University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Crisis communication & natural disasters: communication plan for Rome, Italy in the case of an earthquake

(USC Thesis Other)

Crisis communication & natural disasters: communication plan for Rome, Italy in the case of an earthquake

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content CRISIS COMMUNICATION & NATURAL DISASTERS: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR ROME, ITALY IN THE CASE OF AN EARTHQUAKE by Sara Staffaroni A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS (STRATEGIC PUBLIC RELATIONS) May 2012 Copyright 2012 Sara Staffaroni ii Dedication I would like to thank Priscilla, Mary, and Michelle for knowing how to make me laugh when I needed it the most. Your unconditional love and faith in me is what got me through this journey. Nikhil, thank you for letting me “hand over to you” all my stress and frustrations; you’re wonderful. Matteo, as my older brother you have set the bar pretty high on academic accomplishments, and I am finally about to climb right over it, thank you for being a good role model (academically that is…). Bryan Whaley, you guided me through my undergraduate studies and believed in my ability to succeed when I was in doubt. Thank you for inspiring me to continue my education and apply for graduate studies. Mom and Dad, this thesis wouldn’t have been possible if it weren’t for the constant motivation and inspiration that you have given me. You taught me to take pride in my accomplishments and now I hope I have made you proud too. iii Acknowledgments This thesis wouldn’t have been possible without the support of my committee members. I am truly grateful that in the midst of all their activity, they accepted to be members of my reading committee. I gratefully acknowledge my Chairperson Burghardt Tenderich, for his patience, advice, and guidance from the very early stage of my thesis development. Many thanks to my second reader, Professor Michael Leveque, for dedicating his time in helping me explore the multifaceted aspects of social media and mobile technology in crisis communication. I would also like to pay tribute to my third reader, Professor Jennifer Floto, for helping me discover a thesis topic that would intertwine my passion for Italian culture and interest in crisis communication. In addition, I extend my thanks to Professor Gabriel Kahn, for allowing me to gain insight on his pioneering communications technology project, Crisis Connection. iv Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgments iii List of Figures vii Abbreviations viii Abstract xi Introduction 1 Methodology 4 Chapter One: Italy and Earthquakes 6 History of Earthquakes in Italy 6 Rome, Italy and Earthquakes 7 1 Chapter Two: Crisis Communication 8 Definition of a Crisis 8 Crisis: Natural Disasters 8 Definition of Crisis Communication 9 Importance of Crisis Communication for Natural Disasters 9 Government and Crisis Communication for Natural Disasters 10 Chapter Three: The Role of Traditional Mainstream Media, Social 12 Media and Technology in a Natural Disaster Traditional Mainstream Media 12 Social Media and Technology 13 Chapter Four: Best Practice- Southern California Earthquake 18 Communications Plan Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN) 18 The OPLAN Three Phases of Earthquake Response 18 The OPLAN Objectives for Communications 20 OPLAN’s Critical Assumptions & Considerations for Communications 20 Communications Tasks For OPLAN’s Phase 1-2 of Earthquake Response 21 Chapter Five: Risk Communication Guide for State and Local 28 Agencies Importance of Risk Communication 28 Goals and Objectives of a Risk Communication Program 28 v Trust/Credibility Factors and Risk Communication 36 Guidelines for Choosing Agency Representatives to Communicate 39 with the Community Chapter Six: Natural Disaster Case Study- L’Aquila, Italy 41 Earthquake 2009 Background of L’Aquila, Italy 41 Earthquake of 2009 41 L’Aquila Residents Emotional Response to Earthquakes’ Damages 43 Residents’ Response to the Actions Taken by the Italian Government 44 & Protezione Civile The Role of Media During the L’Aquila Post-Earthquake Recovery 47 Indictment of Italian Earthquake Experts in 2011 47 L’Aquila’s Recovery Progress 2009-2012 49 Content Analysis: The Use of Social Media for Communications By Italian 51 Government and Non-Government Organizations Chapter Seven: Italy’s Current Emergency Response Plan for Crises 54 The Protezione Civile 54 The Protezione Civile’s General Emergency Response Actions 54 Protezione Civile’s Crisis Communication Plan for Rome, Italy 56 Chapter Eight: Rome, Italy’s Seismic Vulnerability 61 Chapter Nine: Suggested Earthquake Crisis Communication Plan 63 for Rome, Italy Phase 1: Normal Operations 63 Phase 2 (a,b,c): Response 70 Phase 3: Long Term Recovery 76 Chapter Ten: Conclusion and Recommendations 79 Bibliography 80 Appendices: Appendix A: Interview Questions for Interview with Professor 85 Gabriel Kahn Appendix B: Transcript of Interview with Professor Gabriel Kahn 86 Appendix C: Interview Questions for Interview with Professor 90 Matthew Leveque Appendix D: Transcript of Interview with Professor Matthew Leveque 91 vi Appendix E: Examples of Pre-Scripted Messages for OPLAN’s 95 Phase 2a: Immediate Response Appendix F: Examples of Pre-Scripted Messaged of OPLAN’s 97 Phase 2b: Deployment & Employment vii List of Figures Figure 1: Phases of Earthquake Response Operations 20 Figure 2: Risk Communication Guide for State and Local 35 Agencies- risk communication vehicles during and after a crisis viii Abbreviations CalEMA: California Emergency Management Agency DOD: Department of Defense EAO: External Affairs Officer EOC: Emergency Operations Center PC: Protezione Civile PIO: Public Information Office ESF 15: Emergency Support Function FCO: Federal Coordinating Officer FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency JIC: Joint Information Center JFO: Joint Field Office JTF: Joint Task Force RRCC: Regional Response Coordination Center SOC: Standard of Cover ix Abstract This paper explores the present natural disasters crisis communications findings and best practices, and applies them to develop the ideal crisis communication plan for Italy in the case of an earthquake disaster. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to address the Italian government’s significant lack of earthquake crisis communication preparedness, by providing guidelines for the best crisis communication plan that the country can implement on its most vulnerable regions. Rome, Italy was chosen because of the city’s considerable volume of valuable historic monuments and high tourism traffic, making it highly susceptible to an earthquake catastrophe. The comparison of California’s best practice plans for natural disasters to Italy’s current crisis communication plan for Rome, revealed the country’s neglect of available and effective new crisis communication tools, particularly social media channels and mobile technologies. The principal conclusion is that facing an earthquake disaster without a prepared strategic crisis communication plan in place, will lead to unfavorable long-term consequences for both victims and government agencies involved in the crisis response and recovery. 1 Introduction Unlike man-made crises, earthquakes are recurring disasters that cannot be prevented even if foreseen. Very often the aftermath of an earthquake is devastating, causing both long-term physical and emotional damage to the affected location and its population. Because of the foreseeable high impact of an earthquake, the ability to communicate throughout the crisis is essential for executing an effective emergency response plan. So, it is the responsibility of government agencies to prepare a well- conceived crisis communication plan that takes into account all possible tools for communicating during the disaster, especially new mobile communication technologies. The purpose of this thesis is to craft the best crisis communication plan to implement in the case of an earthquake catastrophe. Rome, Italy has been selected as the focus of the study, because of the city’s significant volume of valuable historic monuments, large condensed population, and high tourism traffic. Thus, if Rome were to be hit by a strong earthquake the damage would be especially catastrophic. Also, Italians worldwide would particularly feel that a piece of their heritage was gone in the damage and/or destruction of Rome’s renowned historical monuments like the Colosseum, The Vatican, and Pantheon. Many factors were analyzed to build an innovative and successful earthquake crisis communication plan for Rome, Italy. They include the evaluation of Italy’s seismic history and vulnerability, the previous research on crisis communication for natural disasters, and the role that traditional and social media have played in previous earthquake crises. The latest communication technologies, such as Gabriel Kahn’s Crisis 2 Connect project, were explored to identify the most efficient tools to communicate in Rome during an earthquake crisis. Because of California’s robust earthquake emergency response preparation, the Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN) and California’s Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies were used as best practice sources to design Rome’s new plan. Moreover, to determine the level of improvement that the Italian government needs in crisis communication, the L’Aquila, Italy earthquake of 2009 was analyzed as well as any earthquake crisis communication tools and guidelines that are currently in place for Rome. Chapter One provides a brief overview of Italy’s history with earthquakes and Rome’s seismic vulnerability. Chapter Two defines crisis communication, and explores the importance of crisis communication for natural disasters, including the expected tasks of governments and public agencies in the case of a disaster. Chapter Three explores the different roles of traditional and social media in crisis communication for a natural disaster; emphasis is given to innovative information and communication technology, such as Kahn’s Crisis Connection project. Chapter Four includes guidelines from the best practice Southern California Earthquake Communications Plan (OPLAN). Chapter Five is a summary of course of actions suggested by California’s Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies. Chapter Six analyzes the L’Aquila, Italy earthquake crisis of 2009. Chapter Seven looks at Italy’s current emergency response plan for crises, specifically the Protezione Civile’s earthquake crisis communication plan for Rome, and Chapter Eight discusses weaknesses in the PC’s current plan. Chapter Nine provides an in-dept report for the suggested optimal earthquake crisis communication plan for Rome. 3 Chapter Ten concludes the thesis with recommendations for further research on the subject. 4 Methodology To create the optimal earthquake crisis communication plan for Rome, multiple research methods were used. Significant amounts of literature that referenced to natural disasters crisis communication plans, the role of traditional and social media throughout the phases of a natural disaster crisis, as well as the role of the government in crisis communication were reviewed. Two in-person interviews were conducted to gain deeper insight on prominent factors related to earthquake crisis communication. Professor Gabriel Kahn, from the Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism at the University of Southern California, was interviewed for a deeper understanding of innovative crisis communication technology tools, specifically his Crisis Connect project. Matthew Leveque, also a professor at USC’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, provided insight on the role of social media and mobile technology during an earthquake crisis, and strategies in government messaging. Specific guidelines and tips were retrieved from the Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN) and California’s Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies, to create a strong structure for Rome’s best crisis communication plan in the case of an earthquake. A content analysis of 18 different Italian websites was conducted to understand Italy’s current level of use of social media as a tool for communication. The websites were categorized into two different groups: Italian government-related agencies/organizations and non-government organizations. Such groups were established 5 to determine whether an organization’s communications goal(s) are an influencing factor on the amount of used social media platforms. Finally, literature on Italy’s earthquake history and seismic vulnerability was analyzed to thoroughly understand Rome’s current level of preparedness for an earthquake crisis. The L’Aquila, Italy earthquake disaster in 2009 was used as a case study to recognize weaknesses in the Italian government’s current emergency plan, specifically in communications. Moreover, the current crisis communication plan for the city of Rome established by Italy’s emergency response agency the Protezione Civile, was evaluated to identify the baseline from which the city’s new earthquake crisis communication plan would evolve. 6 Chapter One: Italy and Earthquakes History of Earthquakes in Italy Minor earthquakes occur almost daily in Italy because a large part of it, especially the south, lies on a seismic fault line where the African Continental and Eurasian plates (“Travel Advice by Country: Italy” & Pisa, 2011). Hence, because of its unsafe position, Italy has had a long history of earthquakes (“Earthquakes: Italy”), The earthquake of December 28, 1908 in Messina (Southern Italy) is considered to be one of the most damaging earthquakes in the country’s history. With a magnitude of 7.2, the earthquake and the tsunami that followed, killed 40% of the population in Messina and 25% of those living in Reggio di Calabria, an estimated total of 72,000 deaths. This death toll is significantly high, especially when compared to other major historic earthquakes, such as the 1970 Chimbote, Peru 7.9 magnitude quake that killed 50,000 persons, or the 1755 Portugal, Lisbon 8.7 magnitude quake that lead to 70,000 deaths (“Earthquakes with 50,000 or More Deaths”). The recent earthquake in L’Aquila, Italy on April 6, 2009, was magnitude 6.3, claiming the lives of more than 300 people, and leaving 70,000 residents without a home (“L’Aquila Earthquake- A Year On”). In addition to destroying homes, the earthquake also severely damaged valuable historical monuments (Sirletti, 2009). As will be further discussed in Chapter Seven, the communication during the L’Aquila earthquake emergency response and recovery shows Italy’s lack of a well-established and effective crisis communication plan for natural disasters. 7 Rome, Italy and Earthquakes With the emotional and physical damage done to L’Aquila, one can only imagine the extent of harm and devastation an earthquake would cause if it were to strike Rome. On May 11, 2011, many Romans were quick to leave the city fearing that an earthquake, as predicted by Seismologist Raffaele Bendandi in 1915, would strike the city. Officials at the Roman National Vulcanology and Seismology Institute tried to convince people that there wasn’t any danger, but didn’t succeed in reassuring the citizens; on that day, one out of five workers asked for the day off, school attendance was significantly low, and traffic around the city was noticeably less chaotic (Pisa, 2011). While one might blame this response on Italian superstition, it could also be an outcome of Romans’ fear of a repeat of the L’Aquila tragedy. As of 2011, there are 2.7 million inhabitants in the city of Rome (National Online, 2011). The city has the highest concentration of historical artifacts in the world; Rome houses 340 historic monuments, of which 188 date back to ancient Rome, and 143 museums (Cutrufo, 2010, pg.49). Moreover, it is estimated that 10 million tourists visit the city of Rome every year, with an average of 33,000 new visitors every day (Cutrufo, 2010, pg.48). With this in mind, the author believes that in the case of a natural disaster, such as an earthquake, the emergency management authorities in Rome would have to take into consideration the well-being of the city’s residents and tourists, and also the preservation of the many ancient monuments. Therefore, with so much at stake, it is a necessity for the city of Rome to have an exemplary crisis communication plan to use in the case of an earthquake. 8 Chapter Two: Crisis Communication Definition of a Crisis Being such a multifaceted subject, the term “crisis” in the public relations spectrum has been given multiple definitions. Coombs (2011, 3 rd edition) combined various perspectives of a crisis and created one definition, “A crisis is the perception of an unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes” (pg.2). According to Bryson, “a stakeholder is a person or group that is affected by and can affect an organization” (as cited in Coombs, 2011, pg.2). Hence, if a stakeholder perceives a certain situation as a crisis, then the organization involved, government or non-government, must react as so. Moreover, according to Seeger (as cited in Sellnow, 2011, pg.274), crises generate high levels of threat and uncertainty. This, in return, creates a critical need for accurate and immediate information, which is usually provided by emergency management professionals, experts, and government authorities. Crisis: Natural Disasters According to Lerbinger (1997), crises can be separated into three different categories: crises of the physical world, crises of the human climate, and crises of management failure (pg. 10). Crises of the physical world include natural disasters and catastrophes such as landslides, tornados, tidal waves, storms, floods and earthquakes (pg.10). Until recently, crises of natural disasters have received less systematic attention in comparison to other types of crises. This is because, according to Sungu, Johnson, and Dunn (as cited in Sellnow, 2011), natural disasters “present an extraordinary difficult 9 context for inter-organizational and inter-jurisdictional coordination” (pg.273). Meaning, unlike other crises, a natural disaster requires the immediate responses from multiple organizations that typically do not communicate to each other to achieve the common goal of alleviating threats to a community. This scenario usually leads to complications. Definition of Crisis Communication Just as the term “crisis” is complex, the use of “crisis communication” is also very abstract. For the purpose of this thesis, crisis communication refers to the strategic use of communication to manage natural disaster crises. Thus, communication is used to prepare stakeholders for a natural disaster crisis, to respond to a natural disaster crisis, and to recover from a natural disaster crisis. Importance of Crisis Communication for Natural Disasters Fraser (CARILIC conference, 2004, pg.2) believes communication is an effective tool to empower people so they can be more prepared to protect themselves from a natural disaster; communication should be used to educate, warn and inform a community of the dangers of natural disasters. Also, according to Fraser (pg.2), communication should play an important role during and after a natural disaster strikes. For instance, on-time and accurate communication is the most cost-effective means of saving lives and will reduce property damage (pg.2). Another important role of communication during and after a natural crisis is to increase public safety and understanding of the current situation. Fraser (pg.2) believes that the best way to alleviate the public’s fears and anxiety is through effective and reliable communication. Essentially, to be effective in saving lives and property, 10 government officials and other organizations/authorities involved should provide up-to- date information to the widest possible audience. In doing so, those affected by the disaster will feel safer and maintain trust in the integrity of their government (Fraser, 2004, pg.2). Government and Crisis Communication for Natural Disasters Citizens whose lives are affected by a crisis such as a natural disaster, look to their leaders for help. Governments and public agencies are expected to remove or reduce the threat and provide an explanation for what happened and how it will be prevented in the future (Boin, 2006, pg.1). Hence, policy makers are faced with the hard task of providing detailed direction that will save lives, regardless of how difficult a circumstance (Boin, 2006, pg. 7-8). During a crisis, political leaders communicate through a “triangle relationship” made up of political actors, mass media, and citizenry. Most of the communication between the government and citizens is through mass media. Thus, political actors communicate to the mass media with the intent and expectation that the shared information will also be provided to the public (Boin, 2006, pg.72). According to Boin (2006, pg.69), political leaders use a crisis communication tactic called “meaning making” to reduce the public’s fears and concerns after a crisis. They do so by communicating a convincing story that explains what happened, why the crisis occurred, what its repercussions are, how the crisis can be resolved, who will take the responsibility to do so, and who or what is to blame (pg.69-70). 11 Boin’s (2006) core claim is that “crisis communication makes a crucial difference between obtaining and losing the ‘permissive consensus’ leaders need to effectuate their policies and bolster their reputation” (pg.70). He also argues that the political communication process during a crisis is very competitive, in the sense that if a political figure doesn’t get his or her messages across to the public, someone else will (pg.70). Despite its evident importance, many political leaders aren’t well equipped for crisis communication. Boin (2006, pg.77-78) provides three factors that he believes are important for governmental crisis communications to be effective. The first is the degree of preparedness. For instance, if government authorities are not prepared for a natural disaster crisis, they will be trailing the news of the crisis. Instead, they should be shaping the information that is being sent out to the media and public. The second factor is degree of coordination of outgoing information. Multi-level governance is a common characteristic of crisis response, but coordination of messages and communication between these authorities is difficult. So, message discipline is very important in the effectiveness of crisis communication. Third, the degree of professionalism is also an important factor. During a crisis, PR professionals must succeed with the task of approaching the mass media with insightful information while at the same time keeping the media at arm’s length from the political figures involved (Boin, 2006, pg. 76-77). 