Disaster Situation Effective Media Relations Campaign --

Disaster Situation

Effective Media Relations Campaign -- Particularly since the events of 9/11, Emergency Management and Disaster Relief organizations are in clear view of the media and public. People have viewed first-hand the actions of New York City Fire Fighters and Police; they saw numerous agencies work the Katrina disaster, and they have certain expectations of transparency and information during crisis situations. While Emergency Management has been a part of urban civilization for thousands of years, most people in the United States grew up during the Cold War Era, in which Emergency Management was based on the Civil Defense paradigm, even though it dealt with natural disasters, weather and other civil issues. Emergency Management is visible when events occur (hurricanes, flooding, bombs, etc.) but is really only as powerful and effect as its pre-Crisis planning and risk reduction management allows (Haddow, 2004, 2-4).

A Media Relations plan for a disaster is essentially a crisis communications and public relations plan. For many organizations, in fact, disaster planning and crisis communication are essential parts of managing risks to the public, employees, stakeholders, etc. It is important to develop and maintain a plan in a logical manner, one that flows appropriately, knowing that disaster and crisis situations are often unpredictable. The plan should also be updated annually, taking into account new information, channels of communication, governmental regulations, technological developments and organizational abilities (Devlin, 2006).

A basic Crisis Management Plan should include at least eight steps to be effective, many of the steps have numerous sub-groups. These steps are then divided into three major stages: Preliminary Planning, Action and Follow Up/Evaluation. They can most easily be expressed in a table format, showing their interrelationships with one another and the logical progression.

Stage

Action

Criteria

Measurement / Considerations

Preliminary (1)

Identify members of crisis communications team

Develop hierarchy, particularly with those who will be key in interaction and media liaison. Develop plan with clear policies and procedures

Key leadership roles are vital for the public's confidence. When leaders speak, the public believes they are hearing the true story.

Preliminary (1)

Designate roles for spokespersons

The head of the organization should be in front of the public as much as possible; but may not be on the team, per se.

Team should prepare leadership for role in crisis communication plan.

Action (2)

Follow Crisis plan and procedures

The map of the policies is a guide, giving the organization step-by-step instructions and personnel responsible.

Follow plan but be open to contingencies and retasking based on crisis.

Action (2)

Difficult questions

Based on preliminary planning, scenarios should be in place to handle difficult questions that might be faced by media.

In this modern communications age, the most transparent and truthful responses are best.

Action (2)

Liason and Stakeholder issues

Different crisis situations call for different levels of intervention; some may require more medical or life-saving information, others more psychological counseling.

Measurement done by overall effectiveness of transfer of information to appropriate sources.

Action (2)

Audience

Appropriate levels of communication for the intended audience.

Ability to affect change and help people during crisis situations.

Evaluation (3)

Internal

Use contact log evaluation for detailed listing of interviews, articles and coverage.

Debrief as needed, replay scenario management

Evaluation (3)

External

Besides being self-critical, open the issue to additional training based on external analysis.

Rethink plan, reposition and retask; allow to continually evolve.

(Sources: Spink, 2009; Boyes, 2010).

Part 2 -- Communication Channels -- During a crisis situation, communications is one of the key issues that can make the situation more successful. One of the negatives about the Katina situation, in fact, was the inability of the agencies in charge to effectively communicate with one another and between agencies. This resulted in duplicate efforts, lack of efforts, lack of appropriate supply chain management, and no real plan that allowed for step-by-step communications internally and externally (Fink, 2002).

Within Response Team -- This may include more than one spokesperson, but absolutely must be presented in a way that every member of the crisis team has regular updates about information, changes in situation, analysis, etc. This can be accomplished using a point person who will email, telephone, or produce hand copies of memos on a regular basis. Obviously, email to tablets or Smart Phones is the most efficient if the situation allows. As long as there is a point person and the "speak with one voice" policy is followed, the crisis management will be mitigated (Devlin, pp. 365-9).

Between Agencies -- Interagency communication during disasters has been one of the most criticized and openly debated topics in the last decade. This became so visible and apparent after 9/11 that the resulting chaos, miscommunication, and even vulnerability of certain agencies showed almost no real effective communication between agencies. Thus, the government enacted the Patriot Act, which placed a new agency, Homeland Security, as more of the clearing house of information during crisis situations (Ibbetson, 2007). Most experts believe that prior planning and establishing roles and responsibilities, as well as communications channels and a clear "tree" of how to disperse information, along with a shift in bureaucratic control, will improve inter-agency and external communications during emergency conditions (Kapucu, 2006).