Communication and Crisis
Julie Maple
August 18, 2013
HCS/320
Teresa Shook

I am the director of the regional emergency management office. I am coming to you because I have been receiving official reports that our public water supplies of several towns in the area have become contaminated with a life threatening biological agent. Having a contaminated water supply is a very serious situation. There is no solid evidence to show how the water became contaminated, and people need to know what symptoms to look for. Symptoms to look for are nose bleeds, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, blurred vision, and abdominal pain. Contingency plans will be addressed within this organization, as well as with the public, without causing or creating a panic.
As the director, it is my job to put together a strong, reliable group that will be communicating inside and outside of the organization during this crisis of contaminated water supplies. The first thing that needs to be done is to contact different agencies to see if we can find out how serious the contamination really is, and how widespread. Agencies that I would contact would be local agencies like the public works, and local law enforcement agencies. I would also want to know what the water has been contaminated with. The best agency to ask this question would be poison control. The second thing that needs to be done is to let the public know about this crisis. I think the best way to do this without inducing panic would be to hold a press conference with the Governor, the Mayor, and the director of water and waste management. This press conference will introduce the public to our crisis, and by having all of the important people there, it will help ensure the public that we are doing everything in our power to get to the bottom of this and take care of this crisis. I would also advise the public to test their drinking water at home.
There are advantages and disadvantages that come with communicating within an organization during a crisis. An advantage would be that the people that I am working with are already well trained on what to do in a situation such as this one. A disadvantage would be that no one has been trained on what to do during a crisis, and no one knows exactly what to do. A challenge that may occur during this crisis would be the media. We need to keep the media involved, but we do not want them to set our agenda. Pisciotta (n.d), “respond in a timely fashion. The longer you wait, the more time a reporter has to get the information they are looking for from other sources; then you are stuck correcting things. In a similar vein, if you are in a public “fight”, try to get to the media first-that way you can frame the issue, not your opponent. Give the reporter a clearly written statement. Included should be the facts, your response plan and any “emotional” element (regret, apology, concern, etc.). Even though this statement may not be quoted from directly, it grounds the reporter in your position. If possible, provide a spokesperson. Though there are some situations in which putting the CEO in front of the firing squad doesn’t make sense, in most cases individuals respect leaders who are willing to take responsibility in difficult situations. If the CEO or other senior leader can’t be the spokesperson for legitimate reasons, consider deploying your communications person to respond to questions and provide a sense that the company is not afraid to face the situation head on” (How to Communicate in a Crisis: Dealing With the Media). I am sure there will be challenges between the different agencies because there will be limited information. It could also be a challenge to keep the team focused on their job titles.
There will be differences in the communication process during a crisis such as water contamination. I say this because during a crisis people tend to break down. Sometimes a crisis can make it difficult for a person’s brain to function correctly. A lot of break downs will occur when agencies start to point fingers at those that are not fulfilling their job duties. It is my job as the director to make sure this does not happen. In order to make sure that this is not taking place to provide healthcare that is needed such as vaccinations, I will keep checks and balances on my team members. According to “Expert Round Table on Social Media and Risk Communication During Times of Crisis: Strategic Challenges and Opportunities” (n.d), “the explosion of social media-everything from social networking websites, to blogs, to broadcast text messaging- has changed the way in which anyone involved in risk communications must look at overall communication plans. Especially in times of emergency, social media can and should be employed to transmit critically important information immediately to as many people as possible”. Lipowicz (2013), “when it comes to disaster response, social media has proven to be a popular and effective tool for sharing information-except when the information is incorrect or malicious, in which case it hinders response efforts. That conundrum is one of the drawbacks that limit the usefulness of social media in emergency situations, according to a new report from the congressional research service, which was released publicly Sept. 13 by the Federation of American Scientists. Networks such as Facebook and Twitter have been used for sharing warnings and disaster information, contacting friends during a crisis and raise funds for disaster relief. Government agencies use such tools primarily for pushing information to the public, such as links to hurricane forecasts and evacuation routes. Some emergency management agencies are using social tools to help gather and share information in real time, such as locations of trapped survivors. However, using social media in such situations has risks, the service warned. “While there may be some potential advantages to using social media for emergencies and disasters, there may also be some potential policy issues and drawbacks associated with its use,” the report said. For example, studies show that outdated, inaccurate or false information has been disseminated via social media forums during disasters, the report said. In some cases, the location of the hazard or threat was inaccurately reported, or, in the case of the Japanese tsunami, some requests for help were retweeted repeatedly even after victims are rescued.
The media opportunities in our crisis of contaminated water supplies helped us more than they hurt us. Even though there were times that we were not prepared to speak to the media, they showed the side of this organization that was doing everything in their power to resolve the problem of the contamination. The media showed the public that we cared about them and our community. With the media, we were able to put out the correct information in a timely manner. We used the media to our own advantage and maintained the public’s trust for the government.
As a conclusion to this crisis of contaminated water, we have all come together as a group and as a community and resolved our crisis. I put into effect a plan that I thought would be most beneficial and effective in resolving the issue. We successfully notified the public of the crisis without inducing a panic, we obtained vital information from outside sources, we used technology and the media to our advantage, and we resolved the crisis of contaminated water supplies.

References
Expert Round Table on Social Media and Risk Communication During Times of Crisis: Strategic Challenges and Opportunities. (n.d). Retrieved from Http://www.boozallen.com/media/file/risk_communications_times_of_crisis.pdf
Pisciotta, D. (n.d). How to Communicate in a Crisis. Retrieved from Http://www.inc.com/guides/how-to-communicate-in-a-crisis.html/16