12 Chapter Three: The Role of Traditional Mainstream Media, Social Media, and Technology in a Natural Disaster Traditional Mainstream Media According to Burkhart (1991), during a natural disaster, traditional mainstream media is very useful in communicating and amplifying alerts to the public from official sources. For example, mass media can spread instructions to the public to prepare them for a crisis and provide news during the acute crisis response phase about the repercussions (as cited in Garnet, 2007, p.175). Although media can be helpful during a natural disaster, it tends to devote its attention mainly to the preparedness and response phases, because they have the most drama and are “newsworthy” (Garnet, 2007, p.175). As a consequence, less attention is given to the mitigation/prevention phases because they are longer-term and less dramatic, hence not “newsworthy” (Ray, 1999 as cited in Garnet, 2007, p.176). With that said, during the recovery phase of a natural disaster, the media does focus on the public officials in charge of allocating disaster aid and on the long-term consequences that the disaster has had on victims (Burkhart 1999, as cited in Garnet, p.176). Mainstream Media’s Relationship with Victims of Natural Disasters According to Perez-Lugo (2004), literature on mainstream media’s role during a natural disaster assumes that media is a tool used by authorities to disseminate official preparedness and recovery information to a vulnerable audience (pg.222). However, Perez-Lugo claims that the relationship between the media and its “audience” (outsiders and people coping with the tragedy of a natural disaster) remains strong throughout the course of a crisis (before, during, and after the impact). This relationship is a valuable 13 aspect of the people’s coping strategies, but for different reasons at each phase of a crisis (Perez-Lugo, 2004, p.222). During the first phase, Preparedness, audiences turn to the media for information on the natural hazard, such as the locations with the biggest risk of disaster. Also, Perez- Lugo (2004) claims that people are more interested in knowing the location and possible damage level of a natural disaster from the media rather than preparedness activities, because they are seen as common-sense knowledge (p.223). During the second phase, the Impact phase, audiences look for emotional support from the media. The media also connects victims to the outside world, hence removing the feeling of isolation caused by the disaster (p.223). Lastly, in the Recovery phase, audiences expect media to update them on the conditions of the communities impacted by the natural disaster (p.223). The relationship between the media and audiences of a natural disaster has recently been strengthened with the development of new technologies for communicating and sharing information. Social Media and Technology According to Coombs (2011), “Social media is a collection of online technologies that allow users to share insights, experiences and opinions with one another” (p. 21). The importance of strategic crisis communication has increased with the presence of social media because it enhances the exposure of any crisis. The convergence of social media and new technology has erased geographical and temporal barriers, allowing people to participate during a disaster. Hughes, et al. (as cited in Holmes, pg.11), claims that this “unwieldy frontier for disaster activity as a 14 matter of social convergence parallels geographical on-site behavior.” Meaning, the behaviors experienced during a crisis, such as helping, being anxious, mourning, etc. are now also present on online social media. Holmes argues that this similarity in behaviors means that crisis communication strategies can include social media by framing messages and targeting audiences through the new media sphere (pg.11). Holmes states that social media can be a helpful tool for the practice of crisis communication (pg.2). According to Weick (as cited in Holmes, pg.11), whenever a crisis occurs, people need to find a way to make sense of what has happened, which he calls “sensemaking.” Consequently, social media with mobile technology is an additional great tool for “sensemaking” and creating order in chaos; by sharing photos and videos of the event people can understand the situation much better. Hughes etc al. says: Sharing photos in such situations can be informative, newsworthy, and therapeutic. Such activity has been in place since the invention of cameras; now, with digital cameras and photo-sharing websites, the arena for sharing photographic-based information has expanded its reach” (as cited in Holmes, pg. 11). Therefore, through such use of social media and technology, stakeholders who are directly being affected by the crisis on the “ground” serve as primary informants to the general public by transmitting firsthand knowledge of the event; by providing and distributing integral and time-sensitive information in the form of photos and videos, they are also helping crisis communicators and emergency managers, although most likely unknowingly (Holmes, pg.12). In simpler terms, everyone can be a “watchdog” and help communicate during a crisis (Holmes, pg. 9-10 &16). 15 While the presence of social media and new technology has its advantages during a crisis, it can also create problems for crisis communicators. For instance, it can spread false and/or negative information during a crisis at an incredible speed, making it harder for crisis communicators to manage the narratives of the event. Social media can create a greater sense of chaos, leading to stakeholders having to sift through a large amount of information to find what is relevant. It is because of these circumstances that crisis communicators must establish relationships with stakeholders through an online domain prior to any crisis occurring, so people know where to find and share information during a crisis (Holmes, pg. 13-14). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Communication technology’s role during a natural disaster crisis is to establish a link between crisis managers, respondents and those outside of the disaster area (Drabek, 1986, Pinjnenburg and Van Duin, 1991, as cited in Garnett, 2007, p.178). Palen and Liu explain further: Information and communication technology (ICT) has expanded ways people can assist and involve themselves in disaster situations. In recent disasters, ICT has served as a means of expanded communication for disaster survivors, curious onlookers, and compassionate helpers wishing to aid those directly affected by crisis both inside and outside the geographical space of the disaster (as cited in Holmes, pg.12). This concept of sharing information through communication technology has led to the development of new technological tools designed to significantly improve crisis communication during a natural disaster. 16 USC Annenberg School of Communication & Journalism Crisis Connection Project Professor Gabriel Kahn’s Crisis Connection project stemmed from his work at the Wall Street Journal and his attempt to prepare for the coverage of an earthquake; according to him, it is a challenge to cover a catastrophic earthquake when there is a vast area that has been affected and many means of communication and mobility have been compromised. After consulting emergency response authorities such as the fire department, police department and the U.S. Geological Survey, Kahn discovered that there was a lack of communication between the different response teams and there was an even greater lack of communication between these field response teams and the public (Interview, Gabriel Kahn, Sept. 20, 2011). Upon his arrival to USC, inspired by Annenberg’s communication tools such as the iMap campus, which provides a 3D map of the university, Kahn developed his own project that will improve media coverage and crisis communication during a natural disaster. Kahn says: I thought, what if we have a way of crowd-sourcing the report of the disaster? So that instead of having twelve reporters, we have twelve thousand who can take a picture of damage and put it up on a map, and you can quickly get a bird’s eye- view of the situation… this would be something that is very useful to emergency responders, as well as news outlets and the general public (Interview, Gabriel Kahn, Sept. 20, 2011). Through the Crisis Connection tool, those involved in the crisis response of an earthquake would gain a much better understanding of the seriousness of the damages as well as the areas most impacted, making the crisis communication response much faster. The project is consisted of a web interface (webpage) as well as a phone interface (phone 17 application) that are to be interconnected with each other (Interview, Gabriel Kahn, Sept. 20, 2011). The Crisis Connect phone application, which as of March 2012 is still under development, would make a significant difference in the success of crisis communication during an earthquake disaster. It would allow for persons to take photographs of the incident/damages and share them with the public by posting them on the Crisis Connect communal map. Since most mobile phones are location-aware, persons would also be able to automatically positioning themselves on the Crisis Connect map coordinates to inform loved ones of their whereabouts. This way, there would be a decrease in telephone/cell phone usage that is often compromised during a crisis (Interview, Gabriel Kahn, Sept. 20, 2011). Kahn hopes that, once released, this new technology will help lower the barrier of emergency response and allow for more “citizen response,” encouraging regular persons to provide assistance to those in need in nearby locations. (Interview, Gabriel Kahn, Sept. 20, 2011). The Crisis Connect project is an exemplary crisis communication tool that could be integrated to pre-existing earthquake emergency plans, such as Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN). 18 Chapter Four: Best Practices- Southern California Earthquake Communications Plan Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN) The purpose of Southern California’s Operations Plan (OPLAN) is to provide specific and detailed strategies for executing well-coordinated response operations for a catastrophic earthquake in the region. This executable plan is a result of a combined collaboration of the private sector, local, state, tribal and federal stakeholders; it also includes over 1500 emergency management professionals’ expert input. Moreover, the assumptions made in the OPLAN are based on the California Geological Survey and the United States Geological Survey’s ShakeOut Scenario of 2008 (FEMA, 2010, pg.13). The OPLAN Three Phases of Earthquake Response Phase 1: Normal Operations The OPLAN’s purpose for Phase 1 is to “coordinate with private, non-profit, local, state, tribal and federal stakeholders to prepare for a catastrophic earthquake” (FEMA, 2010, pg.27). Unlike the other two phases, Phase 1 is considered an ongoing process. Phase 2: Response Phase 2 is composed of three different stages, Activations (2a), Deployment and Employment (2b), and Sustained Response (2c). Phase 2a occurs in the range of 0-24 hours after the earthquake strikes, hence it is the immediate response sub-phase. During this phase, “Communications, Search and Rescue (SAR), firefighting, acute medicate care, patient evacuation, and mass care are prioritized and carried out by local responders in each Operational Area” (FEMA, 2010, pg.28). Phase 2a ends when the communication 19 for emergency responders is established and initial damage assessments are communicated to the State and Federal Operations Section (FEMA, 2010, pg.29). Following is Phase 2b, which occurs between the 12-72 hours following the earthquake. During this phase, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) resources are deployed and employed in the area struck by the earthquake. Also, support for survivors is established via Staging Areas (SAs) such as hospitals, shelters, arenas and stadiums, and open spaces. Phase 2b is concluded once all emergency response sources and federal teams are well staged and employed with common objectives. Also, by the end of this phase, the life-saving activities must all be established, including shelters for victims (FEMA, 2010, pg.30). Last is Phase 2c and it takes place 72+ hours after the earthquake strikes. During this phase efforts are made to maintain communications infrastructure for all respondents as well as establishing public lines of communication. Phase 2c ends when response activities have set conditions for long-term recovery. This means shelters are transitioned into temporary housing for victims and rebuilding/repairing of homes has begun. Also at the end of this phase all critical infrastructure is functional, including natural gas, power and communications (FEMA, 2010,pg. 31-32). Phase 3: Long Term Recovery Once Phase 3 begins, all life-saving activities have been completed. “Private sector, local, state, tribal, and federal actions are required to restore services, continue government operations, and promote economic recovery following a catastrophic earthquake” (FEMA, 2010, pg. 32). Phase 3 is concluded once permanent housing has 20 been established, schools are opened, and tourism is re-established (FEMA, 2010, pg. 32). Figure 1: Phases of Earthquake Response Operations (FEMA, 2010, pg. 4) The OPLAN Objectives for Communications In case of an earthquake, the OPLAN has three communications objectives: establish and maintain functional and interoperable communications for responders; validate and provide internal and external public messaging; and, adopt an emergency management structure that manages resource shortages (FEMA, 2010, pg.13). OPLAN’s Critical Assumptions & Considerations for Communications The OPLAN makes the assumption that following an earthquake there will be a significant disruption of basic services such as transportation, water, healthcare, power and communications. The plan assumes that all services, voice and Internet, in the heavy 21 damage area will be impacted; the public’s need for telecommunications services will be in such high demand after the earthquake that it will overwhelm the communications systems, causing an impact far beyond the heavily damaged region. Hence, satellite communications will be so overwhelmed that only 25% of all connection attempts will be successful. Moreover, if the Central Office suffers from loss of power and equipment damage, the range and effectiveness of radio communications will be significantly limited (FEMA, 2010, pg.63). In addition, in the Southern California region there isn’t a logistical support dedicated for external messaging, hindering the distribution of information after a crisis. To adopt an emergency management structure for managing resource shortages, there would need to be a strong unity of effort among all levels of the emergency community. Finally, because of the expected damage of conventional public messaging methods, there would be a high need for innovative communications methods (FEMA, 2010, pg.15 & 20). Communications Tasks for OPLAN’s Phase 1-2 of Earthquake Response A catastrophic earthquake will generate extensive national media attention, but due to the expected communications systems breakdowns and impairments, it will be challenging to deliver messages to the public and media, both inside and outside the impacted area. Nevertheless, emergency officials are responsible for providing immediate and continuous internal and external messaging (FEMA, 2010, pg.82). The OPLAN provides an integrated approach for local, state, and federal officials to provide accurate, timely, and accessible information to audiences inside and outside 22 Southern California, including government, media, the private sector and local population. This approach includes pre-scripting public messages that are to be used during the catastrophic earthquake; ensuring that there is a consistent and coordinated delivery of messages both internally and externally in regards to the status of ongoing recovery operations in the affected area; and supplementing existing state and local public messaging assets (FEMA, 2010, pg.82). To achieve such goals, state and federal governments will work along with the Regional Response Coordination Center (RRCC), Standard of Cover (SOC), and Joint Field Office (JFO). To assure consistency in messaging, all messages and external support for messaging are controlled in the Joint Information Center (JIC) (FEMA, 2010, pg.82-83). Innovative public messaging methods will be used to provide critical information, such as public safety messages, instructions on evacuation, and sheltering. Throughout the phases of earthquake response, Southern California’s Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs), the California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA) and the Public Information Office (PIO) will be in charge of delivering these messages to impacted areas with the assistance of the Joint Information Center (JIC) and the JFO. In addition, they will be responsible for providing damage assessment statistics and estimations to the media, along with responding to other media inquires through news conferences, news releases, and preparing state and federal officials to be available for live programming. Furthermore, the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and CalEMA will be in charge of publicizing the status of any emergency or disaster declarations, along with any types of available assistance to victims and locations of Disaster Recovery Centers (FEMA, 2010, 23 pg.83). In addition, the Emergency Support Function (ESF 15) plays an important role by ensuring that sufficient Federal assets are deployed to the impacted area by providing accurate, coordinated, timely, and accessible information to the affected audiences. (FEMA, 2010, pg.83). The Southern California Earthquake Communications Plan addresses both operational and communication aspects of a crisis. For the purpose of this thesis, the focus will be given to the OPLAN’s guidelines for communications in each of the three phases. Phase 1: Normal Operations For the purpose of communication efforts, Phase 1 of the OPLAN consists of coordinating with “state and local agencies to identify their public messaging capabilities and expected shortfalls” (FEMA, 2010, pg.83). In the situation of an unexpected earthquake, communication efforts for Phase 1 end when the earthquake occurs. During this phase, CalEMA and ESF 15 must develop and maintain pre-scripted messages for an earthquake disaster. The CalEMA Office of Public Affairs must also determine the best communication systems to be used in order to disseminate messages to affected areas; examples of communication systems are the Internet, Twitter, Reverse 911, and Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS). Lastly, CalEMA must identify Public Information Office (PIO) teams and conduct training (FEMA, 2010, pg.83-84). Finally, FEMA must develop educational training campaigns for earthquake preparedness to educate the population on how to prepare for an earthquake and what to do during the emergency (FEMA, 2010, pg.84). 24 The Great California ShakeOut is an excellent earthquake preparedness campaign created by the Earthquake Country Alliance. ShakeOut is an annual statewide earthquake drill and preparedness event that anyone can participate in; this plan is often used by government entities to prepare their citizens, employees and other stakeholders for a catastrophic earthquake (ShakeOut Drill Manual Government, pg.1). The plan provides detailed instructions on what to do before, during and immediately after an earthquake to minimize injuries and damages. ShakeOut’s website provides all the necessary guidelines, along with downloadable emergency supply checklists, tips for food and water storage, and resources in 11 different regions throughout the state (ShakeOut Media Guideline, pg. 2). Phase 2a: (0-24 hours) Immediate Response In a communications context, the purpose of Phase 2a is to notify all agencies and organizations of the earthquake. It is important to “conduct initial assessments for situational awareness” and conduct “analysis and assessment of functioning media platforms for distributing local public messaging to the impacted area” (FEMA, 2010, pg. 84). This phase concludes when federal agencies begin to deploy assets for support to Southern California and also start coordinating federal messages (FEMA, 2010, pg.84). A number of tasks must be performed during Phase 2a. First, local authorities need to deliver messages to affected population, regarding shelter, food, water, and how to get assistance and updated disaster information. Prior to the JIC being established, the CalEMA and FEMA along with local authorities will use communication methods such as, Emergency Digital Information System (EDIS) & Emergency Alert System, radio, 25 TV, Internet, Web 2.0 (twitter), Reverse 911 & 211, and Ham Radio Operations, to deliver the pre-scripted messages created in Phase 1; these messages will be both in English and Spanish. They range from information about phone service to food and shelter information; A sampling of messages appears in the Appendix E. By the end of Phase 2a, the California National Guard must have prepared a Joint Team Force (JTF) and be prepared to communicate with and deploy Civil Support Teams. Phase 2b: (12-72 Hours) Deployment & Employment The goal for Phase 2b is “to rapidly, efficiently, and effectively deploy assets to the affected area to support emergency response public message validation and distribution” (FEMA, 2010, pg.92). This phase ends when the JIC is established, and public messaging is coordinated, distributed and received both inside and outside the impacted area (FEMA, 2010, pg.92). For this phase, FEMA will coordinate with CalEMA to provide external messages for national radio, TV and Print media. The California National Guard will deploy Civil Support Teams and JTF units to the designated Staging Areas (SAs) and prepares to provide support for public messaging. Lastly, in contribution with the CalEMA and FEMA, local authorities must continue delivering updated messages to the population affected by the earthquake using all available means of communication (FEMA, 2010, pg.92). Examples of pre-scripted public messages and instructions that should be used during this phase are included below: 26 Operations Message Emergency services and rescue operations are underway. {Provide contact information and procedures to secure these services.} Operations to provide for basic life support (water, food, shelter, energy, and waste removal) are underway. {Provide locations, contact numbers and procedures to getting assistance.} Operations to repair local infrastructure, roads, utilities, etc. Local, state and federal repair and assistance services available and how they are being employed. {Provide estimates on when basic services will return.} Emergency services and rescue operations that are underway. {Focus on success and human interest stories, but provide realistic and accurate estimates of tragedy.} Operations to provide for basic life support (water, food, shelter, energy and waste removal_ that are underway. {Focus on human interest and success stories.} • Volunteers should visit www.californiavolunteers,gov for volunteer agencies that mught be in need of additional volunteers. • Send monetary donations to {Provide POCs and contact information.} Operations to repair local infrastructure, roads, utilities, etc. {Provide accurate estimates of timelines to complete repairs and cost estimates. Provide information on how these operations might affect other regions of the country.} Federal, state and local responders mobilized and moving disaster sites to provide assistance. Rescue efforts have begun with Federal (USCG) State and local assets. {Report success stories and addition of new capabilities as they report in.} Emergency services and rescue operations are underway. {Provide contact information and procedures to secure these services.} Operations and plans to assist property owners (businesses and individual home owners). Where property owners can get assistance and support for claims and repair services (FEMA, 2010, pg.93-94). [Additional messages are included in the Appendix F] Phase 2c: (72+ Hours) Sustained Response The purpose of Phase 2c is “to maximize the use of available assets to support public messaging regarding response operations to the interjected area” (FEMA, 2010, pg.95). This phase is concluded when operations have shifted to long-term recovery and communications systems are back to pre-earthquake levels. 