Crisis communications and social convergence or what to do when your audiences know more than you.

Crisis Communications planning has changed. Gone are the long deliberations about strategies to adopt when an incident occurs.If you haven't got a system, a protocol in place before ... you're behind the 8 ball right away.

Social convergence has empowered our audiences: they now form their own collective (almost hive-like) alerting systems and their own news networks. In other words, when a crisis erupts or an incident occurs, they'll often have more information at their disposal then you will. So what to do? How to stay relevant? 

It begins and ends with listening: social media monitoring. From gauging the initial reactions and amplification of your alerting/warning messages to engaging in continued dialogue, having the ability to listen is now a critical element of any crisis comms response. Again, here are the five reasons why social listening is a must in an emergency or crisis: 

1. validating how your messages are being received/acted upon
2. detecting rumours that put public safety in jeopardy or may hinder your response 
3. isolating and routing calls for help through appropriate channel (we know people will call for help on social networks ... what will you do? 
4. identifying threats to your reputation that could lessen your ability to fulfill your mandate
5. adding to your comprehension of the incident by enhancing your situational awareness (people will share videos, pictures, tweets, messages about what's going on.

So you need to know where your audiences are, what news they're getting ... where they share online. You'll identify key influencers, engage in conversations, be proactive in nipping rumours in the bud ... in other words (by using social networks and mobile devices) you'll be heard and you'll be relevant. 

Here's a good resource to ensure you might be as ready as you can be:

You have to remember that you're now in a competition to have your messages heard. The public's attention is being sought from all fields. Is your crisis or disaster relevant? To what audience? That's an issue well explained by my good friend James Garrow.

The legacy media fully understand that the landscape has changed, they are grasping with relevance and accuracy ... they're adapting to the new reality. Shouldn't you ? 

.

The hidden kernel of truth in the social media universe ...

Another week ... another gun-toting maniac kills a dozen people in Washington, DC. Seems almost banal by now .... 

A constant, in this tragedy, and in any other modern day crisis, is the growing importance of social networks in how the story is told and unfolds. Crowdsourcing tools (and I include apps that let people listen in on police scanner) have changed what's news, how it's created and, too often, how it's wrong.

In the never-ending battle to be first, legacy media outlets are now in a headlong rush to push out facts ,,, info often obtained online ... and often issued by them without any verification or filter on whether or not the public interest in served in publishing every detail (think police scanners ...). So, we now have TV stations who quote police scanners, 

That rush to be first leads to mistakes and often painful corrections. For some digital news organizations, this correction process is a life-or-death issue in terms of their credibility.The shooting in Washington saw another litany of media mistakes ... a good list here.

The public will participate whether we like it or not ... the first instances, such as in the Boston Bombing might not be entirely positive. But the truth is that the crowd is smarter ...the collective intelligence unwavering and unstoppable ... and it learns! 

So, is public participation in reporting a crisis or providing damage assessments after a disaster to be discounted? Certainly not. In fact, FEMA's is maximizing the power of the crowd in the current floods in Colorado. Case in point is their new "Disaster Reporter" program.

Other organizations recognize the need to monitor social media to gather more info and get a better operational picture. Frankly, they either do this or run the risk of being marginalized.

I had the opportunity in the last few months to lead a project on behalf of Agincourt Strategies, and collaborating with two key experts (Gerald Baron and Bill Boyd), to provide a social media monitoring training program for the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. 

It's now an imperative for organizations in all fields, public or private, to have the ability to stay abreast, minute by minute, of any crisis. To do so, they must monitor social media and for the following five reasons: 

1. emergency information/messaging validation: how are your audiences reacting to your messages? 
2. identifying reputational threats? what's being said out there that could negatively impact public perception of your response/actions in a crisis ... and hamper your ability to fulfil your mandate? 
3. Routing calls for help or assistance through the proper channels ...we know people will use social media to call for help in a disaster ... few, if any, public safety agencies are ready for this ...yet they must have a plan in place to do it ...
4. detecting and countering rumours: a critical function of any social listening operation ... in fact, probably the most important aspect at the onset of any crisis.
5. finally, gathering info (pictures, videos, tweets, posts) that provide you with a better idea of what's going on ... adding to your comprehension of an event.

This five-part rationale for social listening during a crisis serve everyone to some extent: a PR crisis, an emergency response, a public health risk .... It's essential because the world now moves at the speed of Twitter ... Sees the story unfold through Instagram or Youtube ... and provides ongoing comment on Reddit ...

Are you listening? 

Even the best sometimes mishandle a crisis: Major League Soccer and the YSA chant

Those who know me realize i'm a total football fanatic (read maniac). I"m a fierce supporter of the Montreal Impact, follow the English Premier League and currently coach two soccer teams.

Over the last year or so, I've come to particularly like watching Major League Soccer (MLS) games. They are usually entertaining even though they might not feature the same level of skills and tactical display found in big European leagues.

However, there is one area where the MLS is a trailblazer in my opinion and that's in online and social media engagement. The people at the league HQ are very adept at producing and promoting their online content. In a way, they don't have a choice since they're yet to secure a contract with a big time TV network to show the games. So social they went ... and it's working.

