Crisis Communications: the Toronto Experiment Take Two

I wrote a few days ago about the "difficulties" currently experienced by Toronto Mayor Rob Ford and the absolute idiocy in which he and his team have approached communications during that period. Despite the obvious harm to the city's reputation (and to the Fords themselves ...), this kind of lack of accountability has serious consequences for those of us who have to communicate to citizens during disasters. How do you build/maintain trust in that kind of environment ? 

A few days later, it seems nothing has been learned. The Ford camp is doubling down on its strategy ...one that appears doomed. Here's how I described it earlier: 

Maladroit: no matter what he does, he appears to lack any poise 

Obfuscating: he tries to divert attention, deflects questions, appears untruthful  

Reactive: his actions keep putting him on the defensive  

Obnoxious: everything he's doing is alienating more and more people 

Non-disclosing: he acknowledges nothing, keeps saying it's "business as usual" ... 

What our subject ought to be instead: 

Sincere: if you acknowledge a fault, it will in time be forgotten/forgiven 

Magnanimous: because calling the press "maggots" for doing their job is not a good tactic 

Assertive: chose a path of action, drive the agenda, don't appear to hide 

Responsive: chosing silence is not a good option when the whole world watches on 

Tuned in: don't ignore the chaos around you, show you still have control ..

Now, let's take a look at some actions since ... actions that follow the usually death-bringing CRETIN template of crisis communications.

Confrontational: calling the press "thick skulls" does not make the questions they ask go away!

Refusing to acknowledge reality:  while his official Twitter account is mired in banalities: 

A parody account is often very funny and sarcastic ... just look at the profile line: 
(by the way: does your crisis comms plan lay out how you'd deal with brandjacks or parody accounts ? )

Evasive and reliant on some bad advice, particularly from his brother (Councilor Doug Ford) who often speaks on behalf of the Mayor ... much to the dismay of many including a city councilor recently removed from the Executive Committee, She (Jaye Robinson) feels Torontonians need to hear the truth:

She believes her firing was also related to her comments that her residents want to hear a clear explanation from Mayor Ford — not statements from his brother, Councillor Ford, speaking on the mayor’s behalf.

Team-less: His chief of staff: gone, other staffers: gone ... and now the guys who got him elected and ran his first mayoral campaign, won't do it again ... they say he needs help ... Rob Ford? Just won't listen. 

(btw: i'm not piling on with all this on someone who's got a mental health and addiction issue ... i'm illustrating the sad state of affairs at Toronto's City Hall)

Irresponsible: seems hizzoner is nvolved with some really bad people: gangsters, drug dealers ... and refuses to address the issue ... which leaves room for all sort of interpretation AND lack of denials from the police ... 

Narcissistic: surrounds himself with an entourage of sycophants and ideologues who can't discern the greater good among the single-minded (simpleton-like) focus to "end the gravy train". All this resulting in fabulous headlines: 

No accountability = no trust ... the challenge for Public Information Officers

My good friend James Garrow published another great blog post today on the ongoing scandal about widespread spying on Americans by their own government. A state that is reading their emails, listening to their cell phones and much more. Here's an excerpt from Jim's post: 

What do we do when we have no trust left? This is not your fault, or my fault. (I check the logs, no one from the White House or Congress reads this blog. Hi NSA!) But we are the ones that have to deal with the fallout. We’re the ones who shout life-saving advice and recommendations into the ether, with nothing more than the cloak of, “they do this job because they are true believers; it’s certainly not for the money,” to protect us from the liars, the sycophants, the paranoid and the deniers. What do we do when that last shred of trust is gone?

By the way, Canada (thought the Communications Security Establishment), the UK via the GCHQ, also do the same. Big Brother IS watching.

Let's leave that aside. The purpose of this post is to talk about the growing mistrust in government by the public and what this means for those of us who have to communicate with audiences during a disaster. How can you do this effectively when the entity you represent lacks credibility? 

