnatural disasters that involve communicating with us about disaster preparedness, public spaces are forced to adapt to risk through increased security measures at sites of sports and other entertainment venues, area hospitals make pronouncements about their roles in evacuation and other plans for dealing with potential disasters, together with schools, churches, and homes. The scope for addressing disasters is thus quite broad, so the skills needed to communicate to promote planning, timely and efficacious response, and recovery require some parameters.

Framing Disaster Communication as Group Communication

The skills to communicate in disaster situations require group interaction. Thus, assignments will be carried out in small groups throughout the course, and the course content will include strategies for working in groups within organizations, such as developing a disaster communication plan, and outside organizations, such as working between agencies and with volunteer groups to prepare for disasters. Group communication is defined as social interaction between two or more people who influence each other's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. The roles of each group member, the rules by which they operate, and the relations which form among members all affect the kind of influence that occurs. Thus, framing disaster communication as group communication emphasizes roles, rules, and relations.

Framing Disaster Communication as Audience Analysis and Group Communication

Audience analysis is a concept that cuts across all types of communication. It draws attention to the strategic nature of communication designed to influence. Once a potential audience for communication is identified, an effort to plan for the roles, rules, and relations contributing to communication with the group or within the group becomes more transparent. For example, in considering audiences for disaster communication activities, the media, the public, first responders, businesses, hospitals, and public health practitioners are among the audiences to include in plan. Communication with each of these audiences varies along the lines of the roles, rules, and intermember relations. Table 1 suggests some of these possible differences.

Table 1. Variances Between Groups to Consider in Disaster Communication

Audience	Roles	Rules	Relations
Media	To inform the public	Be there, be first, be accurate	Competitive
Public	To be informed	Protect self and family, safeguard home and livelihood	Trust some public sources and distrust others
First Responders	To assist affected citizens	Give aid	Altruistic
Businesses	To safeguard business and employees	Protect information	Profit and survival oriented
Hospitals	To provide health care services	Be accessible and equitable	Caring and curing
Public Health Practitioners	To safeguard the public's health	Exercise authority to protect the population	Bureaucratic and hierarchical
Volunteers	To offer support	Augment other emergency service providers	Decentralized and independent actors

Integrating Risk, Crisis, and Emergency Communication as Disaster Communication

Disaster communication as an interdisciplinary pursuit requires integration of risk communication, crisis communication, and emergency communication. Groups from private and public organizations that have varied levels of experience in working with one another must cooperate and collaborate in these efforts to increase their effectiveness. Table 2 includes some overarching aims relating to different audiences and these three components of disaster communication.

Risk Communication

Risk communication broadly defined focuses on risk estimates and consequences. At no time in the history of this nation has the public health mission of promoting the public's safety resonated more clearly with the public, government, and those whose professional duties will be aligned with the charge. While public health professionals have often performed their tasks in obscurity, the events of 9-11 brought public health glaringly into the limelight. Public safety has always included emergency preparedness as one component of public health, with tornadoes, floods, toxic spills, and gas emissions falling within this rubric. The addition of bioterrorism and other terrorist threats as a priority in emergency preparedness points squarely to the role for risk communication as a critical framework within which to conduct the business of public health. Risk communication addresses a negative event or hazard that threatens the public's safety, with communication about that hazard focusing on the probability of its occurrence multiplied by its magnitude, weighed together with consideration of less quantifiable factors such as social values (Covello, 1992). The likelihood of a tornado hitting some geographic regions, for example, is greater than in others, and the public health effort put toward that possible emergency is greater in areas with higher risk, given that the magnitude of harm associated with a tornado can be death or extreme injury. Predicting the likelihood of a toxic spill is far less precise, although the magnitude of harm associated with the risk contributes to public health professionals' consideration of the issue and, often, the preparation of a plan to address the possibility. Prior to 9-11, the probability of such an event appeared to be very small, although the magnitude of harm predicted should it occur was expected to be great, again encompassing death and disability. The ranking of the threat and the way public health professionals planned for and communicated about it, therefore, placed the issue squarely within a planning category rather than an action item. Following 9-11 , the public has been told that the probability of another terrorist attack is 100 percent. The magnitude of harm associated with such an attack will depend partly upon the preparedness of public health professionals.

