Emergency Communication Challenges in Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The crisis with no name: Defining the interplay of culture, ethnicity, and race on organizational issues and media outcomes

“…Earlier, panels of crisis communication experts (Seeger, 2006) and academics (Heath, 2010;Vanderford, Nastoff, Telfer, & Bonzo, 2007) also emphasized the value of a relationship management approach to crises, focusing on establishing strategic partnerships so that these partnerships strategically can be employed before, during, and after crises. Our study findings suggest that organizations that do not have preexisting partnerships with those who represent affected stakeholders still can benefit from creating them*but they must be sincere and not simply self-serving.…”

Predicting Response to Reassurances and Uncertainties in Bioterrorism Communications for Urban Populations in New York and California

“…Despite some notable successes, gaps between communication needs of affected populations and actual practice included: less than optimal, timely adaptation to unforeseen circumstances; 9,11-15 difficulties in interagency response coordination and cooperation; 9,12-16 inadequate or delayed acknowledgment and correction of errors that had appeared in previous public communications about the event; 13,[17][18][19][20] inadequate uncertainty communication; 11,13,16,18 limitations in predicting, assessing, and responding to changing or ongoing critical information needs of affected populations; [11][12][13]18,19,21 and less than desired effectiveness in risk/crisis communications for certain socially vulnerable and ethnically diverse groups. 11,17,[21][22][23][24] Some gaps were historic and reflected longstanding deficiencies, such as limited communications about risk uncertainties and significant social disparities in the success of risk management strategies, with less desirable outcomes for those most vulnerable to adverse consequences of a public health emergency.…”

“…11,[25][26][27][28] Other risk/crisis communication missteps resulted from the changing characteristics of modern risks and limited intelligence about planned attacks, leading to uncertainty about the scope and methods of future extreme risk incidents. 2,4,6,10,13,15,19,29 Despite significant recent improvements in strategic communication approaches, 2,18,30 ongoing critical vulnerabilities in ways of thinking about and preparing for risk/ crisis communication call for increased responsiveness to changing risk scenarios, evolving communication goals, and growing scientific evidence about the dynamics of public risk perceptions and behaviors during unfolding extreme risk occurrences. 31 Even more critical is communication preparedness for extreme acts like biological terrorism or other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) attacks that can display high levels of uncertainty as events progress, demand ongoing timely reevaluation of response effectiveness, present a good likelihood of unexpected developments, and reflect an ongoing potential for catastrophic outcomes.…”

“…28,50,55,56 Vulnerability and potential for loss during acts of WMD terrorism or other extreme incidents may be elevated as an event progresses if risk communications do not resonate or are incompatible with expectations, life circumstances, personal/community resources, values, information needs, and personal evaluation of risk circumstances. 18,20,21,27,28 According to recent risk analyses, 51 extreme events present an unequal potential for loss, not only because of preexisting vulnerabilities in terms of social, resource, and environmental factors, 27,28,30,40 but also because of differences in trust and the potential influence of distrust of government or leaders. 21,28,51,55,56 Although current models acknowledge and provide some guidance for communicating across diverse populations, 26,28,57 persistent and recent social disparities in the effectiveness of strategic communications during a crisis or emergency, as illustrated during Hurricane Katrina or the 2009-10 H1N1 pandemic, suggest the need for greater understanding of why sociocultural diversity is related to and affects the effectiveness of communication.…”

“…6,15,22 ''Resilience thinking'' regarding terrorism or other extreme risk events [33][34][35] emphasizes adapting in real time to ongoing or unexpected adverse events and having effective plans for maintaining public involvement in risk management as an incident evolves. 6,18,36,37 Containment of social, psychological, physical, public health, and economic damage from significant acts of bioterrorism will depend in part on full engagement of large numbers of socially, economically, and culturally diverse populations who reside or work in geographic locations most likely to be targeted for particularly surprising and sizable terrorist acts. [38][39][40] Some frameworks frequently used to plan for risk/crisis communication, such as the 2002 Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) guidelines developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 41 have made valuable contributions to preparedness and communication strategies.…”