In broad terms, the public see all levels of government as a monolith ... one big organization ... "the man". For us to be effective communicators in a crisis, we must rely on a sense of trust and credibility. Unfortunately, that is slowly being eroded in our public space.

Just take a look at what's happening where I live. I reside in a suburb of Canada's largest city. A city headed by a mayor who reportedly smokes crack, whose principal adviser is his brother who's been accused of dealing drugs ... A chief magistrate who's been allegedly caught in a video smoking crack ... and with stories linking that video to a murder, gun play, assaults, more drug dealing and untimely accidents (falls from balconies ???). See a previous blog post on this whole story.

The craziest thing about this Borgias-like story is that the Mayor is still in office, pretending that it's business as usual and not answering any questions about this sordid affair. He won't talk about the issue .... won't step aside or seek help. So there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY ... meaning there is NO CREDIBILITY and therefore NO TRUST. That's at the municipal level.

Now, we move up a level ... in the last election, the ruling party unilaterally cancelled the construction of power plants not too far from my home. An obvious ploy to try to keep seats ... That's fine, electors expect that sort of tactics. What's not resonating well though is the sustained lies that followed about the actual costs of the contract cancellations. Now it appears they are at least 10 times the amount initially disclosed.

This lack of openness and transparency certainly didn't build any further trust in the government from the public. Now it's even worse: a report by the officer responsible for privacy and freedom of information reveals there was widespread destruction of emails and the police is now investigating to determine if criminal charges should be laid.

Notwithstanding the result of the police investigation, there has been no retribution for the staffers who deleted public records ... and the senior elected officials involved are still around ...Again, NO ACCOUNTABILITY ... means NO TRUST ... where are the good ol' days where the mere whiff of impropriety meant the "honourable member" would resign? 

Now, let's look at the ultimate level ... scandal and lack of openness and transparency permeates everything in Ottawa too. It begins with the Senate expenses scandals where senators appointed by our Prime Minister claimed expenses they were not entitled too. The lack of willingness to address the issue head on and the efforts to divert Canadians attention seem to be failing. The top guy is losing a lot of support ... not sure how long electors will remember the scandals but the objective seems to be to wait it out.

In the wake of all this, even the Prime Minister's supporters are starting to wonder about the rigid approach of his office and the lack of transparency. This sad episode even led to that same government MP leaving the party caucus.

Even worse. though, is the federal government's ongoing warfare against its own scientists who question the Tories policies on food inspection, climate change and a host of issues. Again, adding to the general mistrust towards politicians and the government as a whole.

Again the equation is quite frightening for those who need to reach out to the public in emergencies ... our very position is being undermined. 

NO TRANSPARENCY + NO ACCOUNTABILITY = NO TRUST + NO CREDIBILITY

Will people listen to us when their actions based upon our recommendations might save their lives?

Need another illustration? ... A very symbolic one that shows the blurring of the line between partisan politics and purely governmental work ... the Royal Canadian Air Force plane used to transport the Primer Minister got a new paint job. It went from a gun-metal livery ...



To this new colour scheme ... much to the dismay of most observers and professional military officers and defense staff ...

This scheme just so happens to reflect the colours of the ruling party ... just another coincidence say the people in charge ... a story that few believe.

How not to handle a crisis: the Toronto experiment

Okay, let's say you're the mayor of a large north-american metropolis. You got elected on a platform pretty much limited to taking a close rein on the city's bottom line. Your supporters love you for your tough "blue collar" attitude but many more people think you're a bully, are uncaring and lack vision.

You've been accused of being impaired at public events, of groping, of using profane language, of flipping the bird at fellow drivers and texting behind the wheel ... quite a track record.

Then, comes a real whopper. The country's largest newspaper which you accuse of waging a war on you and your administration, has a picture on its front page stating that there's a video of you smoking crack cocaine with drug dealers. 