27 During this phase, the Joint Information Center (JIC), which at this point should be fully established, should continue to use all available means to provide both state and local authorities continuous internal and external messaging support. This expanded support includes, establishing satellite JICs; providing Community Relations Specialists and JIC Field Officer support in shelters, counseling centers, Points of Distribution (PODs) and Local Assistance Centers (LACs); supporting Congressional Delegation and other VIP visits; deploying broadcast operations teams to shelters in order to record circumstances and conditions; improving product development capabilities, such as pamphlets, press releases, talking points, quick facts, and congressional advisories. Additionally, the California National Guard is in charge of sending messages to isolated and hard to reach pockets of the population when and where it is required through loudspeakers. While the OPLAN is an insightful guide, it doesn’t elaborate on resolving the complexity of crisis communication with stakeholders. Therefore, in addition to the OPLAN, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services designed a risk communication guide for both state and local governmental agencies that provides best practice guidelines on communicating with the public during a natural disaster crisis. 28 Chapter Five: Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies Importance of Risk Communication According to the Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies, the manner in which a community is informed of the associated risks of a crisis before, during and after an event, can affect the public’s perception on whether the crisis was handled successfully or not (Maher, 2006, pg.1). While risk communication has been a key factor for emergency management of the hazardous material industry, it is now becoming more widespread and used for other types of disasters, such as earthquakes and other natural phenomena (pg 1). In the case of a crisis, the public is likely to be in a state of panic. Therefore, risk communication must be used before, during and after an event, in order to effectively communicate to the public essential information and reassurance. Before a crisis occurs, state and local agencies must use risk communication to reduce anxiety about potential emergencies. During a crisis, risk communication must be used to prevent further panic in mid-crisis. Risk communication is also used after a crisis to prevent or reduce the public’s outrage about agency actions or inactions in response to the event (pg.4). Goals and Objectives of a Risk Communication Program Defining Target Audiences For an effective risk communication program, agencies must determine their goals and objectives for the plan. Defining the target audiences will help identify these goals because agencies will be able to anticipate a community’s values and interests. General types of stakeholders include residential community, business/commercial community, industrial community, and other governmental agencies. Each type of 29 community is composed of a wide spectrum of individuals with similar but also different interests that need to be taken into account when designing a communication program (Maher, 2006, pg.15). Risk communication specialists also categorize stakeholders into four groups in order of decreasing interest level: Activists are highly concerned people; Attentives are people who follow the issue closely; Browsers are individuals following the issue casually; and Inattentives pay little or no attention to the issue and are the largest group of stakeholders. In the case of high hazard situations, such as an earthquake, the biggest challenge for communicators is to get the population that is not at all involved to pay attention (pg.17). Understanding Key Risk Issues of Interest to a Community Only after all target audiences are defined, agencies can understand the common concerns of a community. Having this concrete understanding is necessary to effectively communicate the possible risk issues to members of a community (Maher, 2006, pg.6). Some common risk questions from a community are regarding consequences and worst- case scenarios, for example “How many people could be killed during an earthquake?”; emergency and disaster likelihood, such as “What is the likelihood of a major earthquake?”; community emergency response actions, for example, “What should I do to protect my family if an earthquake occurs?”; and location of community notification systems (pg.6-7). Moreover, when communicating risk information, agencies must remember to address the financial, business and real estate impact a crisis will have on a community, for it is typically highlight valued by community members. On the other hand, it should 30 be taken into consideration that the public is not concerned with the cost-effectiveness of safety solutions, as well as governmental challenges associated with emergency risks and solutions. Agencies should also recognize that in general a community would be less interested in the science and technology behind risk assessment. Due to human nature, individuals will be more interested in how a crisis will impact them and their loved ones, rather than the community as a whole. Lastly, the risk communicator should address past community crises because persons will focus on them as a way to express concerns of future risks (Maher, 2006, pg.9). Pre-Crisis Objectives and Information Priorities Pre-crisis objectives are to inform the community of any possible risk; seek information from the community that will be useful to the governmental agency; clarify the probability and consequences of a potential risk in order to install a greater degree of proactive preparedness instead of zero risk tolerance; address any existing controversy or concern of stakeholders that would enhance safety; provide a forum for discussion to let stakeholders express their concerns and ideas; improve stakeholders’ understanding and ability to execute an effective emergency response; and satisfy regulatory requirements concerning emergency events (Maher, 2006, pg.18-19). A key factor to remember during the pre-crisis risk communication is the importance of community involvement. Agencies should involve community members in the decision-making process as early as possible. In doing so, agencies will gain valuable information and give people a chance to express their feelings and ideas. As a result, 31 community members are much more likely to accept and respond to agencies’ ideas. (pg.19). Benefits of applying risk communication prior to a crisis are that government agencies will increase its credibility, persons’ risk decision-making will improve as well as their risk perception, and there will be fewer battles between community members and the agencies (pg.20). Pre-Crisis Effective Vehicles of Communication The Risk Communication Guide provides in-dept instructions on the most effective means of communication during the pre-crisis phase. For instance, pamphlets & flyers are recommended as cost-effective one-message communication tools. These tools are of better use when there is a need to focus specifically on one aspect of risk communication. Therefore, each pamphlet/flyer should focus on one specific topic. Because of their brief nature, pamphlets/flyers are most attractive to stakeholders who lose interest in lengthy information material. For best results, agencies should distribute pamphlets/flyers where stakeholders reside and provide multilingual material (pg.34). Another vehicle is newsletters because they are effective for delivering information on long-term projects to an audience that is already interested in the topic being discussed. For newsletters to be a successful tool, agencies must allow for enough time for the material to be edited and approved, develop a mailing list and maintain contacts, avoid the use of acronyms and abbreviations, encourage reading with the use of compelling headlines and graphics and provide audiences with a consistent well-written and high quality newsletter (pg. 35). 32 The Internet is also a powerful tool for disseminating crucial information on a global level. The advantages of using such a vehicle is that it is inexpensive, allows for high quality graphics and designs, audiences can select their topics of interest and provide direct feedback to agencies. In regards to the Internet as a tool, some concerns are that not all target audiences have access to it and the data disseminated may be misused and cause harm. Overall, an agency Internet website should provide more than sufficient information on all sides and issues related to a risk issue (pg. 36). Lastly, in the Guide Maher (2006) encourages the use of public forums, in the form of small-scale public information meetings, for problem-solving and meaningful dialogue. By hosting small meetings with the different affected audiences, risk communicators will avoid the possibility of unnecessary delegation. Aside from formal meetings, risk communicators should provide other options to exchange information such as drop-in hours in local public places like libraries. To be most effective, Maher (2006, pg. 37) suggests for risk communicators to have a clear understanding of the goal for each meeting. Communicators should have researched the stakeholders in order to understand their concerns and also to be prepared incase there is a long-standing embitterment and/or lack of trust by stakeholders towards the agency (pg. 37). Objectives and Information Priorities During and After a Crisis Maher (2006, pg.21) believes that in general, the objectives of defying target audiences and identifying their priorities in a pre-crisis stage also apply during and after a crisis. Different from the pre-crisis, is that during and after a crisis the level of interest from all potential stakeholders is likely to increase. Instead of receiving questions such as 33 “Can this happen?” emergency management professionals will receive questions such as, “How did this happen? How can we keep it from happening again?” (pg.21). Hence, key objectives and priorities for government agencies during these stages are to retain credibility and trust, provide clear information in regard to what caused the crisis and its impact, and express lessons-learned that will help emergency management teams decrease the likelihood or consequences of the risk in the future (pg.21). Effective Risk Communication Vehicles for During and After a Crisis Once an incident such as an earthquake, occurs and has impacted the public, it is important for agencies to understand that “Time is of the essence in providing information to the community, several other communication media will be readily available, but not necessarily controllable, like newspapers, radios, television, technical journals, and community interest will most likely not have to be encouraged” (Maher, 2006, pg.39). A community will judge the success of agencies’ efforts to respond to a crisis by how much information is provided to the community. So, good timing of released information through the right vehicles of communication is critical for agencies to maintain credibility (pg.29). The Guide provides a detailed list of activities for risk communicators to engage in during a crisis. For instance, if there is a high degree of uncertainty among the community, communication should be focused on answering the most common questions, such as “Who will be impacted?” “What should the public do?” “How prepared was the agency to deal with this emergency?” (pg.30). If there is uncertainty with respect to the chronology of the incident or the cause, agencies should immediately 34 release correct information and follow-up when more facts are available. News media should be regularly contacted with relevant information on the crisis as it unfolds; by taking the first step, the media is less likely to think the agency involved is hiding something and will not seek for less accurate information elsewhere. Lastly, Maher (2006) argues to never go “off-the-record” and instead maintain open channels of communication, ensuring that the public receives accurate, clear and timely information, including the message that emergency responders are taking appropriate actions to mitigate the crisis (pg.40). Once a crisis is considered terminated, risk communicators should continue to follow-up with news media to ensure they have the correct information and are updated. All information provided to the media and the public during the crisis should be verified so that future references to the incident will be correct. Within the same lines, resources should be available to persons with additional questions and any promises made to the community should be fulfilled. Most importantly, agencies should be honest with the events that occurred and how they will further impact a community. In revealing their choice of actions, agencies mustn’t be defensive, because that would only lead to more criticism from stakeholders. Instead, Maher (2006, pg.41) claims that if agencies point out their wrongdoings, stakeholders will be more forgiving. 35 Below are examples of suggested risk communication vehicles to be used during and after a crisis by the Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies (pg.38): Figure 2: Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies: risk communication vehicles during and after a crisis (pg. 38) 36 Trust/Credibility Factors and Risk Communication Trust and credibility are the foundation for a successful risk communication plan. A major part of the success of risk communication depends on the history between an agency and its stakeholders; if there is a history of distrust and controversy between an agency and its community, then risk communication efforts can be very difficult because the community will not be interested in the agency’s risk information (Maher, 2006, pg.23). Dealing with Low-Trust as a Government Agency For agencies that already have a low-credibility with stakeholders, certain actions can be taken to recoup trust. For instance, an agency can reduce the reasons for distrust by consistently sharing information with the public and involving the community as much as possible. Another great way to gain trust is to ask stakeholders what actions the agency took that made them lose trust and what it can do to regain their confidence. Also, if agency representatives have caused the mistrust, they should admit to their actions and apologize (Maher, 2006, pg.27). Actions to Build Trust/Credibility Pre-Crisis The Guide instructs, “Instead of pushing the public to trust them, agencies should strive toward acting consistently trustworthy” (pg.24). Agencies should always appear to be caring, honorable, honest and encourage public involvement as much as possible in the decision of actions. Transparency plays a key role in the development and maintenance of a positive relationship; organizational procedures and logics that involve 37 a community should be explained, so persons understand the reasoning behind an agency’s handling of risk and safety issues. Another way to build and maintain trust is for agencies to be forthcoming with information that involves the community with consistent messages; any potential inconsistency in information can lead to the public feeling mislead. Credibility can also be earned when agencies follow through with their promises and take the time to listen to the different stakeholders in a community (pg. 24-36). Ideally, issues of mistrust between stakeholders and agencies should be addressed during the pre-crisis phase of a crisis communication plan. A great way for an agency to develop trust/credibility with a community is by creating an alliance with organizations that already have credibility in the community. For instance, firefighters, medical professionals, environmental groups, scientists, and non-profits can help an agency with risk communication. Maher (2006, pg.26) even suggests for an agency to work with critics; working with groups that are looking to find a fault can help an agency address the community’s major concerns, and will add a great deal of trustworthiness. Trust/Credibility During and After a Crisis While the same underlying principles for building trust/credibility prior to a crisis also apply to during and after, the Guide suggests further key actions for communicators. To minimize backlash, during a crisis agencies should maintain open channels of communication, provide important information promptly, and ensure that the public receives the clear message that emergency responders are working to reduce damage and/or fatalities (pg. 32). 38 To maintain trust after a crisis, agencies should provide resources for the public to receive help and/or additional information, for example a website or community hotline. Additionally, agencies must clearly communicate to the public that proper actions are being taken to investigate the cause of the crisis, on how to prevent or reduce the damages in the future, as well as doing follow-up with any commitment made to the community during the crisis (pg.32). Correct Timing for Release of Information to Maintain Trust/ Credibility Typically, government agencies choose to withhold information from the public for fear of causing undue alarm or disclosing incorrect or misinterpreted data. So, they choose to hold off on disclosing information until a risk management plan is in place. Agencies view this as the responsible choice of action, but once revealed, it is often perceived by the public as a “cover-up,” diminishing the agency’s credibility (Maher, 2006, pg. 29). In the Guide, Maher (2006) provides suggestions on how an agency should make information public to a community, especially if the appropriate release time isn’t clear. For starters, he states that if an agency is investigating a potential risk, it should always consider making it known to the public to prevent any need to justify its lack of disclosure in the future. Even if the agency isn’t completely confident in its findings about the risk, it should still share with the community the procedures being taken without releasing the results. On the other hand, if the agency is fairly confident in its results, it should release the information but remind the public that they are only preliminary results. Moreover, if the agency is waiting for the final results to be quality- 39 assured before releasing them, it should use the preliminary information to start a discussion with the community on risk and possible mitigation efforts (pg.29). On the contrary, if the agency feels that the preliminary information will not make much sense unless it is released with other relevant information that is not yet available, it should wait and release the information together, but should clearly explain to the public the real reasoning behind the delay. In addition, if it seems that the media or someone else may release information, the agency should release it first to prevent any misinterpretation. Finally, agency representatives should refrain from saying “no comment” whenever they do not know the answer to a question. Instead, they should say, “I don’t know, but I will get you the information as soon as possible” (pg.29-31). Guidelines for Choosing Agency Representatives to Communicate with the Community The individuals chosen to represent a government agency are key assets to the success of risk communication; representatives will generate the first impression the public will have of an agency. Hence, the field staff of an agency should seem understanding, responsive to the public’s needs, and report community concerns to the agency so they can be addressed (Maher, 2006, pg.52). An agency must carefully choose its field representatives. People in the community will want to speak to persons that in the case of a crisis would be directly involved in the decision-making process, such as fire fighters or policemen. The field staff should consist of a variety of experts and authorities with the knowledge in one or more specific risk issues, so that they can respond to the community’s concerns. It might 40 be more effective if an agency uses other non-agency experts to address a community, such as academic experts, local community leaders, and representatives of civic organizations (Maher, 2006, pg. 53). Lastly, all representatives must have communication skills and/or training in order to effectively and clearly send out the correct messages (pg. 52-53). Communication skills are necessary for representatives to build a trusting relationship with the public. Such skills include the ability to successfully address personal questions and provide honest and clear responses (Maher, 2006, pg.47) Furthermore, Maher (2006) provides three strategies to advance the relationship between agency representatives and a community. First, when speaking at a public meeting, a representative should begin by telling the group who he/she is, his/her background and why he/she is there; in this way the representative proves to the public why he/she is qualified to discuss the topic at hand. Second, a representative must let the people know he/she is human too; for instance, it is appropriate to express feelings, concerns and compassion for those influenced by the risk or crisis. An example of this would be, “My heart goes out to you. I can’t imagine how awful it must have been for you.” Third, when speaking personally, a representative should express his/her values into the context, and encourage the public to do so as well (Maher, 2006, pg. 47). Since it takes time to build a trusting relationship, an agency should aim to use the same representative(s) throughout the communication plan and encourage frequent interaction. This established relationship will help during a crisis, because people will react more favorably toward a person that they have previously seen or personally spoken to (Maher, 2006, pg.28). 41 Chapter Six: Natural Disaster Case Study- L’Aquila, Italy Earthquake 2009 Background of L’Aquila, Italy L’Aquila was founded in the mid 13 th century by the Holy Emperor Frederick II. It is renowned as a “medieval town” with historic monuments and gothic-like churches dating from the Roman times to the Renaissance. (”La Storia” & Miyamoto, 2009). The city is located on the Arno River and is surrounded by the Apennine Mountains, which developed because of the continuous collision between the Eurasian and African plates (Miyamoto, 2009 & Joyce, 2009). Because of its unfortunate location in the center of the Apennines -- a seismic area -- L’Aquila has had a long history of earthquake disasters. The major quakes occurred in 1349, 1461, 1646, and the worse occurred in 1703 killing 5000 people. (“L’Aquila Earthquake-a Year On”). Earthquake of 2009 Government Immediate Response At 3:32am, on April 6th, 2009, a 6.3 magnitude earthquake struck L’Aquila, Italy and the surrounding villages. (“L’Aquila Earthquake- a Year On”). Less than an hour after the earthquake struck, Italy’s Emergency Response team, called the Protezione Civile (Civil Protection Agency), arrived at the scene prepared with food and other utilities for search and rescue (Bocci, 2009). Soon after, the agency organized “tent cities” for L’Aquila residents who had lost their homes because of the earthquake (Pietrucci, 2010). Local Police and firefighters also performed search and rescue operations and quickly secured the heavily damaged areas (Miyamato, 2009). 