Timely communications describing chemical risks and protective actions will be necessary to help the public understand the actions they can and should take to protect themselves and their loved ones. Having pre-scripted and pre-approved messages immediately available when a chemical incident happens will help address the first of these critical factors. In the chaos of a chemical incident, the absence of pre-scripted and pre-approved messages is likely to delay public communications. Moreover, communications are likely to be inconsistent, increasing public confusion and degrading public trust. Therefore, the composition and approval of pre-scripted messages before an incident occurs should be part of preparedness and planning activities. Based on local chemical risks and existing emergency response plans, pre-scripted messages describing substance identity and health risks, and potentially even locations to avoid, can be developed.
To maximize public compliance with messages providing protective guidance, warning messages should meet style and content criteria designed to elicit the desired public response (see below), and ideally, should be optimized for each communication channel used. Briefly, people respond best to messages that use jargon-free, non-technical, plain language that is specific (i.e., precise and non-ambiguous), accurate (i.e., free from errors that create confusion), certain (i.e., authoritative and confident); and consistent. Following these criteria is especially important in a chemical incident since messages that are not understood will be ineffective at preventing or minimizing the risk of chemical exposures. Follow-on response messaging should keep to the same style criteria while focusing on a similar but broader range of content.
People will want to know why a certain protective action is required before they will take that action. They will want to know information such as: the severity of the incident, their likelihood of being exposed to contaminants, what to do and where to go if they have been exposed or contaminated, what immediate medical life-saving actions they should take if they have been exposed or contaminated and are experiencing symptoms, the efficacy and costs or risks of recommended behaviors, and their ability to perform the recommended behaviors.45 However, when minutes are critical for lifesaving, there is a delicate balance between giving simple, easy to understand instructions, and explaining why the public should follow them. Communications staff should be aware that terms and phrases commonly used in the emergency response field, like ‘shelter-in-place,’ may not be immediately understood by the public and may require additional definition. Providing even a brief explanation of the protective actions ordered can help increase public acceptance and compliance with the recommendations. Relating protective actions to other incidents that require them, like sheltering from tornadoes, can further increase people’s understanding and compliance with safety instructions. Having simple and reasoned explanations for action directives and ready answers to anticipated questions will help avoid chemical exposures, increase public trust, and ultimately save lives. Visit the resources noted throughout this KPF for help with designing effective messages.
Keeping language simple and easy to understand will help ensure people take the right protective actions at the right times and in the right areas.
People will want to know why an action is protective before they will take that action.
The second component of the advance message preparation process is message pre-approval. Developing an approval chain before an emergency happens is essential for speedy delivery of messages to the affected area. Local plans or approval chains may already be in place as a result of all-hazards planning, although additional review and approval steps may be necessary based on the specifics of the situation at hand and whether or not a unified command is activated, a JIC is activated to coordinate messaging priorities, or multiple jurisdictions are working together in the response. Briefings, trainings, and exercises may be used to broach the need for developing these approval chains with decision-makers and underscore the need to get messages out quickly in the face of a chemical incident. Following pre-approval, a “bank” of prioritized responses to media outlets, requests for interviews and information, and public questions can be created that will help meet the overwhelming number of inquiries that will be received during an incident.
Footnotes
45. Rubin, G. J., Chowdhury, A. K., & Amlôt, R. (2012). How to communicate with the public about chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear terrorism: a systematic review of the literature. Biosecurity and bioterrorism: biodefense strategy, practice, and science, 10(4), 383–395.