Crisis Communication

Crisis communication, as summarized in Seeger et al. (2003), addresses threats to an organization's ability to achieve its goals. These events range from obvious threats to core functions of an organization to less obvious threats. Chemical or nuclear disasters associated with chemical or nuclear power plants arise as a result of the organization's primary activity which poses a known threat and for which specific action may be planned in advance. First responders, for example, need to be aware of what chemicals a plant produces, what hazards they pose in isolation or combination, as liquids or air borne, and the strategies in place to address potential problems. These types of organizations should communicate within and outside the organization about these threats and plans to avoid, detect, and address them. On the other hand, an example of a less predictable threat to the core function of an organization is illustrated by the events of 9-11 in 2001 for commercial airlines. While airlines take many precautions for the safety of passengers, 9-11 created a crisis for the airline industry that would have been difficult to address with a prior plan.

Emergency Communication

Emergency communication alerts emergency personnel, those affected, and media about the existence of an actual threat and actions to alleviate or reduce harm. The three primary components of the United States' emergency communication system include the 911 telephone Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP) and call dispatch system, the Emergency Alert System, and radio and/or broadcast or cable television station news and updates. Emergency personnel often find out about emergencies through 911 calls. The dispatcher receiving a call has been trained to route the call to local emergency personnel, including medical, fire, and law enforcement. The Enhanced 911, or E911, system automatically reports both the telephone number and location of calls. While a vital component for communicating an emergency, the system may become overloaded during an emergency, an event that may be addressed in advance with a plan for communicating if this occurs. Mobile phones make the identification of a user's location more difficult, causing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to require wireless telephone carriers to provide E911. In the event that a carrier does not yet use technology that meets the FCC rules, consumers must: tell the emergency operator the location of an emergency right away and give the wireless phone number so that if the call is disconnected, an operator can call back. These guidelines should become public service announcements in all areas to increase the effectiveness of emergency communication.

Table 2. Overarching Aims Relating to Risk Communication,
Crisis Communication, and Emergency Communication

Audience - Role	Risk Communication	Crisis Communication	Emergency Communication
Media - To inform the public and emergency personnel by being there, being first, and being accurate in a highly competitive marketplace of messages	To inform the public about what poses a threat to whom at what time, in what location, and with what consequence	To communicate links to organizations as sites that pose threats, sites that may provide shelter from threats, and/or sites that are threatened	To alert the public about an ongoing threat and activate emergency personnel; to communicate evacuation guidelines, shelter locations, and sites for aid
Public - To seek information about ways to protect self, family, home, and job from trusted sources	Seek and use information to understand risk situations and take action to achieve protection	Seek information to understand possible crisis situations and take action as needed	Listen and act to minimize potential harm by following emergency directives (evacuation orders, etc.)
First Responders - To gain information about who needs what type of assistance in what location	Establish response plans for specific risks and communicate the plans within and outside the responder group as appropriate	Communicate what is required to address emergency and what is needed to respond within and outside the responder group as appropriate	Establish emergency services and training protocols. Include plans and training for the responsibility of providing "Real Time" information to others.
Businesses - To seek information about threats to business and employees, safeguard information about organization's deficits	Communicate to their employees and the surrounding community about potential risks related to the business functions	Communicate what is known, what actions are being taken, and what the public should do to minimize their risk	Seek necessary information to protect employees, the public and business infrastructure; act to limit an emergency's effects for the organization
Hospitals - To gain information about who needs services and triage based on needs; alert staff	Assess risk situations and develop response plans and capabilities to provide medical services for relevant scenarios for their community	If the crisis involves the hospital directly, include everything a business would do in response	Communicate to perform emergency medical services in response to the needs of those impacted by the emergency
Public Health Practitioners - to obtain information about threats to population health and strategies to limit threats	Assess risk situations and develop communication plans about risk for their community insuring that there are adequate response plans for relevant scenarios	Assess the crisis situation to determine impacts to public health; communicate to the public what steps can be taken to reduce their risk	Assess the emergency to determine impacts to public health and take action to communicate to the public what steps can be taken to reduce their risk
Volunteers/Volunteer Organizations	Assess risk situations and develop response plans for communicating to mobilize volunteers in relevant scenarios	Assess the crisis situation and communicate what services can be provided to support a community in need	Assess the emergency situation and communicate what support the volunteers have to offer