Every team and their fans have an enthusiastic social network presence. That's great since it's based on fan support and promotes engagement from players in their communities.

MLS has also used social network to explain some referee controversies ... where calls from ref and the league's disciplinary committee are dissected very effectively. A good way to avoid further issues/crises:

So, the MLS is usually quite adept at handling issues. But recently, one of its biggest teams (the New York Red Bull or NYRB), committed one of the cardinal sins of crisis communications: don't blow things out of proportion ... In other words, don't make a small problem worse.

For years now, MLS Commissioner Don Garber has worked hard to have fans across North America drop the YSA chant ( You Suck A-hole). It's part of the efforts to make MLS parks as family friendly as possible. But in the great scheme of things ... It's not a big issue. But yet, the NYRB's mishandling made it a bigger deal that it should be .... Judge for yourself here ... listen closely toward the end of the short video below: 

OK ... so not very classy and can be somewhat embarrassing for commercial purposes but there's much worse out there. That's why the NYRB's offer of bribes to supporters groups to stop singing the YSA chant is just a bit ill advised. And it wasn't particularly well received.

What's the crisis comms lesson here? Don't make the situation worse by overreacting ... Discretion IS (sometimes) the best part of valour. 

Lac Mégantic aftermath: anatomy of a major crisis comms fail: the MMA story

The images were some of the scariest possible ... right out of a Hollywood blockbuster, except that the outcome was the most tragic possible. Two dozens dead, scores missing and possibly "vaporized" in the inferno that followed the train derailment in the lakeside community of Lac Mégantic in Québec.

The huge conflagration followed the derailment of a train carrying crude oil (the same train had previously gone through the Greater Toronto Area ...). A runaway train, that's the stuff of movies ... right? Well, it turns out it happens more often than you think. And it now looks as if the railroad which operated the train, the Montreal, Maine and Atlantic, owned by a US company called Rail World, has a dismal safety record. 

So, you'd think that they have a pretty solid crisis communications plan in place for such incidents? ... Uhm .... maybe not. 

My friend and crisis communications expert, Melissa Agnes, who lives in Montreal, already wrote a pretty scathing piece on this ... but I can't resist. After a few days of dithering, sordid comments and complete confusion, MMA should stand for Middling, Muddled and Awkward ... 

Middling: a more mediocre response is hard to find in the annals of similar incidents:

• a response that's late ... than ignores the reality of the primary audience (a news release in English ... followed by a farcical translation using an online tool = disrespect for the French-speaking citizens of Lac Mégantic.
• Here's an excerpt from a news story about the simmering anger of residents: "Complaints about the company have ranged from lack of visibility, to longer-term concerns about safety, to the fact that a press release written in French appeared sloppily translated and loaded with errors."
• Another excerpt from an online story highlighting the fact that after days of silence, the company's decision to speak out came with its own disaster: "But those are not their biggest blunders. The real problems came when senior company officials decided to open their mouths and, in one case, make a “joke”."

Muddled: confusion, obfuscation and evasion (trying to escape the horde of reporters at the airport after waiting 4 days to show your face ???)

• various explanations/excuses about whether or not safety procedures (brakes/crew) were followed
• blaming first responders (firefighters for responding to a train engine earlier that fateful evening)
• Differing outlook on what happens next.

Awkward: doing a news conference in the middle of the street of the town your company has just destroyed ... unscripted and un-moderated = a bad idea: 

For all his troubles, Ed Burkhardt, the Chair of Rail World got some "advice" from the Premier of Québec, Pauline Marois:

So, what should have taken place? There is no more poignant reminder to any organization to have a crisis communications plan in place to support any business continuity or emergency management program. A plan adapted to risks, audiences and outreach on social networks.

For a good crisis comms template, you can refer to the work my colleague Barry Radford and I did for PTSC-Online.  

Those of you who read this blog, are aware of my admiration for Dr. Covello and his crisis mapping technique (link to full video here and supporting handbook). So i'll adopt one of his templates to share my idea of what should have happened and highlight what we saw.

The CCO template: Compassion, Competence, Optimism 

Compassion: how hard is it to say (despite lawyers arguing against it ...) it's our train, it's our responsibility ...we're deeply sorry ... we'll do all we can to support the families, the town and its people ...? What we got from MMA/Rail World: absence in the critical first few hours, an automated news release and a bad linguistic disconnect with those impacted ...  

Competence: we should have heard: we're doing our own investigation, to make sure this doesn't happen again. We're doing all we can to help the people of Lac Mégantic .... What we got from MMA/Rail World: confusion, conflicting comments on the cause, lack of communications planning, poor execution, ad lib interviews from the top guy ... 

Optimism: He should have said: we'll work with the town ... grieve with them and them help them rebuild .... What we got from MMA/Rail World: we blame the local firefighters in a nearby town, our own guy is to blame/we'll can him ... hard to believe someone who seems to shirk responsibility and blames first responders and appears ready to throw his own people to the wolves ...

Now, who's gonna tell the boss he screwed up? 

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?