42 It didn’t take long for volunteer organizations all throughout the country to offer help. Although many of these organizations wanted to go to L’Aquila immediately, they were put on standby by officials of the Protezione Civile, because they didn’t want too many people at the scene and cause more confusion. (Bocci, 2009). The same day of the earthquake, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi announced to the people of L’Aquila, “We’re setting up a special fund to revive our architectural treasures,” which had been lost because of the natural disaster (Sirletti, 2009). Also, with the Protezione Civile in charge of controlling and overseeing the reconstruction process of the city, Berlusconi said, “We won’t leave you [residents of L’Aquila] alone. Don’t worry, the reconstructions will be quick” (Fleishman, 2009). As it will become clearer further in the chapter, while on the tragic day such statements must have brought a sense of reassurance to the victims and the Italian population, it was a major mistake for the Prime Minister to make promises that he and the Protezione Civile couldn’t possible keep. Damages The earthquake killed 309 people and left 70,000 L’Aquila residents homeless (“L’Aquila Earthquake- a Year On”). Roughly 110,000 monuments and artifacts were affected (Kimmelman, 2009). For instance, the rear and center of the popular Romanesque church the Basilica di Santa Maria di Collemaggio collapsed. The Porta Napoli, built in 1548, the oldest gate to the city, was also destroyed by the earthquake (Gammell, 2009 & Povoledo, Damages, 2009). The Basilica di San Bernardino di Siena, the largest Renaissance church in Abruzzo, ended up severely damaged by the 200 43 tremors that came after the main 6.3 magnitude earthquake (Sirletti, 2009). The Cathedral of Santo Massimo & the church of Anime Sante in Piazza Duomo also sustained major damage because of the earthquake. While Berlusconi promised a swift recovery, in 2009 Ministry officials determined that it would take 10 to 15 years to rebuild the city, with reconstruction costs of more than $16 billion (Miyamoto, 2009 & Kimmelman, 2009). L’Aquila Residents Emotional Response to Earthquake’s Damages The damage to citizens’ homes and Italy’s cultural heritage was felt throughout the country. An urgent need for rebuilding the city back to “normal” was present throughout the area impacted by the earthquake. On April 8, 2009, Ugo de Paudis, town councilmen for Onna, Italy, a small town next to L’Aquila that was struck by the earthquake, said: Only a few houses are still standing. They’ll have to knock everything down… That’s why we need to rebuild right here immediately, so there’s a sense of future. Otherwise, people will move in with their families in other villages and cities and our communities will be lost (Fleishman, 2009). Onna resident Carlo Ludovici said: I started working here when I was 16, but this tragedy has left me without the will to work anymore. Life is tough when you get to be 64, and you don’t think the world will rumble or you’ll see dead bodies of young dead kids (Fleishman, 2009). Paolo Paolucci, also another Onna town resident said, “I don’t believe in miracles after this…This is not like when you have an earthquake in California or Los Angeles. There is no money here to rebuild.” (Fleishman, 2009). Moreover, in response to the enormous damage to L’Aquila’s historic monuments and artifacts, assistant to L’Aquila’s mayor, Mr. Cialante said, “If we don’t reconstruct 44 properly,” meaning to put everything back exactly how it was, “it will be a shame on the entire nation. We will be another Pompeii.” (Kimmelman, 2009). Vittorio Sgarbi, art critic who served as an undersecretary at the Ministry of Culture in 2001, said “The damage done to Italy’s cultural heritage has been enormous.” (Sirletti, 2009). Residents’ Response to the Actions Taken By the Italian Government & Protezione Civile Residents’ gratitude for the government quickly turned into impatience and distrust. For instance, L’Aquila residents were not satisfied with the government’s efforts for rebuilding homes. On December 2009, almost ten months after the earthquake, Roberto Pilolli, employee at L’Aquila Music Conservatory stated: I want my home back exactly as it was…Now L’Aquila is dead, and they’re [Protezione Civile] only caring about churches and monuments, not about our houses. But the whole city was a monument. (Kimmelman, 2009). While many still remained in the “tent cities,” those who had moved into the newly built apartments, complained about the lack of space, shops and other social organizations (Kimmelman, 2009). L’Aquila residents such as Antonietta Centrofanti, resented the government’s decision to build new homes around the city instead of in the “heart of the city.” She said: These residents have a roof over their heads, but it’s not easy. They are outside the city, where there is no culture, no history, no housing, one building after the other…It’s as if our community has been divided and split into pieces. (Mancini, 2010). Perhaps, such statements of disappointment and frustration could have been prevented if Prime Minister Berlusconi hadn’t set high expectations for recovery. Moreover, residents’ unhappiness with the location of their new homes reveals the Italian 45 government’s lack of post-crisis communication; L’Aquila residents were probably not included in the decision-making of the location of their new homes. While the “tent cities” shelters were meant to provide comfortable and safe temporary homes for the earthquake victims, many residents felt otherwise. The Protezione Civile’s division in charge of shelters was called “Division of Command and Control.” This division set some questionable rules for those residing in the tents including the prohibition of “free association and democratic discussion among the residents of the tent cities, or the prohibition of free access from the outside of both people and information, like, for instance, journalists.” According to the Italian government, these special measures were put into place to keep the situation in order and protect the citizens (Pietrucci, 2010, pg 2). But many of the residents who inhabited the “tent cities” felt that they became dependent on the government’s help; the Protezione Civile provided shelter, food, and supplies. They also felt that the Italian government enforced strict regulations and surveillance through police, firefighters and army, to keep them under control. (Pietrucci, 2010, pg 2). As a result, in the summer of 2009 the residents of L’Aquila decided to fight for their right to be involved in the reconstruction of their city. Also, they felt that the Agency was trying to keep the “real” status of L’Aquila outside of the public and political realm, through filtered media messages of the miracolo Aquilano campaign (The Aquilian miracle campaign) (Pietrucci, 2010, pg 2). Those residents who resented the government’s biased media campaign, decided to create an activist group, called the 14 46 Citizens’ Committee, also known as 3e32 as in 3:32AM, the time the earthquake struck. Their goals were to ensure democratic participation in the rebuilding of the city and to ensure public transparency during the process of distributing funds for the reconstruction. Most importantly, 3e32 set out to fight against the false post-earthquake reality of the miracolo Aquilano that the media was transmitting to the public (Pietrucci, 2010, pg. 3). Pietrucci (2010) argues that the activists recognized the importance of media. She claims that: In a context where politics turned into spectacle, the activists realized that the only possible way to fight against propaganda and misinformation was that of fighting back in the same battlefield, that is, the realm of images and media spectacles (pg.4). Hence, 3e32 created L’Aquila99 TV, which provided a realistic view of L’Aquila’s current condition through films and documentaries. The group also generated a constant flow of alternative information through the use of social media; they created awareness around the world by using compelling images and spreading them through online communication channels, such as the Dice Che blog, YouTube, alternative news channels, Twitter and Facebook (Pietrucci, 2010, pg.4). As soon as the 3e32 activist group began communicating with the public, the Italian government should have monitored their activity on social media platforms; it could have determined the importance of addressing this group by the amount of followers and the messages they were spreading. By not responding to the accusations made by 3e32 the Prime Minister sent the message to the public that he doesn’t care about L’Aquila victims. 47 The Role of Media During the L’Aquila Post-Earthquake Recovery According to Pietrucci (2010), the immediate news coverage of the earthquake showed the real aftermath of the crisis. But as time passed, Italian television started showing only certain aspects of the reality in L’Aquila; they promoted the miracolo Aquilano, which, she argues, had been crafted by Italy’s Prime Minister Berlusconi (pg 3). Italy’s mainstream media showed a serious of images conveying the success of the Protezione Civile in the city of L’Aquila. For instance, many images showed Prime Minister Berlusconi helping with the reconstructions. Therefore, Pietrucci (2010) argues that the media falsely demonstrated to the public that the Italian government was successful in the recovery of L’Aquila (pg.3). Regarding the Italian media’s portrayal of L’Aquila’s recovery, the city’s mayor, Massimo Cialante, said, “The message in the media here is, ‘Things are going well.’ That is far from the truth.” (Kimmelman, 2009). Indictment of Italian Earthquake Experts in 2011 In May 2011, seven members of the Italian National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks (scientists, seismologists, and members of the Protezione Civile) were indicted on manslaughter charges for downplaying the risk of the fatal earthquake in L’Aquila, Italy (Povoledo, Indictments, 2011). There were numerous claims, but the one most relevant to this paper is that he prosecutors argued that the defendants told local media that the six months of low- magnitude tremors were not a warning sign that a major earthquake would follow (Batty, 2011). As a matter of fact, in an interview with local media, one of the defendants 48 Bernardo de Bernardinis, of the National Civil Protection Department, claimed that the public had no reason to worry. When he was asked whether the residents of L’Aquila should just relax with a glass of wine, he said, “Absolutely, a Montepulciano doc [a Tuscan red wine]. This seems important.” (Batty, 2011). After the indictment was made public, there was a global response from the scientific community against the accusations. Scientists all over the world were calling the case a “witch hunt” and accused the prosecutors of putting science on trial. As a matter of fact, the director of the Southern California Earthquake Center, Thomas H. Jordan, said: We have been especially concerned that the prosecution is based on misconstrued notions about the role of scientists, which is to provide scientific information about potential earthquake hazards, and public officials, who must base their civil protection actions on this information but also on many other considerations (Povoledo, Indictments, 2011). But relatives of those who died because of the earthquake said that their trust in science and scientists is what lead to the death of their loved ones. Vincenzo Vittorini, who lost his wife and daughter to the quake, said that he would not have kept his family home unless he had been reassured by the commission members and the news media that it was safe. (Povoledo, Indictments, 2011). Vittorini wrote and released through media a letter on December 11, 2011 to express his opinion on the on-going trial. He claimed that although there was tension in the courtroom between opposing sides, both parties seemed serene and respectful of the other. Also, he addressed the citizens of L’Aquila asking them to not make judgment on 49 the Italian government and the Protezione Civile without having heard all of the facts from both sides of the dispute (”Vittorini”). Perhaps the indictment could have been prevented had the Italian National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risk warned residents of the risk of an earthquake. L’Aquila’s Recovery Progress 2009- 2012 By 2010, 4500 new and modern earthquake-proof apartments had been constructed in 19 areas on the city’s outskirts, housing more than 14,500 residents. Also, 29 schools were built at a cost of US$100 million (Mancini, 2010). These reconstructions may lead to the idea that the city is slowly returning to normal, but on April 6, 2010, a year after the quake, L’Aquila’s mayor Cialante claimed otherwise. In a statement to the media he said, “Things are not where they should be- it’s halfway complete…There is so much to do and there are no funds to do it” (Mancini, 2010). As a matter of fact, by 2010 the government spent more than $1 billion into the reconstruction of L’Aquila (Mancini, 2010). Some local critics argued that the reconstruction was far from finished because of the Italian government’s misguided and poorly coordinated approach to recovery (Mancini, 2010). Furthermore, after the L’Aquila earthquake, the Italian government passed a national financial plan to help prevent property damages and injuries from future earthquakes. This plan authorized the expense of 44 million Euros for the construction of seismic safe public buildings in 2010; it also approved 145,1 million euros to be spent in 2011; 195,6 million euros for each year between 2012 and 2014; 145,1 million euros for 50 the year 2015 and 44 million euros for the year 2016. The execution of the plan is responsibility of the Protezione Civile (“Piano Nazionale Per la Prevenzione”). Nevertheless, in the beginning of 2012 the group 3e32 was still actively fighting against the Italian government for false promises, especially regarding the reconstruction of the city. The activist group argued that after almost three years, the residents of L’Aquila were still suffering from the aftermath of the quake; many were still left without jobs, homes, and debt. These debts, they claimed, were due to the increase in taxes for unnecessary and expensive plans as part of the reconstruction of homes and buildings (“Equita’ o Equitalia”). 51 Content Analysis: The Use of Social Media for Communications By Italian Government and Non-Government Organizations A content analysis of 18 different Italian websites was conducted to understand Italy’s current level of use of social media as a tool for communication. These websites were categorized into two different groups to determine whether an organization’s types of messages and communications goals are an influencing factor on the amount of used social media platforms. The two groups are Italian government related agencies/organizations and non-government organizations, some of which consider themselves activist groups. The names of the Italian government sponsored/related websites that were analyzed are: Italia Tourism Official Website, Protezione Civile, INGV Terremoti, Protezione Civile Roma Capitale, Comune Di Roma, Linea Amica, Salvaguarda Proteggi Qualifica Roma, Italia: Regione Abruzzo, Italia: Regione Lazzio, Il Mio Lazzio, and Regione Abruzzo Ricostruzzione L’Aquila. These websites were chosen because of their relevance to earthquake crisis communication and/or represented the different regions of Italy, especially Rome. The names of the non-government related websites that were analyzed are: 3e32, BlogSpot: Un Diario Aquilano, 6aprile.it, Consumo Territorio- L’Aquila, Il Manifesto, Mediacrew Casematte, and Radio Stella 180. These websites were chosen for their content on earthquake crises and relief. A few key findings were identified from this analysis. For instance, out of the Italian government sponsored/related sites, the Italia Tourism Official Website is the 52 most sophisticated in its use of social media to communicate to and engage with its target audiences; the website links to profiles on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Foursquare, and YouTube, all of which are interconnected. In this case, it is apparent that these social media platforms are used to connect with Italians and non-Italian tourists and residents, because the content is both in Italian and English, and most of the communicating is done without words through photographs and videos. In comparison, the other websites in this category rely on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. For example, the INGV Terremotti website uses YouTube and Twitter to provide real-time warnings/information on natural disasters in the country. Moreover, the websites that should rely the most on social media communications to facilitate the sharing of information on natural disasters and other crises do not put these platforms to much use. The Protezione Civile official website only uses social media to the extent of allowing readers to share on Twitter and Facebook articles, photos and videos from the site. Also, the Protezione Civile Roma Capitale website only uses Twitter to provide up- to-date feeds on road hazards and local news. The Italian non-government websites rely mainly on social media to communicate to their audiences. For example, the content of the 3e32 activist group website is based on multiple blog entries, YouTube videos and live-feeds through their multiple Twitter and Facebook accounts. Similarly, the websites 6aprile.it, Consumo Territorio-L’Aquila, Il Manifesto, Mediacrew Casematte and Radio Stella 180 communicate their messages through multiple blogs and YouTube pages. 53 In conclusion, this content analysis has revealed that most of the Italian government related websites use social media because it is the new “trend,” hence without a well-conceived strategy and communication goal(s). The non-government websites, some of which were developed by activist groups after the L’Aquila earthquake, rely on social media platforms, especially blogs and YouTube, to strategically disseminate their messages to the public. 54 Chapter Seven: Italy’s Current Emergency Response Plan for Crises The Protezione Civile The Protezione Civile (PC) is the Italian government agency responsible for preserving the well-being of the public and of the environment (nature and public/private buildings, etc.) from any damages caused by natural or man-made catastrophes (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 1.1). The agency’s responsibilities include a series of actions. It must foresee possible risks, causes for the risks, and identify the specific terrains that are vulnerable. In addition, the agency is accountable for providing the public with more than sufficient information on possible risks and how to respond to them for protection. It is in charge of reducing possible damages from natural or man- made crises through diverse activities of prevention. Moreover, the agency is in charge of immediate emergency response to any crisis and aiding the recovery by eliminating any obstacles that prevent a location from going back to “normal.” Finally, it is assumed that the Protezione Civile’s duties are interconnected with other state and local agencies (1.1). The Protezione Civile’s General Emergency Response Actions For any state of emergency the Sala Operative dell’ Ufficio Emergenza Protezione Civile (EPC), the Operations Emergency Office of the Civil Protection Agency, is in charge of directing and monitoring national and local emergency response teams. The EPC office is responsible for verifying and distributing information to authorities and the public. It assures the continuous flow of information/communications between the Italian government, media and those affected by the crisis, and it maintains all operations between volunteers, local authorities and the Protezione Civile organized and effective. In addition, the EPC website provides useful information for the public, 55 such as meteorological updates and different emergency safety precautions (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 2.1). Specific examples of information that the EPC office releases during an earthquake crisis include the magnitude of the earthquake; the number of people in danger and fatalities; the level of danger for people in certain areas; the amount of help provided in each area; the damages that have been reported and/or are visible; the presence of medical help, fire fighters, police force, and volunteers in each area; and status of available and failed communications services and tools (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008). The Protezione Civile’s response operations in case of an emergency are categorized into four possible Stati di Attenzione (states of response actions), SA0-SA3. SA0 requires actions for events that do not need immediate response and do not put the public in danger; for example, falling trees, modest home flooding, lost animals, etc. The SA1 consists of the Protezione Civile and corresponding agencies, monitoring the conditions of a possible scenario in case there is a need to alert the public of a minor danger (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 2.1.2). In a SA2 state, the Protezione Civile and other agencies prepare immediate response tools in the likelihood of a possible crisis to occur (2.1.3). Finally, SA3 requires all emergency response teams to provide immediate response support to a major crisis that occurred. During this state, all resources prepared during the SA2 scenario are put into action by the EPC. Local authorities are contacted first followed by the national operations center for the Protezione Civile. Hence, the Centro Operative Comunale (C.O.C), City Operations 56 Center of the region in crisis, is contacted first so all local utilities available are used to begin the crisis response operations (2.1.4). During the SA3 crisis response, the director of the EPC office is in charge of keeping the flow of information by using the office’s communications support systems. Through these support systems, all authorities involved such as police, fire fighters, volunteers, local operative offices, and the Protezione Civile response team can share information as the crisis unfolds. Protezione Civile Crisis Communication Plan for Rome, Italy Under the Italian government, national and local authorities are responsible for informing the public of possible risks and how they can protect themselves. In order for all individuals in a location to hold the knowledge on safety precautions for natural disasters, the safety information must be spread throughout the area, becoming part of the community’s culture. In doing so, during a crisis citizens aren’t passively reacting to information provided to them, but instead are contributing to the aid of response and recovery; this collaboration creates a mutual sense of trust and respect between the public and government agencies. So, for an emergency plan to be executed effectively, a population must first have the confidence and knowledge to protect itself (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 4.1). For the most efficient emergency response, the Protezione Civile’s crisis communication plan for Rome is separated into three information phases: pre-crisis prevention and preparation information; crisis response information; and, information for post-crisis recovery. 