Communicating Radiation Risks
Crisis Communications
for Emergency Responders
United States Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of Radiation
and Indoor Air
EPA-402-F-07-008
September 2007
Reprinted June 2008
For a PDF copy or printed
copies of the guide or
information on guide training,
please e-mai!
radiation.questions@epa.gov or
call the U.S. EPA's Radiation
Protection Division at
202-343-9290.
-------
Communicating Radiation Risks 1
To the Emergency
Response Community
WE HAVE PREPARED THIS GUIDE AS A RESOURCE for emergency responders
and federal, state, and local officials communicating with the public and
the media during a radiological crisis. It provides communications
techniques and advice based on proven risk and crisis communications
strategies as well as radiological scenarios and messages for use in
radiological emergencies.
Two events—the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the
devastation of the Gulf Coast by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2.005—
emphasized the need for effective communications among federal, state,
and local officials, the media, and the public during crises. As public
officials, we should convey clear and accurate messages to help the public
take actions that will help to protect their health and well-being in the
midst of a radiological emergency.
During radiological emergencies, responders and public affairs
specialists are called upon—whether in the field, in an emergency
operations center, or in a press conference—to talk about radiation
risks and safety precautions for the public. This is a challenging and
time-sensitive task.
The public must have information quickly about what is happening,
what they should do, and what government agencies are doing to help
protect them. Effective communications in these moments can make a
difference in the outcome of a radiological emergency. Effective
communicators can inspire confidence, build credibility and, most
importantly, contribute to saving lives and minimizing injury during
a radiological emergency.
Crisis communications is a critical and complex undertaking.
Remember, every emergency presents it own set of challenges.
We hope this guide will contribute in part to the success of your efforts.
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
2 Communicating Radiation Risks
Acknowledgements
This communications guide was funded by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. The Office of Radiation
and Indoor Air would like to thank EPA headquarters and regional staff
who helped in the development of this technical document.
The content of this guide is based on the risk communication theory,
research and principles developed by Dr. Vincent Covello and the
Consortium for Risk and Crisis Communication. Risk communications
expertise and technical support was provided under EPA Contract
No. 4W-3391-MBLX.
Communicating Radiation Risks 3
Table of Contents
How to Use This Guide 4
Crisis Communications for Emergency Responders 5
I: Communicating in a Radiological Emergency 6
Taking the First Steps 8
Communicating Effectively 70
Recognizing Traps and Pitfalls 12
Explaining Radiation Issues in an Emergency—Q&A 75
II: Messengers, Messages and Means... ..... 26
MESSENGERS: Roles and Responsibilities of a Spokesperson 26
MESSAGES: The Importance of What to Say and How to Say It. 31
MEANS: Working With the Media 38
III: Quick Response Guide for
Radiological Emergencies 46
SCENARIO 1: Radioactive Materials Transportation Incident 57
SCENARIO 2: Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD)—Dirty Bomb 53
SCENARIO 3: Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) 56
IV: Building on Lessons Learned 60
After a Radiological Emergency 60
Appendices 63
APPENDIX A:
Emergency Communications "Top 10"Planning Checklist 63
APPENDIX B:
Answering Difficult Questions 67
APPENDIX C:
Important Terms and Frequently Used Acronyms 69
APPENDIX D:
Suggested Readings 74
APPENDIX E:
References 77
-------
4 Communicating Radiation Risks
How to Use this Guide
The guide is divided into five sections; each section is
color coded for easy reference.
Provides guidance on crisis
communications and sample messages that have
been approved for use in a radiological emergency,
TEAL: Section II Gives in-depth information on
how to be an effective communicator, how to develop
messages, and how to get those messages out to the
right audiences.
ORANGE: Section III The Quick Response Guide
provides information on what to expect in the event
of a radiological emergency and the potential questions
for each scenario.
PURPLE: Section IV Shows how to monitor your
progress during a crisis, recognize strengths and
weaknesses, and build on what you learn after an event.
GREEN: Appendices Includes additional information
and references to help you build your skills as a
risk communicator.
Communicating Radiation Risks 5
Crisis Communications for
Emergency Responders
THIS GUIDE SERVES AS AN INTRODUCTION for emergency
responders who have had little training in public speaking
or who have had little exposure in working with the media,
yet is also a refresher for experienced public information
specialists. Along with providing basic information
on radiation, the guide contains sample messages
recommended for use during radiological emergencies.
Use the Messages Carefully This guide contains
a series of messages that can be used during a
radiological emergency. Remember, each emergency
presents it own challenges. The messages in this guide
may need to be adjusted based on the exact situation
you are facing.
Rely on Your Situational Awareness Your expert
knowledge of the situation should guide you in
developing and delivering messages suitable to the
emergency. In many situations, you will be acting as
part of a larger response. Be aware of what your partners
are saying as well as the concerns of your audience.