What's your immediate reaction? to say nothing ... for seven whole days ... meanwhile, here's what happens (for a complete timeline ... see here) :

• it becomes public that people who you posed with in the drug den picture and video have been shot and/or killed.
• You fire your chief of staff and one of your cronies suddenly seems everywhere. 
• Your family, and especially, your brother, who's a city council member is the subject of a profile in the country's most influential newspaper about him being a drug dealer in his younger years.
• Comes out that your family has a long history of associating with unsavory characters
• You finally break your silence and deny the existence of such a video and then reports surface based on info from your own staff that you know where the video might be
• You then retreat into a series of lame public announcements where you refuse to answer any question about the ongoing controversy.
• Staffer after staffer leave your employment .... the sense is the ship is going down and the crew is getting out while they can ... meanwhile the captain is still blind to the looming iceberg.
• You remain totally oblivious to the greater picture and greater good of the city and people you're supposed to represent ... your council colleagues implore you to get help and step aside but you ignore them ... in fact, you state you'll run for reelection ! 

It should be clear by now to most readers of this blog that the behaviour above is pretty much the antithesis of a good crisis communications strategy.  Here's how our subject went wrong ... by being: 

Maladroit: no matter what he does, he appears to lack any poise
Obfuscating: he tries to divert attention, deflects questions, appears untruthful 
Reactive: his actions keep putting him on the defensive 
Obnoxious: everything he's doing is alienating more and more people
Non-disclosing: he acknowledges nothing, keeps saying it's "business as usual" ...

What our subject ought to be instead:

Sincere: if you acknowledge a fault, it will in time be forgotten/forgiven ...

Magnanimous: because calling the press "maggots" for doing their job is not a good tactic
Assertive: chose a path of action, drive the agenda, don't appear to hide
Responsive: chosing silence is not a good option when the whole world watches on
Tuned in: don't ignore the chaos around you, show you still have control ..

What do you think the mayor should do ? 

Different roles for different PIOs ... getting the big picture

I recently wrote about the critical importance of the information coordination function for any PIO. An aspect of the role that can easily be forgotten in the mad rush to push out info, especially on social networks. Although the coordination is a constant for any PIO, there are differences on what kind of work one has to do depending of who they are supporting.

The toughest thing to do, albeit usually pretty straightforward, is supporting an incident commander ( or IC) or more broadly, an incident command post. For an absolutely essential read on what this entails in the era of mobile technologies and social networks, you must read Jim Garrow's blog where Marcus Deyerin highlights his role as the on site PIO at the Skagit bridge collapse in Washington State.

A few of the key lessons learned as they relate to the use of social media ... Twitter in particular: 

• Twitter reigned as the superior tool for getting information out rapidly to a broad audience. [Note to Twitter - please, please don't do anything vis-a-vis your API or business model to mess this up for those of us in the emergency management field.]
• Twitter worked when phone and SMS didn’t. That won’t be true in every situation, but it was interesting nevertheless.
• Photos attached to tweets are great – but may not always work in a constrained data flow environment
• Once the media calls started coming in, I was no longer able to tweet. If I need to do this again, I’ll direct media calls to a different phone I have, so I can take calls on one phone and use the other phone for tweets / social media

A great illustration of the power and increasing expectations brought by social networks in incident-support communications. So, how would the role of the PIO differ at the incident command post from that of the PIO at the municipal or state level EOC for example? 

As I stated in my previous post on the role of the PIO, it's in the transition from incident-specific communications to consequence management information, where the role of the PIO evolves. One might be tempted to simplify this as the differences between tactical and strategic comms ... but that can be misleading.

There are similarities and areas in which both roles complement each other, Let's look at the use of social networks:

Incident PIO: running steam (twitter or any other social network) of the response and immediate actions .... using SM mostly as a way to push out info ... maybe responding to some queries ... because the PIO is so busy feeding the beast, there's actually little online engagement (although the phone keeps ringing ... if the lines/airwaves are still open )

Muni/State EOC PIO: amplify incident PIO social media output + create an online or SM portal for all emergency info from key stakeholders + CRITICALLY important: monitoring social media ... 