57 The objective of the pre-crisis information is to reduce the tendency for individuals to irrationally react to a crisis and, instead, encourage the community of Rome to work together with common understanding (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 4.2). The information given during this phase educates the public on the different types of risks and how to prepare for them, along with the survival behaviors to adapt for each crisis and the vehicles that the government will use to give warnings of a crisis. For this phase of the crisis communication plan, the Protezione Civile uses multiples means to communicate information to the Roman community. For instance, the Televideo Rai is a local television channel that provides ongoing instructions and information relevant to possible risks in the area. Also Protezione Civile’s regional website for Rome is used to publicize all information relevant to a crisis. In particular, the website informs locals on the current projects that the EPC is conducting in order to help reduce damages and dangers in the case of an earthquake occurrence. It also includes local meteorological conditions, detailed scientific and technical documents, and the Protezione Civile’s emergency plans for different crises (4.2.1). An example of a pre-crisis information document provided by the PC is the Vademecum. This document, which can be downloaded from the PC Rome website, is a guide on how to respond to multiple types of emergencies; it provides a list of all regional emergency numbers and indicates which numbers to use according to the crisis. Detailed information is provided regarding what to do during and after and earthquake, as well as definitions of specific emergency codes that would be used by local and national authorities (Comune di Roma, 2006, pg.4-25). Another example is the Protezione Civile 58 in Famiglia document (Protezione Civile in families), which focuses on how families should prepare and respond to crises, especially taking into consideration young children and elderly persons (Consiglio dei Ministri). Among the methods used by the PC to inform during the pre-crisis phase is conducting periodic crisis response exercises in public places, office buildings, schools etc., very much like Southern California’s ShakeOut. In this case, the EPC is in charge of promoting and coordinating these exercises, with the objective being that these exercise activities will help facilitate the learning for the public and government agencies regarding the best choice of action in case of an earthquake. Also, the Numero Verde (Green Number) is a free telephone line service that the PC provides for persons to call and receive information on preparing for a crisis (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 20084.2.1). Finally, the PC in collaboration with Italian research organizations has released a few mobile applications for pre-crisis communication. The PC has made available a version of the Protezione Civile Roma Capitale website in the form of an application for all mobile devises. The purpose of the app is for city residents to have easy access to local weather conditions, possible risks, and numbers to use in case of a crisis (“E Disponsibile”). In addition, the Instituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INVG), the National Institute for Geophysics and Volcanology, released an iPhone application called “INGVterremoti” that provides up-to-date information on the most recent earthquakes, seismic vulnerability, and valuable research findings for each of Italy’s regions (“INGVterremoti”). 59 Once a crisis has occurred, the crisis response information phase begins. The objective during phase 2 is to provide a constant flow of up-to-date information. This includes information on the phenomenon and its cause(s), what to do once the immediate danger has ended, the evolvement of the event and the actions taken by the emergency response teams to alleviate danger, and the important numbers and locations for resources such as shelters (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008 4.1). During a crisis, the personnel in the EPC office are in charge of receiving and responding to citizen calls. A specific call-line is activated by the EPC that will respond to calls from persons such as tourists who speak different languages. Moreover, traditional print media, such as national and local newspapers, is used to provide updates on the situation of the crisis; the PC uses traditional media with the intent to keep transparency between the Italian government and the Italian population. The local Rome television channel, the Televidieo Rai, is also used to provide continuous updates on the damages, injuries, and fatalities caused by the earthquake. The “news” section in Rome’s official website is dedicated to providing all relevant information to keep the public involved in the process of responding and recovering from the crisis. Furthermore, in the case of a breakdown of traditional communications tools, the Italian government plans on distributing a document called the “Modello di avvisi urgenti alla popolazione” (model for warning the population) throughout public streets and if necessary from door-to-door (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008 4.2.2). Once the crisis is declared over, phase 3 begins and communication is focused on post-crisis information. In this phase, the Protezione Civile focuses on answering to 60 citizens’ concerns and helping to bring the damaged regions back to a “normal” state (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 4.1). 61 Chapter Eight: Rome, Italy’s Seismic Vulnerability According to the Protezione Civile the areas of Rome vulnerable to seismic activity can be separated into two categories, appenniniche in which seismic activity is due to the continuous coalition of the African and Eurasian plates, and vulcaniche where earthquakes are manifested with the same characteristics of volcanic activity (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 2.2.1). The agency’s research revealed that Rome’s sediment terrain is the most vulnerable to an earthquake. This type of land is found around the Tever River, located throughout the center of the city. This land is considered most vulnerable because it is filled with valuable historic and functional buildings that would be easily destroyed by an earthquake. The Protezione Civile agency argues that these valued historic monuments would be of less risk from the impact of an earthquake if a specifically tailored prevention plan was created and implemented; it suggests “micro-organizing” the city of Rome into levels of seismic vulnerability, by taking into consideration the different areas’ buildings and citizen population. So, those areas at most risk would become top priority in the prevention of damage from a quake. Instead, the current Italian national plan categorizes all the cities throughout the country into four levels of vulnerability to seismic activity, with 1 being the most dangerous location and 4 being the least. Through this plan, Rome as a whole has been categorized a level 3, meaning there is a moderate possibility of danger from an earthquake. But if the Protezione Civile’s ideal plan would be put into action, the city of Rome would be divided into micro-areas and its levels of vulnerability would most likely 62 vary by location, between level 1 and 3 (Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile, 2008, 2.2.1). Using a standard measure to determine seismic vulnerability throughout Italy undervalues the diversity of each of its regions. So, the underestimation of Rome’s varying levels of seismic vulnerability could explain the current lack of a unique and customized natural disaster crisis communication plan for Rome. The existing Protezione Civile crisis communication plan for Rome focuses most of its efforts into communication pre-crisis, rather than considering all possible means to maintain the flow of information once a crisis occurs. For instance, the plan relies mainly on telephone use to distribute information during a crisis, suggesting that the PC doesn’t expect telecommunication services to breakdown. Also, the crisis communication plan doesn’t include pre-prepared messaging, meaning that it doesn’t take into consideration the public’s general distrust in the Italian government’s emergency response actions. The absence of such significant considerations supports the purpose of this study, which is to introduce a more appropriate and effective approach to crisis communication. 63 Chapter Nine: Suggested Earthquake Crisis Communication Plan for Rome, Italy For the most effective crisis communication plan, all the data retrieved from the previous research has been taken into consideration, especially the Southern California OPLAN and Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies. The plan has been divided into the three phases of emergency response provided by the OPLAN; Phase 1: Normal Operations, Phase 2 (a, b, c): Response, and Phase 3: Long-Term Recovery. Phase 1: Normal Operations The steps taken during Phase 1 are important for the development and execution of an effective crisis communication plan for the city of Rome in case of an earthquake. It is important to keep in mind that in terms of communication, this phase ends when an earthquake strikes, but will continuously changed for improvement. Identifying Target Audiences for Rome and the Community’s Concerns/Priorities Before creating a crisis communication plan the Protezione Civile (PC) will identify and understand the plan’s different target audiences. Because Rome is a renowned tourist attraction, as well as the capital of Italy, it is reasonable to assume that the city’s inhabitants and visitors are very diverse. So, during Phase 1 the PC will consider the different ethnicities, cultures, and languages that are present in the region. Examples of possible stakeholders are Roman citizens of Italian and/or non-Italian ethnicity that may or may not be fluent in Italian, tourists from around the world, government agencies, the business community, and all individuals and organizations 64 involved in Rome’s tourism industry. Once all target audiences are determined, the PC will identify their common and different concerns in regards to the risks of an earthquake. All audiences will be categorized into four different groups by their level of interest in earthquake risks: from Activists who are highly concerned, to Inattentives who pay little or no attention to the issue. The next step will be for the PC to identify each group’s concerns and priorities in the case of an earthquake crisis. PC representatives will engage with the community of Rome to collect the public’s top concerns that the agency should address before, during and after an earthquake. But for the Protezione Civile to retrieve valuable information from its stakeholders it must first develop a trusting relationship with them. Pre-Crisis Communication Strategies to Build Trust/Credibility Between the Community of Rome and the Protezione Civile Although it would be wrong to assume that all Italians have a negative perception of the Italian government, the simple existence of this distrust plays an important role in the success or failure of a crisis communication plan for Rome. The public’s hostility toward the Protezione Civile following the L’Aquila earthquake of 2009 diminished the agency’s credibility. So during Phase 1, actions will be taken to re-build a positive relationship between the Italian general population and Italian government agencies. To recoup trust, the Protezione Civile needs to be consistently honest and transparent. The PC will involve the Roman community as much as possible in its decision-making; the agency will explain the reasoning behind its decisions and actions and provide consistent messaging to prevent the public from feeling mislead. Another 65 way to increase credibility is to ask the apprehensive part of the community to express why they lost confidence in the PC, and what actions the agency can take to regain their trust. If necessary, the Italian government representatives that caused the mistrust will address the public and if necessary apologize for their misguidance. The final action, and perhaps the most effective, is for the Protezione Civile to create an alliance with organizations that have criticized the agency in the past. If possible, the PC will partner with the 3e32 L’Aquila activist group to capture target audiences’ attention and trust in order to prepare them for an earthquake crisis. Phase 1: Pre-Crisis Communication Objectives and Priorities During Phase 1, the top priority for the Protezione Civile’s emergency office, Sala Operativa dell’Ufficio Emergenza Protezione Civile’s, (EPC) is to provide the Roman community with abundant information on the possible dangers of an unexpected earthquake, how to prepare for such crisis, and how to respond post-event. Hence, the overall objective for the EPC is to educate all stakeholders so they are more than capable of executing an efficient emergency response to an earthquake. To distribute the information, the EPC will encourage as much community involvement as possible; this will help address stakeholders’ concerns, increase its credibility, and increase the likelihood that the Roman public will accept the agency’s recommendations. In preparation, the EPC will also determine the best communication systems to use in case of an unexpected earthquake, keeping in mind the common assumptions of damages to conventional communication means after a quake, such as cell phone service overload. Additionally, it will develop pre-scripted messages to use during a crisis, and 66 develop and execute training programs, like the ShakeOut, for government/ non- government personnel, citizens, and tourists; the purpose being that the correct actions to take during and after a quake come as second nature to all stakeholders. Vehicles for Pre-Crisis Communication In the current Protezione Civile crisis communication plan, the EPC uses the television (emergency report channel), Internet (PC website), telephone (Green Number Hotline), educational pamphlets and periodic crisis response exercises, as communication tools to disseminate pre-crisis information. While these tools can be effective, they don’t take into consideration the many unique factors of Rome. The agency’s use of Internet for communication only extends to the Protezione Civile website, hence ignoring the powerful impact of using social media during the pre- crisis phase. So, the PC will use a fresh approach to pre-crisis communication by creating a presence in social media platforms. For instance, an official Protezione Civile of Rome Facebook page will be created to provide the public with easy access to all pre-crisis information: electronic versions of written documents, instructive videos, and links to other helpful websites, such as the PC’s official site, and other organizations that might have partnered with the agency. Because of social media’s globalization, the page will allow for the PC to interact with a crucial target audience, the foreigners who will be visiting Rome. To address the needs of tourists, the page will provide helpful guidelines in English on being prepared in case of an earthquake; such as carrying identification, having a map of the city and a list of local emergency numbers, and a summary of the Protezione Civile’s emergency response plan so outsides will know what to expect. As a 67 result, the Facebook page will be a resourceful tool for all stakeholders, Italians and outsiders, to ask questions and receive answers by agency representatives. The purpose for creating a Facebook page before a crisis occurs is to evolve it into a strong and reliable foundation for communication, so stakeholders will perceive it as a trusting source for information during and after an earthquake disaster. A public forum is an essential vehicle to disseminate information in Phase 1. The EPC will hold small-scale in-person public meetings to address people’s concerns and questions. Multiple forums will be available to separate target audiences so the information given will attend to the specific interests of each group. Hence, there will be separate forums for schools, non-governmental businesses, government agencies such as police force and firefighters, and the industry of tourism including hotels, museums, etc. To accommodate the diverse population of Rome, whenever possible the PC representatives will be bilingual. The EPC’s general periodic crisis response exercises will be extended into a local preparedness program for Rome, much like Southern California’s ShakeOut program. The program will provide detailed guidelines for actions to take prior, during and after an earthquake. Once the instructions are distributed to all local target audiences, the EPC will call upon a day and specific time for the Roman community to practice the step advised by the program. Moreover, the program will have an additional set of instructions tailored to the tourism sector of the city. Personnel working in hotels, museums and other tourist attractions, will have an extra set of guidelines that address the complications that could arise during a crisis with persons who aren’t familiar with their surroundings and 68 do not speak the local language. By collectively participate in this exercise, stakeholders will feel more confident in their abilities to protect themselves and others in the probability of an earthquake. The current PC crisis communication plan doesn’t take into account tourists, a major audience in Rome. Addressing this audience segment in the new plan is significant because the case of an earthquake, tourists may be at higher risk of danger than locals because of the language barrier and lack of knowledge of their surroundings. So, to further prepare the tourist sector, the agency will distribute earthquake preparedness information in the form of pamphlets and flyers throughout hotels in Rome and the city’s airports and train stations; they will be written in the most popular foreign languages for the best outreach. The pre-crisis communication phase will be used to create awareness of helpful innovative mobile communication technology. If the public and the emergency respondents have knowledge of such tools, they can be used during an earthquake crisis to maintain the flow of communication between disaster victims, the Protezione Civile, and those outside of the region of Rome. An exemplary communication technology tool for crisis communication is Professor Gabriel Kahn’s Crisis Connection project. Such technology will significantly increase the speed of rescue and recovery in Rome. So, the Protezione Civile will create a similar tool by using the Crisis Connection project as a guideline. By having this application available, all stakeholders with mobile phones will be able to report damages and/or injuries, search for the nearest shelter/medical help, send a message to loved ones, 69 and participate in the rescue and aid. So, as Kahn suggested, this mobile communication technology will facilitate the sharing of valuable information at a much quicker speed, and create an interconnection between all participants in the earthquake crisis response in Rome. Furthermore, the Protezione Civile will advise the Roman community to upload onto their mobile devises the agency’s mobile application and INGV’s “INGVterremoti” iPhone application to remain up-to-date with the city’s weather conditions and receive information on possible earthquake risks. A “check-in” feature, suggested by USC Professor Matthew Leveque, will be added onto the PC mobile application. The “check- in” will be provided so that in the case of an earthquake, persons can quickly report to the emergency response team and loved ones that they are okay (Interview, Leveque, March 2, 2012). The PC mobile app will also be available in English so it can be of use to tourists and outsiders visiting Rome. In addition to these applications, the PC will create a warning system similar to the Hermosa Beach, California Code Red: Keeping Citizens Informed. According to Leveque, the Hermosa Beach warning system successfully informs Hermosa residents of upcoming risks, like natural disasters, by sending a warning message to all possible communication devices, such as cell phones, iPads, home telephones, and emails (Interview, Leveque, March 2, 2012). So, in addition to the mobile applications, the PC will encourage all residents of Rome to register for the city’s new warning system. Ensuring that stakeholders are armed with these communication technology tools during Phase 1 will increase the likelihood of safety in the case of an earthquake crisis. 70 Phase 2 (a, b, c): Response If an earthquake strikes Rome Phase 2 will be put into action. As is in the OPLAN, the response phase will be divided into three subcategories: Phase 2a, 2b, and 2c. Throughout this phase, the EPC office (Operations Emergency Office of the Protezione Civile Agency) will be in charge of managing internal and external communication response, which includes both the public in and outside of Rome, and all emergency response agencies. Phase 2(a, b, c): Crisis Communication Objectives and Priorities To successfully conduct an earthquake crisis response, the Protezione Civile will have to keep in mind its target audiences, their interests and priorities, and most importantly the emotional impact that the disaster has caused to a historically valued city like Rome. The communication steps taken by the agency during Phase 2 will be the determination of the community of Rome and outsiders judge the success of the Italian government in handling the crisis. So, all communication priorities and procedures will be carefully though out and executed. Therefore, the main objective for the PC during this phase will be to retain the trust and credibility within the Italian population by providing continuous and reliable information regarding all rescue aspects of the crisis, including what is being done to restore the city of Rome back to normal. This means that The agency will be prepared to answer expected questions similar to those asked during the L’Aquila tragedy. Residents of Rome will ask, “How will you fix all the damaged monuments of our city? When will it all go back to normal?” and tourists/outsiders will 71 ask, “How do we let our loved ones know we are okay?” Addressing these questions and maintaining transparency throughout the crisis response, will prevent the public from questioning the agency’s honesty and reduce the likelihood of the media and other sources from making their own wrong speculations. Phase 2a Communication: (0-24 hours) Immediate Response Phase 2a will begin with the Italian government notifying all emergency response agencies and organizations of the earthquake. Once notified, the Protezione Civile will conduct an initial assessment of the available and functional media platforms that can be used to distribute immediate messages to the public. This phase will conclude when the EPC starts deploying assets for Rome, including civil support teams and volunteer rescue teams, and begins distributing immediate messages. Once notified by the EPC, it will be the role of Rome’s Centro Operative Comunale (C.O.C), the city’s local Operations Center, to deliver immediate messages to the affected population regarding where they can find shelter, medical help, and where they can receive updated information on the status of the crisis. Bellow are some examples of messages that the EPC will distribute during the immediate response: “People Check/Civilian Support” This is a special safety message from the Protezione Civile Emergency Office. There has been a strong earthquake and stronger shaking is possible our area (Rome). Local authorities and the Protezione Civile emergency team are currently dealing with the most pressing problems, so for the moment, we strongly encourage all unharmed persons in the area to help victims of the earthquake. We also strongly recommend for locals to aid non-Italian speakers, such as tourists, as well as children, and the elderly to find shelter and medical attention. Further instructions and updates on the status of the crisis will be available soon. 72 “Assist rescue teams with phone application(s)” This is a special safety message from the Protezione Civile Emergency Office. Police, firefighters and medics need Rome’s population to assist in the rescue and search to speed up the process and minimize the amount of fatalities. Please report damages, injuries, and fatalities in the area you are located via your phone application (s), such as {equivalent to Crisis Connect}. Your help with make a significant difference in the recovery of your city. Further instructions and updates on the status of the crisis will be available soon. “Search for Shelter/ Medical Help” This is a special safety message from the Protezione Civile Emergency Office. If you are safe in your location, stay where you are to prevent unnecessary evacuations and consumptions of resources. If you seek a shelter, shelters have been set up in the areas {list locations in Rome}. Medical assistance will be provided in the shelters. Please use your phone application, {equivalent to Crisis Connect}, to search for the nearest shelter/medical assistance location in your area. “Communicate with Authorities/Loved Ones” This is a special safety message from the Protezione Civile Emergency Office. Please stay off phones, including cell phones, unless you need to report a life- threatening problem. Unnecessary calls can disturb the function of local telephone communication, inhibiting emergency response teams to attend to injured persons. The Protezione Civile urges persons in the impacted region to contact loved ones, inside and outside of Rome, to confirm your