Update and Revise Messages Throughout an
Emergency As your information about the crisis and
the response changes, your messages should reflect
this information.
Address Public Concerns Make sure to address the
current state of the response, actions being taken and
concerns of your audiences.
-------
6 Communicating Radiation Risks
D Communicating in a
Radiological Emergency
HOWTO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY IN A CRISIS CAN
BE LEARNED. More importantly, you can prepare now to
speak effectively during a crisis
by thinking through the steps
you will take and the messages
you will need in an emergency.
Your crisis communications
efforts will be more successful if
you anticipate what may happen,
what questions may be asked,
who should address various
questions, and how to get
your messages out to the media
and the public effectively.
Spokesperson Considerations. In some cases, there
will be an obvious spokesperson, for example, the
senior-ranking person in command who is on scene.
Experienced public affairs specialists in the role of public
MYTH VS. TRUTH
Risk Communication Myth: Crisis and risk communications
is not my job.
Truth: Yes it is. As a public servant, you have a responsibility
to the public. Integrate public communication into your job
and help others do the same.
Communicating Radiation Risks 7
information officer also are a logical choice for the
designated spokesperson, as are local officials. In
addition, both the National Response Plan (NRP) and
the Incident Command System (ICS), governmental
blueprints for managing emergency responses, suggest
appropriate spokespersons. Often there will be a lead
spokesperson working along with technical experts to
address specific areas of expertise at a media briefing or
press conference.
If you are placed in this role, it is important to
remember that referring either the public or the media
to another spokesperson who is more comfortable with
the role is perfectly acceptable and preferable in an
emergency, especially if you don't believe that you can
convey clear and accurate messages with confidence
and credibility.
(Hyer & Covello, 2007)
Spokespersons should be:
Skilled in interpersonal communication.
¦ Able to convey empathy.
¦ Effective listener.
¦ Respectful of people's concerns.
Knowledgeable about the topic area.
¦ Be able to answer basic questions about the situation.
¦ Know when to refer the question to a subject matter expert.
Credible.
¦ A known, respected name.
¦ Associated with respected agency or institution.
-------
8 Communicating Radiation Risks
Taking the First Steps (Coveiio, 2003;
h Assess the crisis: HYer & Covello, 2007)
¦ What information do you need? What do you know?
What don't you know? What is the extent and degree
of the damage?
¦ What steps are being
taken by what
government agencies
at all levels?
¦ What steps are being
taken by which
non-government
organizations (NGOs)
like the American
Red Cross?
¦ How will you obtain or share information with NGOs
or other groups?
¦ What should the public do?
¦ When will you get back to the public with more
information?
2. Identify and assess your audiences:
¦ Who are your audiences?
¦ Is it a local, statewide or national emergency?
¦ What are each audience's greatest concerns?
3. Determine communication methods:
¦ Consider the best way to reach your audience; When,
where and how will you communicate with them?
Communicating Radiation Risks 9
¦ Prepare for possible disruptions or failures in electricity
and/or broadcast signals during a radiological crisis.
¦ Consider what other channels of communications
you will need.
¦ Get your essential messages to the media quickly and
at continuing regular intervals. The media will be
reporting on the crisis rapidly, so this is important.
4. Develop your three key messages:
Think in terms of limiting your information to three
key messages because research shows that three key
messages are all the public can process during a
high-stress situation.
¦ Most of the questions that will be asked can be
anticipated. (See page 15 for sample messages for the
most frequently asked questions about radiation and
radiological emergencies.)
¦ Support your messages with accurate information.
¦ If available, use radiation experts who are skilled in
speaking with the media.
KEEP IN MIND,
In an emergency, you should expect that people
will want to:
¦ Be with their loved ones—particularly their children.
¦ Seek medical services.
¦ Look for more information,
-------
10 Communicating Radiation Risks
5. Focus on message integrity:
¦ Be honest and open about what you know and
don't know.
¦ Be clear about what is being done and when you
anticipate having more information,
¦ Be explicit about what the public can and should do.
¦ Report only on information that you know with
certainty to be credible.
6. Be timely in responding to the public and the media.
Communicating Effectively (Coveiio et ai., 2001)
Overcoming "Mental Noise"
During emotionally charged, high-stress situations,
people may experience "mental noise," an emotional
block that can make it difficult to hear, understand,
or remember information. Research shows that by
following the three steps below, your audience will
more easily understand your messages.
Keep it simple: Use plain language that avoids jargon
and scientifically complex terms.
Keep it brief: Make messages for the public brief,
concise and clear.
Keep it to the point: Follow the "27/9/3" rule:
¦ 27 total words is all print media usually allow
for a quote.
¦ 9 seconds is what television and radio media outlets
usually allow for a sound bite.
¦ 3 key messages is all the public can process during a
high-stress situation.
Communicating Radiation Risks 7 7
Message Development
Communicating during a crisis
can be daunting. If professional
communicators and radiation
experts are available, work
closely with them on what
to say and how to say it.