It all comes down to resources: the incident command post PIO is busy supporting his/her IC in sending out details on the response and tactical info as well as emergency info (shelter in place, evacuate, etc) ... Even a team of two or three PIOs from different first responder agencies would be hard pressed to do anything else in most large-scale incidents.

At the municipal or state EOC level, being detached from the purely operational communications needs, there's a greater ability to look at the broader picture and look at the impact on public health, transportation, etc. This also translates in being able to support the on site PIO with monitoring (legacy and social media) and engage online on their behalf. The VOST (virtual operation support team) concept can really shine in this kind of situation when implemented efficiently.

Other examples of the differences in the role of the PIOs:

At the incident command post, the info coordination is mostly done with other first responder agencies and a key contact at the EOC.

At the muni/state EOC, info coordination links back to the incident command post but is mostly looking at the broader picture: other city/state departments, federal government and the public sector (utilities and others)

Further differences:

At the ICP, the PIO gets the incident commander to approve the social media outreach parametres (as opposed to individual tweets for example) and other communications messages/products (news releases, first responder agency web updates, etc) ... the focus is operational ...

At the muni/state (or provincial) EOC ... in fact the higher you go, the levels of approvals necessary to obtain permission to send out info might vary according to whatever practice/policy is in place .... operational support comms would usually be approved by the lead PIO and the mgr/director of the EOC ... sometimes though, there might be a request for some messaging or a quote from an elected official ... that's when it can get messy and be delayed.

It is critical for any PIO to understand the different characteristics of his/her role depending of their assignment: tactical or strategic, Having had the opportunity to plan and coordinate the delivery of emergency info at both the ICP and provincial EOC levels, it can be a challenge.

A solution is to train as often as possible in setting up a Joint Information Centre (or crisis comms cell) at the strategic level and assign staff whose sole function is to liaise with the incident PIOs to ensure uniformity of messaging, or at the very least, the flow of info between all partners.

Even more valuable, is cross-training with first responder agencies with the two-fold goals of 1- ensuring they get used to working together and avoid comms silos (see my previous post) and 2- ensuring every PIO at all levels understand the pressures and expectations at the ICP and the EOC. That's where my recommendation that every response exercise include a communications/public affairs component comes to the fore.

These kind of partnerships will make everyone lives' easier. This is especially true in situations where a senior PIO is sent from the state/provincial EOC to help coordinate at the local level ... We hear the scariest words in the English language echo ..."I'm from the government and i'm here to help ..."  

Truth is ... the strategic outlook can be of help at the municipal and operational level ... especially for ongoing incidents ... a few days following the initial response. That function of the PIO ... the emergency info liaison role is growing in importance in my jurisdiction where local resources are often stretched and the need for comms and social media support are growing in the face of increased expectations from our audiences ... 

There you have it ! Collaboration is the only way all PIOs will be able to meet the growing expectations of the people we serve ... demands that grow heavier by the the day as social networks for emergency communications become the main channel for disseminating information.

The role of the Public Information Officer

I've spent a lot of time recently developing procedures for our public emergency information officers (or EIOs as we call them ... for emergency info officers). As I talk with colleagues and observe what's going on around us, I notice that a key function of the PIO/EIO's tends to be somewhat forgotten amid the pressure to be quick and relevant in the constant battle to provide information to the public, particularly on social networks.

We all understand the pressures brought by social media and the need to have a solid crisis comms plan in place as part of any response or business continuity plan. The need for immediacy often means the PIO's attention is focused on feeding the "beast". That social media imperative, while critical, should not overshadow what is to my mind, the primary responsibility of the PIO: coordinating information among all agencies/organizations involved.

A key factor is that the management of incidents and their consequences has evolved. It's fairly plain to see that incidents (fires, terror attacks, natural disasters) can no longer be managed in a comprehensive manner by a single agencies. There are just too many interdependencies involved. 

