Suggestions for minimum practice for social media in emergencies

This post emerges from a confluence of inputs. Patrice Cloutier’s post “Best practices in the use of social media in emergency management: too soon?” got me thinking. At the Emergency Services Show I spoke to a whole host of people who feel that some responders are on top of social media but others are nowhere with the technology. Given the way emergencies are managed in this country this is an area of risk. At that same show I understood Gordon Scobbie to say that he is working in Scotland to make sure SCG*s (called LRF*s in England and Wales) have a shared approach to social media.

It seems to me that the time has come to define minimum practice for digital technology use by responders. Here are some initial suggestions.

1. Every Category One Responder* should maintain key social media channels.
Right now this would mean that every council, fire service and health trust would have, at minimum, a facebook page and twitter account.

2. Every Cat One Responder should be able to update its social media channels with a maximum of one hour notice 24/7/365.
For larger responders this means having staff in its control centre trained and empowered to provide updates. For smaller responders this would mean having on-call staff trained and empowered to do the same.

3. Every LRF should have clear protocols for how responders will co-operate with each other on social media channels during an emergency
In an emergency all responders involved should use their own channels to talk from their own competence. They should also ensure that they link, re-tweet and point to the channels of the other responders involved. Where there is a lead responder, other responders should regularly indicate this eg

“Follow @marchfordpolice for the latest updates on #theincidentinthetown”

4. Every Cat One Responder should be able to mobilise variable levels of communications resource to their social media presence in a timely fashion.
As an incident escalates, there will be an increased need to updates and to respond to issues raised on social media. This will quickly require a dedicated resource (ie someone who isn’t trying to actually manage the incident).

5. Every LRF should have arrangements to provide for the monitoring and analysis of the online environment in an emergency.
The general public uses the online environment to share data about emerging situations. In some cases the information being shared may be of direct benefit in improving the information picture. In every case it is important to understand how the public perceive the situation and where they are self-organising. This is a resource-hungry task both in terms of the cost of technology and the people needed. Accordingly it is probably most appropriate to resource on a partnership basis.

6. Every LRF should have considered the risk associated with the loss of Internet connectivity and have appropriate contingency plans in place.
Social media is already, for many people, a vital tool in communicating in emergencies. It is becoming a vital tool for responders. This increases the impact of the loss of connectivity. Connectivity might be lost through power failure, telephone system failure or demand significantly exceeding network capacity. If people can’t get online they may self-evacuate, they may panic and they probably won’t turn on the radio (even if it is battery powered, which it probably isn’t).

7. Social media should be explicitly referenced in every plan, exercise and after-incident review.
I don’t think that needs any exposition.

Those are just my suggestions. I’d love to hear other thoughts.

*Some quick definitions

Emergencies in the UK (or at least in Great Britain) are dealt with by local public bodies: police, local authorities, health trusts, fire, ambulance etc. Those with the duty to deal with emergencies are called “Category One Responders” or “Cat One Responders” if you feel jargony, which clearly I do. They have to co-operate in planning for and dealing with emergencies. They all cover different geographical areas. For clarity they are required to join a partnership based around the police force footprint. In Scotland these partnerships are called Strategic Co-ordinating Groups (SCG). In England and Wales they are called Local resilience Forums (Fora?).

Comments