By Stolero Nathan, Bodas Moran, Peleg Kobi, Adini Bruria
Tel Aviv University
Imagine the not-so-hypothetical-anymore situation: there is a worldwide pandemic, and many countries are in lockdown. People are at home, confused, worried, and some even suffer from a medical condition that they are not sure if it is related to the pandemic. A true crisis is ongoing. One crucial aspect of managing such a crisis is the communication process between authorities and first responders and the public and vice-versa.
Project ENGAGE is an EU-funded consortium aiming to engage societies in risk awareness to enhance their societal resilience. As part of this project, we examined the communication needs and expectations of the public before, during and after emergencies and disasters and how authorities and first responders communicate with the public and vice-versa.
One of the essential communication questions arising in all phases of emergencies and disasters is what does the public need the most? Information? Knowledge on how to cope with the situation (e.g., what to do during an earthquake)? In order to answer this question, we surveyed respondents in France, Israel, Italy, Norway, Japan, Romania, Spain and Sweden. In addition, we analysed user comments to posts in social media of authorities and first responders in those countries (excluding Japan).
We found that needs related to information and knowledge (cognitive) are perceived to be the most important by the respondents across all counties, followed by the need to receive fast and accurate information. However, both the survey and the analysis of the user content in social media highlighted that the communication needs of the public before, during and after emergencies and disasters are multiplex. They seek information and content that will make them feel better, part of society, and even escapism from reality. Authorities and first responders were, in many cases, in their eyes, the address for fulfilling these needs. In other words, they found authorities and first responders responsible not just for helping them in what to do and what should they know, but on how to feel and even disengage, if needed. This was the first study out of two already conducted examining the communication process.
If the first study focused on the public’s point of view, the second study examined the communication strategy, channels and guidelines of authorities and first responders. In other words, we examined, using document analysis and semi-structured interviews, how do emergency organisations communicate with the public and vice-versa.
Here, we found that authorities and first responders across the countries we examined (seven, again, excluding Japan) use a variety of communication channels, from traditional and mass media channels, through social media, to more innovative communication channels, such as AI-enabled chatbots (very little, but it still exists). The collection of communication channels allowed us to generate a list of possible channels. A list that can serve other organisations in looking for new communication methods to communicate with the public. However, we found that authorities and first responders had minimal guidelines regarding communicating with the public. We also identified several gaps in how authorities and first responders perceive the communication process with the public and how the public perceives it. For example, authorities and first responders were very concentrated on disseminating information, while the public, as mentioned above, desired the fulfilment of other needs.
To conclude, the communication process of authorities/first responders-the public and vice-versa is complex. Addressing this complexity is one of the keys to enhancing societal resilience. Achieving this could be done by building communication guidelines grounded in research and professional recommendation, and not less important – addressing the gaps between authorities and first responders and the public.