More and more, that's where Unified Command, comes in. While the primary responsibility to respond to the incident itself remains with a specific type of responder, the consequence management part now plays a greater role. Hence the need for multiple or joint ICs. 

I suggest, that a parallel framework exists to help individual PIOs ensure that all public messaging around an incident be coordinated. That's the main purpose of a JIC or Joint Information Centre. 

The problem is though, that it's hard for agencies to let go of decades worth of legacy thinking around incident management ... and sharing a piece of the "command pie" ... The same applies to some extent to communicators. Although breaking down silos can be difficult ... we simply have no choice. 

Our audiences expect us to work together, be coordinated and hear the "government" (the public doesn't distinguish between local/municipal or provincial/state or federal levels) speak in "one voice" ... it's all one thing to most ... The voice of the "Man" ... should therefore resound in unison.

A recent case in point ... (and I want to be clear here that I do not blame any specific organization or first responder agency ... I simply want to illustrate a point)

There was a major industrial fire in Ontario last week, just across the border from Michigan. A plastic recycling plant caught fire and sent plumes of billowing smoke that could be seen for miles and miles ...

Did people get worried? You bet! There was first talk and then instructions of evacuations in a radius of 1.5 miles around the plant and shelter-in-place orders for an even larger section of the city and town affected. (btw: see my friend Jim Garrow's blog on shelter in place and clear language during emergencies).

So, I hear of this fire and I go online. I see on the city's website that police is evacuating people and that a shelter in place order has been issued. I go on Twitter and see the same from the local fire service ... and then I see on the police twitter account that there are no evacuations ...

At that point, I was thoroughly confused .... So I go and check back. OK, now the city's website says only to shelter in place .... the fire and police soon match up as well ... 

Although the confusion did not cause any major issues ...It could have because the media and the public picked up on the lack of coordinated info. What's the risk to the public from the smoke? Should we leave? Stay home? Why can't we get the same message for those responding to this? 

So finally, there is, perhaps, no danger. But why are first responders wearing masks? And we're told to stay home? 

In my view, a lot of this confusion could have been avoided by the immediate set up of a JIC where all PIOs from the major agencies involved could have coordinated their messaging ... The beauty of the thing is that you don't even have to do it in person anymore. With mobile technologies, a virtual JIC is now a real option.

A quick google hangout ???? or google chat or using IPads ... could have put the PIOs on the same page especially when it came time to use their individual social network accounts to send out info.

So the "social convergence" is not only about social networks but those mobile devices and tech as well. It's time that agencies and governments start using the tools that the public they serve use every day ... 

We know our audiences turn to Twitter on mobile devices to get breaking news ....especially when it happens close to home (see a couple of good blog posts by my good friends Gerald Baron and Bill Boyd on that ...).

It's about the tech but also about our own professional reflexes ... how we react to emerging incidents. Yeah, tweet out that you're responding ... implementing your plans ... and keep sending out info ... but DON'T forget to coordinate with the other guy ... his audience is your audience ... are you in sync? 

That coordination is essential to the success of any PIO ... to managing public reactions and fears following an incident and to ensuring your credibility survives long after the ashes have gone cold.

Social media, digital volunteers, distance and coordination ...

It's been quite a week. First, the Boston Marathon bombing, then the fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas and today, severe weather, tornadoes and floods across the US Midwest. In all of these events, social media is player a big role.

In Boston, the investigation is being crowdsourced with digital volunteers coordinating through Reddit and the FBI and law enforcement are counting on the millions of people armed with mobile devices that can be real-time sleuths and provide valuable tips. Here are the two suspects.

Here's an excellent summary of the many stories on the role of social media in the aftermath of the bombing.



As far as the severe weather outbreak ... crowdsourcing, social networks, mobile technologies are finding their expressions through some impressive crisis mapping. ESRI once again shows the way.