and their wellbeing, using your phone application(s), PC “check-in” and {equivalent to Crisis Connect}. Please stay tuned for further instructions and updates on the status of the crisis. “Example of Status Message” This is a special safety message from the Protezione Civile Emergency Office. The Steps of Rome region of the city has significant damage due to the earthquake. The Protezione Civile and local authorities have been mobilized and support assets are being deployed. So far, authorities have recognized four fatalities and the steps of Rome has a significant amount of cracks caused by the shake. Please stay away from this region. In Phase 2a the Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti will deliver a message to the public; this will be the only time Monti addresses the public during the response phase of the 73 crisis, leaving the responsibility of messaging to relevant experts and authorities in the community. The goal of Monti’s message will be to convey the Italian government’s concern for the victims of the earthquake and express its dedication to conduct effective and transparent responsive and recovery efforts. The Prime Minister will extend its sympathy to the Italian population as well as the families of those who were visiting Rome when the earthquake hit. He will conclude his message by directing the public to sources to retrieve real-time updates on the status of victims and damages (Interview, Leveque, March 2 2012). Bellow is an example of Mario Monti’s message in the form of a public speech: A catastrophic earthquake has just hit Rome. As of right now the Protezione Civile is working to help victims and prevent any further danger. As soon as we have an accurate estimate of victims, fatalities, and physical damage, it will be released to the public. I want to extend my sincere sympathy to those affected by the quake and I want to let their families know that our main goal will be to reunite survivors with their loved ones. We are working on activating our “check-in” system, but for the time being, you can learn about victims and survivors by visiting {website} or calling {EPC hotline}. I assure you that you will receive continuous updates on the circumstances of this disaster. Phase 2a: Vehicles for Crisis Communication If the earthquake is detected a brief moment prior to it occurring, the first vehicle of communication in Phase 2a will be Rome’s Warning System. The EPC will use this tool to send a widespread message to the Roman community of the high risk of an earthquake; even a few minutes of notice can make a significant difference in the chance of persons’ survival. Nevertheless, the Warning System will be used after the quake occurs to communicate to the local population through mobile devices of further possible dangers, such as areas in the city to avoid, etc. The EPC will also use more conventional communication tools such as news conferences, public hearings/meetings, news releases, 74 question and answer sheets, public service announcements, and social media. The EPC will also rely on the communication technology tool equivalent to Crisis Connect, to receive and share information on the severity of physical damages and persons in need of help in different areas in Rome. Phase 2b Communication: (12-72 Hours) Deployment & Employment The goal of Phase 2b will be to communicate effectively in order to deploy assets to the affected areas as rapidly and efficiently as possible, and to support and validate the emergency response public messages made during Phase 2a. The EPC will ensure that all messages are consistent from all sources and are delivered and received by all audiences, including local and national news media outlets. When delivering messages, the EPC will remember the emotional needs of the affected population as well as those of the victims’ families. So, in its messaging the EPC will focus on the safety of loved ones, the damages of private property such as homes, and the destruction of valued historic monuments/architecture that are part of the Roman culture; the agency must keep in mind that when addressing these concerns, it mustn’t make promises to the community that it cannot follow through with. Bellow is examples of messages sent during this phase (in addition to messages listed in Phase 2a): Operations Messages • Operations to provide for basic life support, such as food, water, shelter, waste removal, energy sources, etc. are ongoing in {list locations in Rome}. • Operations to repair local roads, buildings, utilities, etc. are ongoing (include information on how Italian government agencies/organizations are conducting these repairs}. • Rescue efforts and emergency services are ongoing (focus on success stories). 75 • Operations to repair Rome’s historical and valuable artifacts are ongoing (provide specific damages and how they are going to be restored). Messages to Volunteers • Send monetary donations to {include website, numbers, etc.} • To volunteer, please visit {website} or call {number} to find out which volunteer organizations need additional help. • Volunteers please do not approach dangerous/affected areas in the city without permission by local authorities and/or the Protezione Civile. Messages Addressing Concerns: • The Protezione Civile’s top priority is to restore the Roman community back to its pre-earthquake status. • The Protezione Civile will provide temporary housing for those left without homes, and will dedicate much of its recovery operations to first reconstructing homes, schools, hotels, etc. • The Protezione Civile understands the incredible trauma of witnessing valued historic buildings/monuments damaged by the earthquake. It also understands the economical impact that such damages will bring to the city, so it assures the Roman population and Italians nationwide that it will focus on restoring such artifacts/monuments back to their normal state. • The Protezione Civile will reconstruct homes, buildings and historical tourist attractions to be safer and more protected in the probability of future earthquakes. Phase 2b: Vehicles for Crisis Communication Messages will be sent via the communication tools established in Phase 2a, and will provide information on status of locations, injuries, fatalities, ongoing operations for recovery, estimated cost and time for restoration, instructions for volunteers, and anticipation of when basic services will return to normal. In addition, the EPC will put into action the “check-in” system; it will encourage persons to use their PC mobile application to “check-in” to notify their loved ones and the government of their wellbeing. Considering the possibility that due to the earthquake many persons will not have their mobile devices available, the EPC will deploy a response team with a mobile 76 powered tablet devise to assist survivors in the “check-in” process; incorporating this method, will significantly speed up the process of communicating worldwide survivors and victims (Interview, Leveque, March 2, 2012). Phase 2c Communication: (72+ Hours) Sustained Response In the last stage of Phase 2, the EPC will maximize the use of assets available to continue public messaging, both internally and externally, in regards to response operations. Hence, it will deploy Information Center Field Officers to shelters and counseling centers throughout Rome to assist victims and families. To further enforce the Italian government’s message of support, it will organization visits from members of the Italian National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks to answer questions from the community and discuss the possibility of future risks. To keep the public up to date on the status of operations, the EPC will distribute Broadcast Operations Teams throughout Rome to record and report on the current circumstances and conditions. This phase concludes when government operations have shifted to long-term recovery and communication services are restored back to pre-earthquake status. Phase 3: Long Term Recovery Phase 3 will begin when all life-saving activities have been completed, leaving the EPC to focus its efforts on reinforcing its messages to the public and analyzing its crisis response actions to improve communication and recovery efforts for future risks. Phase 3: Post-Crisis Communication Objectives and Priorities The objective of post-crisis communication is to maintain credibility with the public after the crisis has occurred. This entails expressing to the public the lessons the 77 PC has learned from the crisis, and how the agency plans on making improvements on their emergency management plan to mitigate future risks. It will also be a priority for the agency to follow-up with any commitment it made with the community during the crisis. Phase 3: Vehicles for Post-Crisis Communication After the earthquake crisis has ended, the purpose for the PC’s messages is to ensure that the information given to the media and the public is correct and to continue developing a positive relationship with the Italian population. So, without the urgent need for communication to alleviate danger, the agency will use a wider array of communication vehicles. This includes public hearings and presentations, conferences, traditional and social media, news conferences, talk shows, and featured articles. It will also rely on conventional means of communication such as the telephone to maintain its help hotlines as a source of information for the public. Although traditional media will be used as a communication tool, the agency is aware of the present skepticism towards traditional mainstream media due to the L’Aquila activist groups. So, PC will establish a public forum for sharing information through social media platforms. For instance, the Protezione Civile will create its own official blog dedicated to the city of Rome post-quake to take the leadership role as the main communication platform that facilitates the sharing of concerns, personal stories, emotions, and updates on the status of Rome’s recovery. The PC will contribute to the blog by providing factual information on the city’s conditions, including photographs and videos of what is being done to return the city back to “normal.” The agency will also partner with other organizations such as the 3e32 activist group, so they can add content 78 to the blog. Furthermore, to generate public engagement the PC will encourage the Roman community and the public worldwide, to share photos, videos, and personal stories on the blog. So, by using social media platforms that allow for the flow of communication with no restrictions, such as the blog, the PC will appear transparent and credible 79 Chapter Ten: Conclusion and Recommendations In spite of Italy’s turbulent history with earthquakes, the country still lacks a well- established and strategically designed crisis communication plan. In this thesis, the suggested crisis communication plan for Rome provides an overview of the necessary steps that the Italian government must take in order to be prepared for the next earthquake disaster. To create the optimal plan, further research must be conducted. This could include, gaining more insight on the Italian population’s opinion of the Protezione Civile in regards to crisis communication and management; analyzing the level of impact activist groups such as the 3e32 have on the Italian public’s perception of its government; and identifying the top tools for communication, such as social media platforms, that the Italians use to share information on a daily basis. 80 Bibliography Batty, David. “Italy Earthquake Experts Charged With Manslaughter.” The Guardian. N.p. 26, May 2011. Web. 10, Sept. 2011. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/26/italy-quake-experts- manslaughter-charge>. Berselli, Edmondo. “Generose Amnesie.” La Republica. N.p. 21, Nov. 2009. Web. 11, Sept. 2011. <http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2009/11/21/generose- amnesie.html>. Bocci, Michele. “Terremoto, Troppi Volontari: Aspettate a Partire.” La Republica.N.p. 7, April 2009. Web. 11, Sept. 2011. <http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2009/04/07/terremoto- troppi-volontari-aspettate-partire.html>. Boin, Arjen, Paul’t Hart, Eric Stern, and Bengt Sundelius. The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership Under Pressure. United Kingdom: Cambridge UP, 2005. Print. California. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Southern California Catastrophic Earthquake Response Plan. Southern California (2010). Print. California. The Great California ShakeOut. ShakeOut Media Guide. Southern California: Earthquake Country Alliance (2011). Print. Caporale, Giuseppe. “L’Aquila Tradita Dai Paesi Del G8 Beni Artistici Lasciati Senza Restauri.” La Republica. N.p. 21, Nov. 2009. Web. 11, Sept. 2011. <http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2009/11/21/aquila- tradita-dai-paesi-del-g8.html>. Coombs, Timothy, W. Ongoing Crisis Management: Planning, managing and responding.3rd ed. Florida: Sage Publications, Inc., 2012. Print. Comune di Roma: Protezione Civile. Piano Generale di Emergenza di Protezione Civile del Comune di Roma. Rome: Protezione Civile, 2008. Web. 26, Dec. 2011. <http://www.protezionecivilecomuneroma.it/ppccroma/>. Comune di Roma. Affrontare L’Emergenza: cosa sapere e cosa fare. Rome: Protezione Civile, 2006. Print. Consiglio dei Ministri: Dppartimento Protezione Civile. Vademecum: Protezione Civile In Famiglia. N.d. 1-64. Print. 81 Cutrufo, Mauro. La Quarta Capitale, Roma. Roma Capitale. 29, July, 2010: 1-128. Print. “Earthquake Rocks Abruzzo Region, Italy’s Emerging Tourist Destination.” Daily Mail Online. N.p. 6, Apr. 2009. Web. 1, Sept. 2011. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-1167947/Earthquake-rocks-Abruzzo- region-Italy-8217-s-emerging-tourist-destination.html>. “Earthquakes: Italy.” Echo Molise: Emigration and Cultural Heritage of the Molise Website. N.d. Web. 22, Nov. 2011. <http://www.echomolise.org/Earthquakes.html>. “Earthquakes with 50,000 or More Deaths.” USGS: Science for a Changing World Website. Oct, 1994. Web. 12, Nov. 2011. <http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/most_destructive.php>. “E’ Disponibile la Versione Mobile del Sito della Protezione Civile.” Protezione Civile Roma Capitale Website. N.d. 2010. Web. 13, Feb. 2012. <http://www.protezionecivileromacapitale.it/informazioni-alla-popolazione/324- e-disponibile-la-versione-mobile-del-sito-della-protezione-civile.html>. “Equita’ o Equitalia.” 3e32 Website. 23, Dec. 2011. Web. 23 Dec. 2011. <3e32.com> Fleishman, Jeffrey. “Italy Continues Rescue Efforts Amid Quake Devastation.” Los Angeles Times. N.p. 8, Apr. 2009. Web. 8, Sept. 2011. <http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/08/world/fg-italy-quake8>. Fraser, Regenie. “Communicating Effectively in a Disaster Situation.” CARILEC Conference, 2004. Presentation/Speech. Gammell, Caroline and John, Bungham. “Italian Earthquake: L’Aquila Sees History Repeat Itself 300 Years On.” The Telegraph. N.p. 7, Apr. 2009. Web. 1, Sept. 2011.<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/5115134/Italian- earthquake-LAquila-sees-history-repeat-itself-300-years-on.html>. Garnett, James L., Alexander Kouzmin. Communicating Throughout Katrina: Competing and Complementary Conceptual Lenses on Crisis Communication. Spec. Issue of Public Administration Review (2007): 171-188. Print. “Google Map of Rome, Italy- Nations Online Profile.” One World Nations Online: All Countries in the World Website. N.d. Web. 21, Nov, 2011. <http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Rome.htm>. 82 Holmes, Whitney. “Crisis Communications and Media: Advantages, Disadvantages and Best Practices. Knoxville: University of Tennessee. Print. “INGVterremoti.” Anteprima di iTunes (iTunes app store) Website. June, 2008. Web. 16, Feb. 2012. <http://itunes.apple.com/it/app/INGVterremoti/id424180958?mt=8>. Joyce, Christopher. “Collapsing Mountains Rocked Italy’s Earthquake.” NPR. N.p. 7, Apr. 2009.Web. 5, Sept. 2011. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102804479>. Kahn, Gabriel. Personal Interview. 20 September 2011. Kimmelman, Michael. “An Italian City Shaken to Its Cultural Core.” The New York Times. N.p. 24, Dec. 2009. Web. 2, Sept. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/arts/24abroad.html?ref=laquilaitaly2009>. “L’Aquila Earthquake- a Year On.” Planet Earth Online: Environmental Research News. Natural Environmental Research Council. 28, June 2010. Web. 2, Sept. 2011. <http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/features/story.aspx?id=753>. “La Storia.” Citta’ Dell’Aquila Website. N.p. n.d. Web. 5, Sept. 2011. <http://www.comune.laquila.gov.it/pagina7_la-storia.html>. Lerbinger, Otto. The Crisis Manager: Facing Risk and Responsibility. Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1997. Print. Leveque, Matthew. Personal Interview. 2 March 2012. Maher, Steven T. Risk Communication Guide for State and Local Agencies. California: Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, 2006. Print. Mancini, Rosamaria. “An Earthquake One Year On: L’Aquila’s Example.” AOL News. N.p. 6, Apr. 2010. Web. 1, Sept. 2011.< http://www.aolnews.com/2010/04/06/an- earthquake-one-year-on-laquilas-example/>. McLaughlin, Tara. “L’Aquila After The Earthquake.” Italy Magazine. N.p. 20, Jan, 2010. Web. 4, Sept. 2011. <http://www.italymag.co.uk/italy-featured/laquila-province/l- aquila-after-earthquake> Miyamoto, Kit, Peter Yanev, and Ilbe Salvaterra. 2009 M6.3 L’Aquila, Italy, Earthquake Field Investigation Report. Global Risk Miyamoto & Miyamoto International: 2009. Print. 83 Perez-Lugo, Marla. “Media Use in Disaster Situations: A new Focus on the Impact of Phase.” Sociological Inquiry, 74.2 (2004): 210-225. Print. “Piano Nazionale Per la Prevenzione Del Rischio Sismico.” Protezione Civile Website. N.p. 2009. Web. 22, Nov. 2011. <http://www.protezionecivile.gov.it/jcms/it/piano_nazionale_prevenzione.wp>. Pietrucci, Pamela. Resistance, Activism, and Spectacular Politics to Recreate Community and Reappropriate Citizenship in Post-Earthquake L’Aquila, Italy. Washington: University of Washington, 2010:1-12. Print. Pisa, Nick. “All roads lead Out of Rome: Streets of Italian capital empty after 1915 prediction of ‘big one’ earthquake.” Mail Online. 11, May 2011. Web. 23, Nov. 2011. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1385815/Rome-quake-rumours- Streets-1915-big-earthquake-prediction.html#ixzz1lk1fcPzf>. Povoledo, Elizabeth. “Indictments Over 2009 Quake Cause Quite a Furor.” The New York Times. N.p. 14, June 2011. Web. 6, Sept. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/world/europe/15italy.html?_r=1&ref=laqui laitaly2009>. Povoledo, Elizabeth. “Damage to Historical Monuments ‘Significant’.” The New York Times. N.p. 6, Apr. 2009. Web. 6, Sept. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/world/europe/07damage.html?_r=1&ref=e urope>. Rumiz, Paolo. “Sciacalli Di Pietre.” La Republica. N.p. 12, Aug. 2011. Web. 11, Sept. 2011.<http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2011/08/12/sciac alli-di-pietre.html>. Sellnow, Timothy L. et al. “Chaos Theory, informational needs, and natural disasters.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 30.4 (2002): 269-292. Print. Sirletti, Sonia and Flavia, Krause-Jackson. “Deadly Earthquake Destroys, Damages Rare Italian Art Treasures.” Bloomberg. N.p. 7, Apr. 2009. Web. 8, Sept. 2011. <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aO94w5cEnkyw &refer=muse>. 84 “Travel Advice By Country: Italy.” Foreign & Commonwealth Office Website. 7, Feb. 2 2012. Web. 23, Nov. 2011. <http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living- abroad/travel-advice-by-country/europe/italy#naturalDisasters>. “Vittorini: Non Polemiche Sterili, Ma Verita’, Giustizzia e Accertamento Responsabilita’.” 6 Aprile Website, Dec. 11 2011. Web. 25, Dec. 2011. <http://www.6aprile.it/featured/2011/12/11/vittorini-non-polemiche-sterili-ma- verita-giustizia-e-accertamento-responsabilita.html>. 85 Appendix A: Interview Questions for Interview with Professor Gabriel Kahn • Tell me about your Crisis Connection Project? What inspired you to come up with such a project? • Would you say that its purpose would be to mainly help with the immediate response? • In the case of an earthquake in Rome, who would be my client as a PR professional? The Italian national government? The city of Rome? • How well prepared do you think the Italian government is to respond to an earthquake hitting Rome? • Do you know of any pre-existing crisis communication plans for Rome? • Who does the Protezione Civile report to in case of an earthquake? 