 

Integrating Risk, Crisis, and Emergency Communication as Disaster Communication

The fact is that we often make very little effort and have no intention to be exposed to information about disaster. This does not mean that we are not influenced by messages about disasters. Disaster communication occurs in three forms: visual, verbal, and nonverbal.

Visual Forms of Disaster Communication

Many messages which we are passively exposed to are visual. Pictures of the devastation of a hurricane, the crumbled buildings following the Oklahoma bombing or the images after 9-11 are all examples of visual messages emblazoned in our memories. These visual communication forms evoke emotion and tell a story, thus providing a form of narrative evidence to shape attitudes and behaviors. Some of these visual messages to which we are passively exposed address role occupants. The expectations that individuals have about a role for government, for first responders, for volunteers, and even for themselves during disasters will be shaped by visual images. Recall the media's role and rules (i.e., to be there, be first, and be accurate) as one audience for which strategic disaster communicators may plan communication efforts. Their intention is to be there, be first, and be accurate, but also to be more memorable than the competitor. 

Verbal Forms of Disaster Communication

In addition to the visual messages to which we are passively exposed, there will be both verbal and nonverbal messages. Again, we often have to make little effort to be exposed to these messages. Friends and neighbors, pastors and employers, and — again — the media will speak or write about who is responsible, what should be done, why more is not being done, what to expect, how to act and feel, and a host of other issues. The spoken discourse is more likely than the written discourse to reach us without any active intention on our part. We have more control over what we read. However, even with written discourse, in efforts to be informed, our choices to read some content may be associated with our passive exposure to ideas, opinion, and information that we were not seeking.

Nonverbal Forms of Disaster Communication

In many cases, accompanying the verbal communication of a source of disaster information will be nonverbal messages. When the spokesperson for a community ravaged by a hurricane speaks on a national news channel, the passion in her voice, the angry gestures, the direct eye contact, etc. all form an impression and contribute to the meaning of the verbal messages. For this reason, sources chosen to speak to represent government or agency views during times of disaster should be selected in part based on the ability to be aware of and control nonverbal messages. This may require as much planning and practice as preparing the verbal message. This should not be judged as support for dissemination of just a verbal message which will also contribute to the construction of meaning. There is an expectation to see the source of the message, in part because belief in the trustworthiness of its content will be judged by nonverbal behaviors. Thus, passive exposure to disaster communication shapes expectations about people, roles, events, and even governments and countries.

Despite the reality of an increasing number of messages about disaster around us, we still find ourselves actively seeking more information about disasters and wanting to talk about the information that we find. As we entered the 21st century, more than half of Americans reported that they were using the Internet to seek health information (Weiss, 2001). We do not have similar statistics about how often we seek information about disasters. We do know that even as disaster occurs, online news sources, blogs, and email exchanges reveal the active exchange of communication about the event. In efforts to advance disaster preparedness, government resources to identify strategic planning endeavors by terrorists often involve complex strategies to chart the online communication. One of the challenges of the 21st century in the U.S. has become drawing parameters in association with citizen rights to privacy in association with communication online, by telephone, and other modalities, and efforts to thwart terrorist activities. Here, too, planning associated with introducing these activities to the public is needed. Media reports may emphasize the encroachment into citizens' rights over the protection of citizens' lives and livelihood. Both aims must be balanced in meeting goals for disaster readiness.