Finally, the gigantic explosion at the fertilizer plant in Texas, in the little town of West, some distance from Waco proved to be devastating. 35 or so deaths and many more are still missing ... the social convergence phenomenon (mobile tech + social networks) have given us one of the most poignant videos we've seen in a long time:

I observed some very interesting exchanges last night about the use of hashtags ( #) on Twitter about the explosion. Two sources/contacts on Twitter that I respect had opposing views on what principal location hashtag should be used.

The NYC ARECS (Amateur Radio Emergency Communication Network - @nycarecs on Twitter) was using and promoting the use of the #waco tag:

@nycarecs : Report: Every home within a four-block area of the fertilizer plant is gone. West, TX #waco 3 mins ago · more » · @GlobalRevLive : BREAKING ...

@nycarecs : USE #WACO AS A HASHTAG FOR [WEST, TEXAS] EXPLOSION. #smem #vost PLEASE RETWEET


For some, closer to the action in Texas, this did not sit too well. There's a big difference, 

between the little town of West and Waco. Michael Walter (@michaelmwalter on Twitter)

an SMEM enthusiast and PIO for the Office of Emergency Management in Houston pointed 

that out to the New York ham radio crew.

Michael Walter ‏@MichaelMWalter

22h

DO NOT USE #WACO as Hashtag for #westexplosion or #westtx ! #vost #smem

Expand 

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorited 

Michael Walter ‏@MichaelMWalter

22h

@nycarecs #waco is not where the event is happening. most of the information is on #westtx and #westexplosion - please stop tweeting this.

 View conversation 

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorited 

.Now, is there a wrong and a right in this? How about a "closer appreciation" of the local considerations? I don't believe in micro-management and this applies to digital volunteers as well. That's why local knowledge is so essential to Virtual Operations Support Team activations and other crowdsourcing and crisis mapping endeavours in emergencies.

So, I'm my humble opinion, Michael was right and the New York ham radio folks, as well motivated as they are (and with a long list of accomplishments ...) were on the wrong side of digital collaboration on this one. What do you think? 

A Royal mess ... and no, this is not about that family in London ...

My good friend Gerald Baron has already chimed in on the brouhaha around the Royal Bank in recent days. His post talks about sending the right person with the right messages to do crisis communications. It's a good read as always.

For me, there are five critical components to effective crisis communications planning ... the 5 Ps:

1. Procedures (easy to use, flexible, allow for quick action)
2. People (how they are trained, skills needed, roster)
3. Preparation (key messages ahead of time = message mapping)
4. Practice (exercises, drills, full or table top)
5. Platform (the tech: emergency mgmt/BCP software + social networks)

Training is the key element of the second P ... the People part; and, as happens too often, it's the forgotten part. So now, imagine you're dealing with a Big Headline reading something like this: Canadian Bank (one that makes billions in profit) Fires Canadian Staff And Replaces Them With Foreign Workers.

Yep, that's the mess in which the Royal Bank of Canada finds itself in. No matter what the actual technicalities of "outsourcing" jobs are, the RBC is scrambling to express its position clearly. Things didn't start well:

As my friend Gerald Baron said is his piece, I'm sure that Ms Hirji is supremely competent in her job running HR for the bank. But was she really the best spokesperson to explain RBC's practices ... which are fairly common in large corporations? 

Being a senior corporate executive or elected official is NOT the same as being a proficient communicator ... especially in a crisis. Training to learn how to communicate clearly when things go wrong or your reputation is at risk, is of the ultimate importance.

The above video is an illustration of what NOT to do:

• appear jittery to the point of appearing as uncaring 
• avoid the issue and obfuscate
• expand on technicalities ... use jargon
• don't focus about the most crucial factor: the people involved.

To be honest, her big boss ... Gord Nixon didn't fare much better in a later interview with the CBC:

Yes, we understand that it's a common practice for big businesses to outsource IT work to firms from abroad but the very first words out of his mouth should have been about the Canadian workers impacted. About what RBC is doing FOR them and I'm sure they are doing good stuff. 