86 Appendix B: Transcript of Interview with Professor Gabriel Kahn A: Sara Staffaroni (Interviewer) B: Professor Gabriel Kahn Date of Interview: September 20, 2011 START: A. So you were saying that there is no plan… B. Well it’s not the most organized country in the world… (Italy) A. Yeah, ha B. Um, regarding anything, including its current financial issues, um, I remember when I was in Milan in 1998 it emerged that the Protezione Civile had devised a plan and hadn’t publicized that in the case of a major volcanic eruption or earthquake in the south, they had twin villages in the south and in the north that then would host them. Of course people in the north caught wind of this plan and were of course upset about it because they have such antipathy toward the south in the first place…but of course nothing like that got implemented. A. Hmm, yeah. B. The fact that it (Italy) has very few plans in place is a little strange because it does have so many natural disasters. A. So, um, what made you decided to come up with… B. Oh, with my Crisis Connection Project? So the Crisis Connection Project could be applied anywhere. A. Oh okay. B. So that stems from my experience as being Los Angeles Beauro Chief for the Wall Street Journal and trying to prepare for coverage of an earthquake and thinking that I had twelve reporters which is a lot, but um, when you are talking about a landmass of eight- hundred square miles or more, it is a lot of area to cover when you have communications that are compromised and mobility that is compromised. B. So, um, I started talking to people who, um, made preparations in the field for this kind of thing, such as the fire department, such as the U.S. Geological Survey, um, and others…and then realized that, you know, they didn’t do a lot of talking to each other and they did very little talking to the public…um, even though they had spent millions and millions of dollars sort of to prepare for this event (earthquakes/natural disasters). B. Um, so, then when I got here, I looked at some of the communications tools we have here, such as this sort of iMap campus, this 3D map of the campus and everything else, and I thought, well what if we had a way to sort of crowd source the reporting of the 87 disaster, so that instead of having twelve reporters, I had you know, twelve thousand who could take a picture of damage or something like that, and put it up on a map and you can kind of get a bird’s eye view of the situation…um, and this would be something that is very useful to emergency responders as well as news outlets, ah, and the general public, because everybody would be able to get a much faster understanding of how damage was concentrated and where the things were, and so and so forth. B. So that’s essentially what we built now, and now we’re doing our prototype testing..um… A. So, sorry, just to understand it better, so when you are saying people taking photos and damages you mean anybody that has the phone or the application… B. Hm yeah, I’ll show you. (Typing sound) B. Um, so this is what it looks like, this would be the web interface, right? And then there is a separate phone interface too. A. Okay. B. Um, for the app…but here I can report an incident, and you can do the same, get the same thing on the phone… B. Give it a title, what kind of incident is it, building damage, fire, hazards material, road flooding, etcetera, ah you know, injuries…yes, no, fatalities, or whatever. So those things are all coded and can be read by the computer and then it gets placed onto a map…um, here it’s asking me to place myself here but the phone has, is geo coded so it would know… A. Oh, okay. B. Know where to it is… A. Yeah. B. Um, and then, ah, then that information gets uploaded…so if we were to sort of look here, this looks like the map is clean, I think because we are doing prototype testing, but you would see bubbles here, um, representing different incidents. A. So, okay because I was going to say, if there is an earthquake people are not going to have that much time to sit there and find the place on the map right… B. No, for the phone it’s automatically, it knows where you are. A. Okay. B. And it doesn't necessarily have to be an earthquake, the incident could be anything… A. Yeah, cool. B. So, um, and so then the other thing that this does is um, let’s say there is a particular incident that requires a particular kind of response, um, most of the incidents-most of the resources deployed, in disaster relief, in this country now, come from the private sector, 80 percent or more. Um, even if sometimes they are routed through an organization like FEMA, um and that is a change from before when the government tried to provide much more, and now the government does a lot more contracting with private companies. B. So, one thing we are trying to do is lower the barrier to entry to, ah for citizens to help in disaster response, so that if you happen to be a construction form, and there happens to be a water main break in Venice Boulevard and it’s flooding businesses, like that, and you see that on your phone, because you have been alerted to that, um, and you can 88 provide something because you are a construction site that actually has some heavy equipment, something like that, um or you got drinking water, or whatever it is you got, um, you can connect with them. A. Oh, cool. B. And you can basically say, hey we got sands for sandbagging and we can help you prevent flooding in your business, you know? So you can put that up there and they can see that you are offering up help…that’s specific to their needs. B. And so we are trying to connect resources with their needs very efficiently, rather than wait for the fire department to get involved… A. Yeah… B. And stuff like that, which might be doing other things which have a high priority because there is human life involved or something like that. B. So, we are trying to sort of…and in addition to that, we are trying to create a database of resources that are static such as police stations, fire, you know, fire stations, hospitals, medical centers, etcetera, etcetera, that would be on the database that can then, you know you can be guided to through the system as well. A. Okay… B. So that’s kind of what we are trying to do. Sort of create a bird’s eye-view of what’s happening, allow people to, um, enter into the process of providing help, and offering help, and offering resources that are targeted for a specific need. A. Hm… B. Um, providing people, connecting and categorizing needs for people. Um, and then, also, we have something that is a people finder. So this is on the phone. So let’s say that there is an incident nearby, um, there’s an explosion right? And your parents know that you are in Los Angeles, they are freaked out, they want to get in touch with you, on the phone, you can simply, basically ah, it doesn’t work on the web, but on the phone, you can send out a note to all your social networks such as through Facebook or whatever, um or to a set of emails saying, I am okay, and there is a link where you are. So, that your network would see that you are okay, or that you are not okay, depending on the message and then click on the link and see a map to locate you. So that obviates the need for a lot of phone calls… A. Hm… B. During a moment when the phone system is over taxed. A. So is this website already public? B. No, we are still testing it. I mean there’s all sort of issues that need to be worked through for something like this. A. Okay, so would you say that this is kind of for the immediate help or like response? Like people helping people kind of? Instead of… B. I think it’s got a number of utilities. A. Yeah… B. So, for one, in a situation like this what is your most sort of trusted resource for emergency response or disaster, what do you think of? A. 911 89 B. Right, in a wide spread emergency it’s useless because they are overloaded with volume and they have no ability to distinguish what is most urgent from what’s more benign… A. Hm… B. So this helps the emergency responder community get a clear picture of what’s going on when they have to deploy scarce resources such as a fire truck or an ambulance or something like that. A. Okay… B. Um, so it also helps news organizations to be able to quickly disseminate information. Um and it helps individuals communicate two ways, get information and communicate information about their own status, even to a community of emergency responders even though there is guarantee that in a real emergency, emergency responders can answer to that kind of call. Ah, but also to their social networks or others that are looking for them, or something like that. B. Um, we’ve also got, um again this ability to get involved and to offer up your resources in um a kind of, what we hope, is a focused fashion. So, it’s not just like you know, I have 200 rescue cones, but you are trying to figure out where what you have can be useful so that everybody feels that they can actually get involved more quickly. A. So, if I’m doing PR for the government…if the Italian government say is my client, which I was actually going to ask you that, like if there is an earthquake in Rome, would my client be like the entire Italian government or would it be that province, how would that work? B. So, you know, there is a lot of overlapping authorities there. So you got the city of Rome, the province of Rome the region of Lazio, and then the national government. The arm of the national government for emergency response is the Protezione Civile. Um, however that is not an organization that, um, they can’t put out fires, you know that’s your local fire department, which is organized on a national level. A. Hm… B. Police is also organized on a national level, you know, um, Polizia Municipale is on a metropolitan level. B. So, in the past, as many have done, they have a control room where they have representatives of different authorities sitting in a room watching different video feeds of what is going on, it’s a similar sort of room that exists here. B. So, again, the city of Rome probably has one set of competences…um if it’s a matter of providing shelter then that’s probably going to lead by Protezione Civile, which is sort of the FEMA of Italy. And they call on the army as well. A. So who do they report to…per say? B. That’s ah, I think they are part of the interior administry. A. Okay. Great. Thank you so much for your time. B. Yep, no problem. END. 90 Appendix C: Interview Questions for Interview with Professor Matthew Leveque • When making his announcement after an earthquake crisis in Rome, what should the prime minister of Italy focus on? (Considering the history of mistrust in the Italian government and the many tourists in the city) • Who should take control of messaging during the crisis and recovery phase if an earthquake hits Rome, and why? • After the L’Aquila crisis, the activist group 3e32 accused the Italian government of trying to cover up the real status of the city’s recovery. They used social media to spread the word. The Italian government didn’t respond to these accusations. Would you have recommended them to? Why or why not? • As part of the messaging, should the Italian government provide information directly to the activists groups such as 3e32 because they are considered trustworthy in the eyes of the public? Or should they stick to creating their own content?                                       91       Appendix D: Transcript of Interview with Professor Matthew Leveque A: Sara Staffaroni (Interviewer) B: Professor Matthew Leveque Date of Interview: March 1, 2012 START: A: So, there was an earthquake in 2009, in L’Aquila, and what happened was that people from L’Aquila actually started this whole activism group movement and they used social media to basically record what was actually happening, and they had their own little radio station, YouTube page and all that stuff. And from what I got, the government didn’t do anything about it, like they didn’t respond to it, they didn’t do anything! B: Right. A: So, my question for you is, should they have responded to it? And how should they have done it? I mean should they have used social media…what kind of messages should they use, what could they have done? B: Well that’s an interesting question, sometimes you know, because that often happens a lot, I mean just think about right now in the election cycle here, a lot of people are very unhappy with Obama, a lot o people are really happy with Obama, it doesn’t mean that the administration responds to every criticism that’s going on online..umm…it would depend. If that became like a credible source of information, if my job was to be the communication professional for the government of the agency on the disaster and that gorilla channel communication group started developing a lot of followers and people started actually believing the information on it, I would maybe start to address it and say, this is not true, this is what’s really going on with different factual information. But if they are only just complaining about what we are doing and not doing… A: I mean it’s actually, its pretty huge now. It has all these different, all these different things generated from it. I mean obviously I don’t know how true it is, because I am not there… B: Right. What’s their views or followers? A: You know, I don’t know exactly what their followers are but they have a lot of websites that are really professionals and from those websites others are created, um, their basic view is that the government isn’t doing anything and you’re lying to us. And they argued initially that the traditional media outlets of Italy were basically going along with the Prime Minister’s message that everything is fine. So, I guess from the government’s perspective, could they even have done anything? If the activist group was telling the truth, would it have been better to not even talk and let them go with it? 92 B: Um, wow it’s an interesting question. Um, when you are in government you are used to people complaining a lot. And screaming, yelling, making noise against you. It just becomes how large is it. So, help me out here, are these agencies that deal with this, are they bureaucrats, are they political, do they reflect, because oftentimes you can have government bureaucracies that are very independent from the elected official, the president or whatever, or are they still more, kind of… A: I mean, I am not an expert, but what I got was that, the Protezione Civile don’t take direct order from the Prime Minister but I feel like there is obviously a connection to him. B: I mean, bottom line to me, this is not, maybe there is a separation here, there’s a certain of the emergency communication when the disaster is taking place, accelerating accurate facts out there to make sure services are going where they are needed, to make sure the population doesn’t- I mean a rumor mill can go crazy and people will start believing things that aren’t necessarily true, so I think there is a different strategy and urgency to have accurate communications from the initial disaster situation as you try to get some sort of recovery and normalcy coming back, and there’s a different strategy looking at it as long term they are just complaining about things that haven’t been fixed but they promised us… A: Yeah, I mean they are definitely complaining but from that there just grew a huge professional structure, organization, kind of… B: But isn’t that how a lot of our bloggers started off with situations like that? So maybe there are communication entities, that start as an activist that then turn into a regular communication channel. Is there also any monetization of it? Do they have ads on it? Are they making any money off of this cite? You know all this kind of stuff may be interesting to look at too. A: So if you had to answer, yes or no, let’s respond to these people or not, would you lean towards a no? Let’s say they have a lot of followers… B: I believe that if you are an astute leader, you are listening to what your populations are saying. So I would say, that I would be paying attention to what’s going on in social media, and if there’s a certain volume of incorrect information I would probably address it and make sure I have accurate counter information, you know my channels, my YouTube site, social media and things like that. A: So, now that social media is being used in Italy and this activist group is stil out there, and lets just say that they have a lot of followers, if there was an earthquake in Rome would you as the government consider giving them information and having them spread it out so you can give it more credibility? B: I would say yes. It would even be to the point where I would invite them and show them what’s going on, um, again that depends on if the government is being truthful, if its being transparent, and what they are telling you is reality on it. So I would invite them along. B: And we don’t know, maybe the government reached out to them and they may be just irrational in their points of view… the government is not going to reach out to them because they aren’t considered mainstream reasonable. 93 A: So there’s a new Prime Minister in Italy and obviously people are still skeptic, so if there was an earthquake in Rome, you were saying last time that he should make an initial announcement and then let other authorities do the communication. B: Well it always goes back to the credibility of messengers, in horrible situations like wars, do you want to hear the politician brief you or do you want to hear from the techs the generals that know what’s going on? The politician is just a third party accordant from the information that is coming from experts of the community. If you can use messengers like NGOs that do disaster relief, the government ministers, people like that. And you often look for, who is the right spokesperson? Who is the most popular? A: So you know how in 911, Bush gave that speech with firefighters… B: Right. A: I guess that was for the Americans saying yeah let’s fight back! So in Italy, if there was an earthquake, would you suggest giving that kind of a speech? A support speech… B: Yes, typically yes. That’s why we didn’t see Bush much after his speech. So source of information, the messenger, how he is perceived, their expertise is important. A: So if there’s an earthquake in Rome, would it be okay to assume other countries will intervene… B: I don’t think they intervene. They ask for…first it depends how bad it is. A: So would you recommend on asking for help? B: Again it depends on the preparedness and resources that you have available. A: So in the messaging, because Rome is full of different tourists, would you recommend in the beginning to mention something about the tourists? For the families who know their loved ones are there… A: Like say, and to the families of the tourists here…like acknowledge the fact that there are a lot of people. B: Yeah, I think to me, so that’s an interesting question. If I had somebody out there, like let’s say my class was in Rome right now and there was a big earthquake, would I be looking to the Italian government or the mayor of Rome to reassure me that the foreign nationals are being taken care of? I would be looking to the United States government, USC, to convince me that you guys would be okay. B: I think there’s no downside to mention it. I am just trying to visualize it...I think that would be reassuring. A: I guess in a way it would be nice to see the person that is in charge of the country acknowledge that these people are there too. B: Typically what they do is you always see these, if you want to find out about victims and survivors then call this toll free number that’s usually Red Cross or some international humanitarian governments work with all these other entities on it. B: Here’s our facebook page, check in on our facebook page so your family knows you are okay. Or, do you have government people, say if all the technology is down and you have no power, then you have people go around and get your name and everything and check you in on this, its kind of interesting, mobile social media check-ins for people…It seems like an odd idea…. Some sort of location where you know you can say I am okay mom and dad. Do a mobile check in! 94 A: Yeah that would be a cool application too. You write your name and it goes to some kind of… B: Right, but if there’s really a bad disaster, then they would have to travel with mobile ones that are powered and people can just go up to them and check in here and get information. That’s kind of an interesting concept for in a really really bad situation where power goes out. A: Okay, I just have one more question, um, so after the whole earthquake now they have a trial where a lot of the scientists and people from the Protezione Civile are accused of basically knowing the information about the earthquake about to happen but didn’t tell the public or lied to them. So basically a month before the earthquake they had a meeting where they saw signs of there possibly being an earthquake. So they didn’t tell the public because they didn’t want them to freak out, so when the local media asked them, they just said, oh its fine! A: What would you suggest, would you suggest giving some type of warning anyway? B: I don’t really know, it all comes down to the accuracy and the warning. We do that with hurricanes but a lot of the time they aren’t accurate. B: If you give these warnings and you do it multiple times and people get prepared and take it very seriously and nothing ever happens, and then you actually give one, it’s, the if you yell fire in the theatre so much that people stop believing it, and then nobody does anything and it actually happens and you could have saved life, how does that work? B: The beauty of digital and social now is you can get information that can accelerate out very quickly. So if we knew that we are five minutes from something happening, it can spread like wild flower now, because everyone is on their mobile device, and you’re getting it on traditional media but you don’t have to have a press conference. A: Maybe they can add to their application a warning on their phones if something going to happen… B: USC has that. So the emergency alert, you get text messages if something is going on. The city of Hermosa Beach uses a similar system, so I’ll get phone calls at home and I’ll get text messages. So when the Japanese earthquake and tsunami came, I actually got tsunami warnings, because they were predicting a couple of foot tsunami coming into Hermosa Beach. I was really impressed that on all my devices I was given good information! Those I find to be very effective. A: Thank you so much for your time! END. 95 Appendix E: Examples of Pre-Scripted Messages for OPLAN’s Phase 2a: Immediate Response “No Phones” This is a special safety message from the California Emergency Management Agency. There has been a strong earthquake and stronger shaking is possible in our area. The police and fire departments are aware of the situation and are busy responding to the most serious problems first. Please…stay off the telephone…including your cell phone…unless you need to report a life-threatening injury or fire. Do not text emergency services like 911 as they cannot receive text messages. Unnecessary calls could keep life-saving calls from getting through. There’s more emergency information in the front pages of your phone book. And stay to this station for more information from the California Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 2010, pg. 86) “People Check” This is a special safety message from the California Emergency Management Agency. Police, firefighters and medics are currently dealing with the most pressing problems…but the most available source of help for your family, friends and neighbors right now…is you! If your area has damage, check in with the other people nearby…your family, neighbors, or co-workers. Use the first aid information in the front of the telephone book to treat any injuries. Small children and elders will need special attention and reassurance, even if they seem OK. People with special needs may need a little extra help, too. And stay to this station for more information from the California Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 2010, pg. 89). “Food” This is a special safety message from the California Emergency Management Agency. Following the earthquake, a hot meal can help everyone feel better and calmer. It’s not too early to start feeding people. But plan your meal carefully. If your power is out, eat the perishable foods in your refrigerator first…then the food from your freezer. Leave the food that’s stored on your shelves last. 96 Unless you’re sure your gas and electronic connections are safe, cook outside on a barbecue, a charcoal grill or a camping stove. Remember that those are only for use outdoors. Read the helpful information in the Survival Guide section near the front of your telephone directory. And stay to this station for more information from the California Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 2010, pg. 89). Status Message Describe the Incident Site & Location. State and local responders mobilized, federal assets notified awaiting requests for assistance. Assessment is underway, updates to follow. Sustain yourself, your family and your neighbors. Use personal survival kits and personal emergency plans (FEMA, 2010,pg. 91). Shelter Message If you do not have to leave, stay where you are and remain calm. Unnecessary evacuations can strain resources; please do not leave unless mandatory evacuations are ordered Aftershocks are possible. If you must seek shelter, shelters have been setup at {insert main mega shelter locations}. For more information, listen to radio {insert stations here} for general emergency notifications and updates (FEMA, 2010, pg.91). Special Message to Emergency Responders Report to duty if you are able to do so. Text your families, phone service will be interrupted for some time (FEMA, 2010, pg.91). Pets and Livestock Message If you have pets, keep your pets with you. Do not release your pets or livestock. There is limited or not medical support for pets and livestock at shelters; some vets are on site at the following locations {Locations of medical sites with veterinary care} (FEMA, 2010, pg.91-92). 97 Appendix F: Examples of Pre-Scripted Messages of OPLAN’s Phase2b: Deployment & Employment Ongoing Operations Message Cover what emergency services and rescue operations are ongoing. Focus on success and human interest stories. Cover how operations to provide for basic life support (water, food, shelter, energy sources and waste removal) are ongoing. Focus on success sand human interest stories. Provide information on how outside organizations and people can help. Cover how operations to repair local infrastructure, roads, utilities etc. are ongoing. Provide information on plan to restore full service, estimates on when basic services will return and estimated costs. Provide anticipated affects of disaster on rest of nation and need for country to pool resources to help out the disaster area. Cover how operations to assists individual property owners are ongoing. Report type of assistance and amount of aid available to property owners and businesses form private, and government programs (FEMA, 2010, pg.94). Message to Volunteers Do not approach affected areas unless requested. Please send monetary donations to {provide resource for donations.} For a list of registered volunteer organizations, visit www.californiavolunteers.org