The latter reflects the multifaceted scope of sources active in the dialogue about disaster preparedness. Elected political representatives spend a lot of time and monies debating and making policies about disaster readiness. Physicians, too, carry on a running dialogue about readiness and response to disasters. Public health professionals, including field staff that maintains vital records of births and deaths, clinic nurses, and professionals such as epidemiologists–despite working at sites sometimes far from previous disasters—strive to be prepared through readiness to communicate about disasters with the publics they serve.

Barriers to Effective Disaster Communication

Across the three phases of disaster communication, several barriers to effective communication exist.

Lack of a Common Knowledge Base

How much each audience knows shapes the ability to respond to messages. Too little knowledge contributes to the inability to act on recommendations. Assuming that an audiences has more knowledge than they actually do about a situation may lead to a lack of trust based in the belief that information is being kept from an audience.

Real World Case: Flooding

During floods the media consistently tells their audiences to boil their drinking water without describing the process. For boiling of drinking water to be effective, the water must be boiled for a minimum time (and time adjusted for altitude).  Often these requirements are not communicated and the recommended action may not be effective. In recent years television news organizations often refer viewers to a web page for more information on treating water. It is a big assumption that someone affected by a flood will have access to the internet.

Failure to Listen

Disasters may cause all audiences to resist listening, to hear what they want to hear, and to act accordingly. This is not limited to the media or the public. Professionals and first responders also form learned responses to certain stimuli and act accordingly. The characteristics of a specific situation may require adaptation based on understanding information that has been communicated.

Real World Case - Sago Mine Disaster, January 2, 2006

In the Sago Mine Disaster the emergency response team reported they found "signs of life." Because of the limited communication capability of the rescue team and a strong desire to find the miners safe, the message was translated by the filters of the emergency workers and families to a message of "all alive." This one communication failure increased the pain and suffering of the rescue workers, the community, and most importantly the families of the miners.

(You may wish to review more information on the communication surrounding the Sago Mine Disaster at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Sago_Mine_disaster)

Distractions

During efforts to build disaster readiness, distractions relating to all of the more immediate issues facing the public, businesses, health care delivery systems, and governments function to limit the cognitive and behavioral resources devoted to messages about disaster preparedness. Effective disaster readiness communication involves a component of planning to overcome these distractions by providing compelling reasons for audiences to be interested based on their roles, rules, and intermember relations.

Real World Case - Family Disaster Readiness

In appeals to families to prepare for disasters, long lists of items to be purchased and stored comprise a frequently mentioned readiness approach. Families may pay little attention to these messages, distracted by the realities of too little space to store the belongings and items they use every day, and too little money to purchase necessities or to save for retirement. It is necessary to provide a compelling message which links preparedness to responsibilities around which families are already committed. This may include the addition of a phrase, such as "When disasters such as tornadoes, hurricanes, or other weather events occur, it is often at night. Electrical power will likely be disrupted and local grocery stores closed. To prepare for this event, have a flashlight in a location in each bedroom where the occupants know where it is at and can easily reach it. Keep two days of food and water stored in a location where you and your family know where it is at and can get to it…." (You may wish to review more information on communication designed to get families to prepare for disasters at: http://www.redcross.org/portal/site/en/menuitem.d8aaecf214c576bf971e4cfe43181aa0/?vgnextoid=72c51a53f1c37110VgnVCM1000003481a10aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default)

Lack of Concentration

During communication based on preparedness, this can relate to the seeming distance in time related to the topic. During disaster response periods, communication may be competing with direct examples of loss, including family and friends, home, work site, and even entire communities. While communication to promote concentration about preparedness may require a facilitator to promote action, communication to promote concentration during response may require brief, explicit, action-oriented content. During recovery, the opportunity to be more reflective and expand upon experiences may be one that promotes concentration. These interactions may suffer from efforts to limit the time spent talking. Survivors may regard attempts to limit their input as attempts to ‘silence' them. Yet, policymakers may view the extensive time spent ‘telling their stories' as a waste of their time. Once more, a clash between roles, rules, and relations may pose a barrier to desired outcomes.             