Again some key points. Your messaging should:

• emphasize your human values/face ... your compassion 
• point to a tradition of excellence, best practices, worker/community-centered approach to conducting business
• stress the huge benefits brought by your presence in many communities.

Perhaps this will serve to remind many leaders that leadership is also about clear and compassionate communications in a crisis or emergency. It's something that's occasionally beyond the most successful among us who are use to ferocious competition to get to the top of their field ... 

Crisis communications training builds on our shared human traits of compassion, empathy and not just on competence alone. 

Proactive crisis comms or emergency information .... or death ...

I've written in the past about the need for organizations dealing with a reputational threat or responding to an emergency, to be ready to occupy the public space quickly. The social convergence of mobile tech + social networks means that agencies and companies must now move at the speed of their audience (social media) and use the tools they use (mobile devices) to have a chance to be heard and be relevant. 

Simply put the traditional media is no longer the primary audience in a crisis. The news is now told by those witnessing or being impacted by events ... no intermediaries necessary. The time for a purely reactive crisis communications posture has gone by. Organizations that let others tell their story are putting their very existence in jeopardy. You can steer your own ship ... or have someone else run it aground ... 


Just ask the owners of the Costa Concordia and Carnival Cruises if they'd do things differently now ... Things go wrong, people screw up ... be ready ... You need to be able to monitor social networks and be able to adjust your "pitch" in minutes ... not stick to some corporate policy when everything is going wrong.

Emergency managers and private sector executives should now think of their organization as their own broadcasters during incidents. Take charge of the conversations ... right from the get go. It's not about message control ... that era is also gone ... It's about message competition. So, you need the right tools and policies to be effective, to be heard.

This can start with a sound Twitter strategy for example. Something very effective when done immediately and sustained ... such as my good friend James Garrow highlighted in a blog post on the City of Hoboken's response to a water main break. 

And now, with what may turn out to be the start of a new pandemic, the World Health Organization also took a Twitter-centric approach to its updates on H7N9:

WHO ‏@WHO

5 Apr

You read it on our Twitter account. As soon as we get new #H7N9 numbers, we’ll post them here. Full updates will follow on website as usual

Expand

Twitter is really a perfect tool for broadcasting your actions during a crisis or emergency. You can break down the info in digestible chunks and then follow up with more details on other social media and web platforms. Works great most of the time ...In fact, if journalists can win a Pulitzer Prize with their coverage of the aftermath of a tornado which destroyed their town and their office ... anybody should see the value in it.

But the tools don't stop with Twitter and other microblogs. Why not literally become your own broadcaster? Youtube and other livestreaming services allow you to do just that. Costs might be an issue but some services are fairly non-expensive. It's an idea that's been promoted by crisis comms expert Gerald Baron for a few years now.

I'd certainly recommend reviewing static or responsive-only crisis communications plans. Among hundreds of conversations during incidents, how will your voice be heard if you're whispering? Fact is, a sound strategy is to build an audience over the long-term so your stakeholders will WANT to hear YOUR voice when a crisis erupts because you'll have a rapport with them. That's worth about a million PR and crisis comms experts and consultants. 

So go ahead ... talk, listen, engage ... be social! 

Writing the right statement in a crisis

I was recently asked to write a statement about a tragic public safety issue in our province. While I accomplished the task rather quickly, I started to think afterwards about the key elements that need to be reflected in such a writing assignment.

First, let's be clear that this is not an apology type of statement where an organization responds to an issue it has created or is responsible for. This is about showcasing your organization's human side.

So, what are the key elements of that statement? Well, they are:

1. showing empathy/compassion
2. relaying a sense of action
3. presenting a positive outcome

This clearly follows one of the components of Dr. Vincent Covello's message mapping principles: Compassion + Competence + Optimism ... With a clear focus on empathy in the message delivery:

You can access the full video of Dr. Covello's to learn more about the message mapping technique. 