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This paper explores the present natural disasters crisis communications findings and best practices, and applies them to develop the ideal crisis communication plan for Italy in the case of an earthquake disaster. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to address the Italian government’s significant lack of earthquake crisis communication preparedness, by providing guidelines for the best crisis communication plan that the country can implement on its most vulnerable regions. Rome, Italy was chosen because of the city’s considerable volume of valuable historic monuments and high tourism traffic, making it highly susceptible to an earthquake catastrophe. The comparison of California’s best practice plans for natural disasters to Italy’s current crisis communication plan for Rome, revealed the country’s neglect of available and effective new crisis communication tools, particularly social media channels and mobile technologies. The principal conclusion is that facing an earthquake disaster without a prepared strategic crisis communication plan in place, will lead to unfavorable long-term consequences for both victims and government agencies involved in the crisis response and recovery.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Collegiate athletics in crisis: a new practical model for crisis communication/management

PDF

Crisis communication for tourism destinations in the new media environment

PDF

Public health anti-obesity communication: an analysis of current campaigns for future guidance

PDF

Comparative analysis of nuclear crisis communication: 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis and 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear crisis

PDF

The making of a crisis communication plan for a large, public, national professional services company

PDF

Cultural differences in communication patterns of international B2C technology companies on Weibo and Twitter: an examination of effectiveness from a motivation perspective

PDF

The visual literacy explosion: a brief history, relevant cases and commonly accepted practices

PDF

Public relations in the music business: how publicists continue to improve a changing industry

PDF

The share factor: implications of global digital strategy for public relations

PDF

Volkswagen Dieselgate: an analysis of Volkswagen AG's crisis communication as a response to the emissions scandal from 2015

PDF

Corporate reputation crisis in the digital age: a comparative study on Abercrombie & Fitch’s reputation crisis in the U.S., China and Taiwan

PDF

A study of the cultural environment of social media

PDF

Lights, camera, (call to) action: global public engagement in film launch campaigns

PDF

Communication plan for City King

PDF

An analysis of internal communication practices in Marvell and tentative optimization suggestions

PDF

The C word: managing crisis in the modern media landscape

PDF

Musicians utilizing social media to increase brand awareness, further promote their brand and establish brand equity

PDF

The new great leap forward: a two-case analysis of modern China's efforts in external communication strategies

PDF

Engaging in the conversation; best practices in strategic social media

PDF

The comic book superhero: his amazing journey to connect and communicate with society

Asset Metadata

Creator Staffaroni, Sara (author)

Core Title Crisis communication & natural disasters: communication plan for Rome, Italy in the case of an earthquake

School Annenberg School for Communication

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Strategic Public Relations

Publication Date 04/25/2012

Defense Date 04/24/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Communication Plan for Rome,crisis communication,earthquake,Italy,natural disasters,OAI-PMH Harvest,Rome

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tenderich, Burghardt (committee chair), Floto, Jennifer D. (committee member), LeVeque, Matthew (committee member)

Creator Email sstaffaroni@gmail.com,staffaro@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-10441

Unique identifier UC11289307

Identifier usctheses-c3-10441 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Staffaroni-635.pdf

Dmrecord 10441

Document Type Thesis

Rights Staffaroni, Sara

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA