With Great Tweeting Comes Great Responsibility

As I reflect on the various #SMEM developments from the past week I am somewhat appalled at how much negative attention was showered upon the Larimer County Sheriff's Office (@LarimerSheriff).  The criticism began after the Sheriff dared to ask the media to refrain from immediately publishing video or photos of homes damaged by the High Park Fire (#HighParkFire, #Cofire).  Depending on whose account you read it seemed as if the First Amendment itself had gone up in smoke!

The Denver Post shed light on the issue when they published an article commenting on the Sheriff's request and subsequent media response. The article summed up the issue stating:

"At times the journalistic imperative to deliver news clashed with authorities' efforts to control the flow of information  
On Monday, the Larimer County Sherriff's Office issued a request to the media not to show photos of destroyed homes out of respect to homeowners.
Station managers acknowledged the sensitivity of the issue, but turned aside the plea on journalistic grounds."

In the #SMEM world this relatively tame article was quickly drowned out by very loud voices which looked to condemn the Sheriff for issuing his request.  Blogger Dave Statter (@STATter911 http://www.statter911.com/) wrote a flippant article which, in extreme sarcastic flare, outlined his view of the perceived government clamp down. You can read his article here: 

Those ghouls are at it again: TV stations turn down Colorado Sheriff's request not to show burned or burning homes.

This was followed up by an article from Emergency Management Magazine (@EmergencyMgtMag) entitled: Should Law Enforcement Determine What News Media Can Show or Not Show.  The article, written by Gerald Baron, did at least consider that the Sheriff's motives were not entirely maniacal:

"What is the most surprising is that the Larimer County Sheriff's office would make that request. Maybe they did it for political reasons, showing their sensitivity, while realizing that what they were asking was out of line and totally unrealistic."

But that was as forgiving as it got.  Baron concluded the article stating:

"But, maybe not. I suspect that this sad story is one more example of how some authorities are simply not understanding the world in which they now live, a world that has changed dramatically over the past few years. Larimer County Sheriff: Wake up, you are living in the Internet age."

Seriously? Do we have to jump to such harsh conclusions?  The Larimer Sheriff, though not perfect, is well aware of the Internet age.  They have a Twitter account (@LarimerSheriff) which has been pushing out constant updates (they are even mastering the art of the hashtag!) Their counterpart, @LarimerCounty, is likewise participating in the Internet information outreach campaign via Twitter and via their website.  Both entities also have corresponding Facebook accounts that are also involved in the effort.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/LarimerCounty

http://www.facebook.com/#!/larimersheriff

Clearly the Larimer County Sheriff's Office is aware that we are living in an Internet age.  If nothing else the following tweets illustrate this:

The fact that @LarimerSheriff responded to this issue via a Twitter conversation with @CalFireNews is a clear example showing that the Sheriff's Office's has a strong understanding of the Internet age.

Now let's take a close look at the Sheriff's message:

"The Sheriff's Office asked that press not show burned homes of people who had not been notified yet. Not controlling the press."

Can we in the #SMEM community calm down and simply take the Sheriff's request at face value? The Sheriff by no means squashed the 1st Amendment.  He simply asked the media to give him some time to deliver horrible news to affected families.

Is it too much to ask that everyone exercise some basic civility and responsibility even while freely exercising their First Amendment rights?  Ours certainly is a brave new world where information flows freely and swiftly but that by no means must lead to a world where basic manners and rules are antiquated or defunct.

I have begun to use the phrase, "With Great Tweeting, Comes Great Responsibility".  Let's face it, when we, the public, or the media press "send" our messages, pictures, and videos are immediately broadcast to the world.  This is a great and powerful tool which must be taken advantage of by the all entities to include the government, media and public.  Yet this same fact of immediate broadcast capability does not diminish our responsibility to ensure that the message is accurate and appropriately delivered.  On the contrary, our new found power only increases our responsibility.

When I consider the Larimer County Sheriff's request I see a reasonable request that simply attempts to allow the managing agency to make important notifications before a family's pain and suffering slaps them in the face via live television or live tweet.

To close, I am must share that I am disappointed in some members of our #SMEM community.  I expect more from us.  I expect that we would embrace my new favorite maxim, "With Great Tweeting Comes Great Responsibility".  Let's encourage everyone to go forth and exercise their First Amendment rights, but let's also ask them to do so wisely and with great care. 

Just because we can inform the world by hitting "send" does not mean we always should!

Nothing New Under the Sun...

Nothing is new under the sun...but a whole lot is changing!

I just read through a chapter of W. Timothy Coomb's book: Ongoing Crisis Communication, Planning, Managing and Responding (2012 Sage Publications). In chapter 2, titled: Effects of the Online World on Crisis Communication, Comb argues that social media has not revolutionized crisis communication but has merely been an evolution of the same.

Coombs writes:

"We should remember that people did essentially the same communication tasks prior to the Internet.  However, it took more time, effort and resources to accomplish them." Page 19

We in the SMEM community are quick to share the newest trick and quickest way to post our information but have we really revolutionized the crisis communication world?  I think that Coombs may be more correct then we would like to recognize.  Coombs continues his theory stating:

"Crisis managers still face the same needs to identify warning signs, confront the same basic communication demands, utilize the same concepts, and must enact effective strategic responses [...] Crisis managers are faced with demands to create a quick and accurate [...] Crisis management plans (CMPs) and crisis teams still compose the heart of the crisis management effort [...] Crisis managers must weight key crisis factors and devise an appropriate and effective crisis response" Page 19-20

None of these concepts are new...so nothing has changed right? Not so fast...of course things have changed!  Coombs recognizes this and continues:

"What has changed is how the information is collected, and in some cases, how that information is processed [...] what has changed is what constitutes "quick" and how that initial response is delivered [...] what has changed is how CMPs are stored and accessed and how team members interact with one another [...] what has changed are the ways of identifying critical crisis communication and how their messages are delivered." Page 19-20

So a lot has changed! Today's communication tools and tactics have dramatically changed even as our overarching goals and tasks remain the same.  Coombs concludes the chapter stating that:

"The Internet, especially social media, is helping crisis managers execute existing communication-related tasks rather than creating the need for entirely new ones.  But crisis managers would be engaging in malpractice if they did not integrate social media into their activities." Page 29

Nothing is new under the sun.  Crisis communication has existed from the dawn of society. Their are proven plans, goals, and purposes that must be remembered.   Yet at the same time their are new and improved communication tools and tactics that must be embraced.  This leads to the spinning conclusion that nothing is new under the sun but a certainly a whole lot is changing!

This is a paradox that the modern emergency manager must recognize and embrace.  The old and the new must mix to create a communications strategy that fully integrates the proven goals of the past with the ever evolving tools and tactics of the present.