To really be effective, such a statement needs to be short and not feature any political or self-serving messaging ... it also needs to point the way to a brighter horizon/future. 

It's a hard balancing act ... Finding the right tone. Here's a great example of how to achieve this from the speech of Virginia Tech's Chancellor following the tragic mass shooting of a few years back: 

So here's a brief idea of how it can be done:

1. we share your grief .... collective sorrow .... all of us ... our thoughts and prayers .... with the victims, their families
2. our will is undeterred .... we will continue to fight XXXX, YYYY, ZZZZ  ... safer, more vibrant communities .... stronger ... positive alternatives .... 
3. together we can achieve this .... brighter future for us all .... we can all unite in this effort ...

Yes, it might sound formulaic ... but that's because it works ... and when delivered by a trained crisis communications spokesperson .... they carry weight and have a great impact on your stakeholders/audiences.

Here's more info on crisis mapping and the use of social media ... from a presentation I did with my colleague Barry Radford.

Integrating social media in your EM and/or BCP program

Most readers of this blog know that I also collaborate on the PTSC-Online community which is a web-based tool to exchange with Canadian emergency management, BCP professionals and others. In the past, I've worked with my colleague Barry Radford to develop a crisis communications/emergency information plan template with a focus on social media.

I also recently completed a series of post on the integration of social media into emergency management (SMEM) ... a detailed outline of the "social convergence" continuum as it applies to disaster response and EM programs in general. Here's a brief look at the continuum:

• NO SM: we still hear some EM types go: ..." I don't have time or the resources, or the money, to get into social media ..." or "... I don't know enough about it" ... or even ..."it's a fad and will go a way, we need official tools to communicate ..." 
• Limited use of SM: ... the first step is ... acceptance ... social media platforms are now key parts of our communities' fabric. We have to move at the speed of our audience and that means, in some cases, using social media as an old-fashioned one-way communications tool, Think of Twitter (for example), as a key component of your alerting/notification process. 
• Interactive use of SM: the realm of using more than one SM platform, integrating it into a good web-based information strategy. We know who some of the key "influencers" are, those who help shape public perception of our response.
• Conversational use of SM: , the Listen, Learn, Engage formula. Now that we know who our key stakeholders who may be helpful to us are, we actually go out and engage with them on social media platforms. We know who to interact with to counter false information and dispel rumours. 
• Operational use of SM: this is not only for the PIO or the JIC anymore, although SM play a key role in the provision of prompt, effective and accurate emergency information. Now, we're taking advantage of the "age of social convergence" where mobile devices/tech + SM = empowered citizens and volunteers ... This means we become aware of, and use to some degree, data provided by digital volunteers and crisis mappers. 
• Integrated use of SM: We integrate those data streams and analyses in the EOC. More than that, it's use is expanded in all aspects of EM, from preparedness and mitigation to recovery.  SM is now a fully integrated part of our electronic emergency management systems and a proven volunteer coordination tool.

In addition to posts on each of the six steps, I've also posted on topics like setting objectives and getting started, setting up a social listening operation and, most recently, measuring your progress on the social convergence continuum. Here are the links to all 10 posts in the series: 

Series introduction (October 12, 2011)

Part 1: starting from scratch (October 23, 2011)

Part 2: Setting objectives and measurement (October 23, 2011)

Part 3: Choosing your first social network (November 2, 2011)

Part 4 Interactive use of social media (November 22, 2011)

Part 5: monitoring social media as a routine and going into crisis mode (December 20, 2011)

Part 6: Conversational use of social media (February 11, 2012)

Part 7: Operational use of social media (April 15, 2012)

Part 8: Integrated use of social media (June 24, 2012)

Part 9: Gauging your progress on the SMEM convergence continuum (March 13, 2013)

Although I started writing the series in October 2011, a lot of the topics are still relevant and most of the links in the individual posts are still live. I hope you will find them useful and that you will also look at the other great content on PTSC-Online.