EPR-Public Communications L-011 Good Practices for

Transcript:EPR-Public Communications L-011 Good Practices for:
EPR-Public Communications L-011 Good Practices for PIOs Objective To review good practices to improve effectiveness of communications before, during and after an emergency; How to apply these practices in planning communication for a radiological or nuclear emergency. Outline Review: Good communications practices; Putting practices into action. Review: Good communications practices Give people things they can do; Don’t delay in communicating about risk; Provide as much relevant information, as soon as possible; it can be updated. If information needs to be changed as the emergency evolves, clearly explain why to avoid loss of credibility and trust; Initial perceptions will “frame” the risk in the public’s mind; Once the risk has been framed it will be difficult to shift this perception. Review: Good communications practices Communicate clearly about who is at risk and who is not; Plan how to deal with increased anxiety; Consider the perspective of the audience in developing information and messages to be communicated; Consider pre-existing knowledge and language skills; Use plain language in explaining scientific and technical information. Review: Good communications practices Prepare as much information in advance as possible; Anticipate likely questions and prepare answers in advance. Review: Good communications practices Identify effective communications channels in advance; Consider the risks and benefits of both controlled and uncontrolled channels. Review: Good communications practices Use the internet to its full advantage; Plan for high use demands of an emergency —bandwidth and low graphic versions; Listserv for users to sign up for updates; Enhanced media relations; Monitor the Internet for misinformation and rumours; Mobile phones have made it possible to broadcast text messages with emergency information. Review: Learning from past practices IAEA Public Communications during the response to TEPCO’s Fukushima-Daiichi NPP accident Insufficient bandwidth to meet demand Caused long delays in web site response; Site required 45 times more bandwidth than normal; Limited web site access For first three weeks, web site access was often not possible, led to public criticism of IAEA; Use of Facebook To overcome initial black-out period, all emergency content was posted on Facebook, which remained visible without loss through the emergency period; Putting practices into action Plan for possible types of emergencies; Identify which nuclear technology and radiation sources are in use; Are these sources fixed or mobile? Putting practices into action IAEA Threat Categories I—facilities, such as nuclear power plants, which could give rise to severe deterministic health effects; II—facilities, such as research reactors,