Real World Case - Concentration, Communication, and Preparedness

Efforts to concentrate may be lacking during communication based on preparedness. This can relate to the seeming distance in time related to the topic. Communication research has long shown that events which seem to be far in the future have a difficult time competing with what is going on in the present. Even the use of fear appeals relating to negative outcomes which may occur in the future as a result of failure to prepare in the present are often unsuccessful. Thousands of Americans continue to bask in the sun despite clear messages aimed at warning them about the links between this behavior and skin cancer in the future. When asked, many may be unable to recall specific information about the evidence linking this past time activity to a health harm, as they selectively do not attend to the information. Messages promoting disaster preparedness are also likely to be perceived as fear appeals aimed at scaring the listener into action and generate selective time and attention. It is important to include an explicit bridging statement to link a current responsibility and role to the desired preparedness action to prompt fuller attention. For example, "If a disaster occurs, parents are likely to be at work and children at school. To know that your child will be well-cared for, parents should ask their children's school to provide them with information about disaster preparedness."

To read about this phenomenon in more detail, you may wish to consult the following resource:

Ellenbogen, M. A., Schwartzman, A. E., Stewart, J., & Walker, C. (2002). Stress and selective attention: The interplay of mood, cortisol levels, and emotional information processing. Psychophysiology, 39, 723-732.

Summary

Disaster communication requires us to integrate risk communication, crisis communication, and emergency communication into a new form of communication that must address all the key elements of these types of communication while addressing various audiences who need to plan to communicate about disasters. When disaster communication works well, it sustains the public, energizes first responders and volunteers, and gets help to the victims quickly and effectively. During and immediately following the 9-11 attacks, then New York Mayor Giuliani was present, told the people of New York and the United States what was being done, how it was to be done, what the people needed to do in order to be as safe as possible, and what he was doing to support the first responders in their jobs. He gave frequent updates, dodged no questions, and when he didn't know something, said he didn't know but would get the answer. Then he followed through and got answers. On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina came ashore in Mississippi and Louisiana and destroyed much of the area. In this disaster, no one emerged as an effective leader in Louisiana. The poor disaster communication stands in stark contrast to effectiveness of Mayor Giuliani during the 9-11 attacks.

Defining Disaster Communication: Activities

Student Questionnaire Form

Complete the student questionnaire form to help the instructor get to know everyone. (Note that your responses will go only to the instructor, not other classmates.) (I, U)

Initial Team Assignment

Check the class roster to see what team you have been assigned to. You can also access the course roster, by clicking on the Communicate link in the left-hand menu. Click on the Course Roster link and then click on the Teams link in the upper-right hand corner. Finally, click on the Members link below the team names to find which team you are on. Post an introductory message to your team's discussion area. You can also acces your team discussion forum by clicking on the Activities link in the left-hand menu. Click on the Lesson 1 activities folder. Click on the Team Introductions folder and finally click on the Team Introduction discussion forum. (Note that these posts will be visible to the instructor and your fellow team members.) (I, U)

2001 Anthrax Attack Communication Issues

Based on the Hughes & Gerberding reading, identify communication issues in the 2001 bioterrorism-related anthrax outbreak. Write a 1-2 page paper considering how verbal, nonverbal, and visual forms of communication functioned in these issues and defining the "golden triangle" of response. Submit your paper to the 2001 Anthrax Attack Communication Issues Drop Box. (I, G)

References

Covello, V.T. (1992). Risk communication: An emerging area of health communication research. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 15 (pp. 359-373). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Seeger, M., Sellnow, T., & Ulmer, R. (2003). Communication and Organizational Crisis. Westport, CT: Praeger.