They can help you anticipate,
prepare and practice until
you feel confident in what
you are saying.
The following provides additional strategies as you
prepare to communicate:
¦ Choose your words carefully.
- The right words can achieve your needed impact.
- The wrong words can lead to public harm.
¦ Understand each audience's unique concerns,
- Tailor your messages to their needs.
¦ Be aware of media coverage on the crisis.
- Understand what the public is seeing, hearing
and reading in the media.
Message Delivery
Delivery is also critical—often how a message is
delivered is as important as the message itself. To help
build credibility and trust:
¦ Convey empathy and caring first.
- Acknowledge the fears and concerns of the public.
-------
72 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ Exhibit commitment and competence. Especially
in a crisis:
- People depend upon the leadership of
public officials.
- People need to be confident of your command of
the situation and response.
¦ Express optimism.
- People rarely see beyond
the crisis at hand and need
to be assured, realistically,
that the response is
designed to improve the
situation.
¦ Be attentive to your
body language.
- A confident, open demeanor
will help build credibility and trust.
¦ Avoid "no comment."
- "No comment" appears as though you are covering
something up or are guilty.
- Instead of saying "no comment," tell them what
you can say—what has been confirmed or known
at the time.
Recognizing Traps and Pitfalls (Coveiio, 2006,
Avoid using "I." Hyer & Covello, 2007)
¦ Speak for the organization using its name or saying
the pronoun "we."
¦ Avoid the impression that you, alone, are the authority
or the sole decision-maker.
Communicating Radiation Risks 13
¦ Never disagree with the organization you represent
by saying: "Personally, I don't agree," or "Speaking for
myself," or "If it were me ... ."
Avoid speculating.
¦ Stick to the facts of what has, is and will be done.
¦ Avoid speculating on worst-case scenarios,
what could be done, what might happen or
possible outcomes.
Avoid making promises you can't keep.
¦ Promise only what you can deliver.
¦ State your willingness to explore other options.
Avoid jargon, technical terms or acronyms.
¦ Limit their use and explain those you must use.
Avoid negative words and phrases.
¦ Use positive or neutral terms.
¦ Avoid words like no, never and none.
¦ Avoid highly-charged analogies, like
"This is not Chernobyl."
Don't blame others.
¦ Accept your fair share of responsibility.
¦ Don't point fingers at others.
¦ Focus your communications on how problems
can be solved.
-------
14 Communicating Radiation Risks
Avoid details on how much it costs.
¦ Focus instead on how the response has supported
the health and well-being of those affected.
Avoid humor.
¦ No exceptions! It is not appropriate in an emergency
situation, The audience may be offended and think
that you are not taking the event seriously, or you
have no compassion for those involved.
Don't repeat negative allegations.
¦ Refute critical allegations succinctly.
¦ Draw upon and reinforce your key messages.
Don't become defensive.
¦ Respond to issues, not personalities.
¦ End debates, rather than continue them.
¦ Stay calm and remain collected.
TEMPLATE TOOL
1 Negative = 3 Positives
When breaking bad news, negative messages should be
counter-balanced with at least three—and preferably four—
positive, constructive, or solution-oriented messages.
(Covello et a I., 2001)
Communicating Radiation Risks 15
Explaining Radiation Issues in an Emergency—
Questions and Answers
The following are responses to
frequently asked questions
during radiological emergencies.
These questions address critical
health and safety issues likely to
be of greatest concern to the
public. Of course, the choice of
appropriate messages depends on the type and magnitude
of the event and the evolving nature of the response.
These messages are written in plain language with
the intent of making them understandable to the general
public during a crisis. The messages are also written keeping
in mind the "27/9/3" rule of crisis communication:
(Hyer & Covello, 2007)
27 total words is all print media usually allow for a quote.
9 seconds is what television and radio media outlets
usually allow for a sound bite.
3 key messages are all the public can process during
a high-stress situation.
Basic Radiation Information
1. How do I detect radiation?
¦ You cannot sense radiation.
¦ Radiation can only be detected using specialized
instruments.
- With the correct instruments, radiation is easily
detected.
¦ Emergency responders are skilled in using these
instruments.
-------
16 Communicating Radiation Risks
2. How can radiation exposure occur?
¦ Radiation from natural and man-made sources is
always around us.
¦ We cannot eliminate radiation in our environment,
¦ We can reduce our health risks by controlling our
exposure to it.
3. How much radiation is safe?
¦ There is no known safe amount of radiation.
- The current body of scientific knowledge tells
us this.
¦ We always assume that less radiation is better.
¦ There are steps you can take to minimize your exposure.
- Your local officials can advise you on what steps
to take.
4. What are common sources of radiation?
¦ Low levels of radiation come from a number of sources.
-These include natural background.
- They also include sources such as medical x-rays.
5. What should we do about low levels of radiation?
¦ There may be some risk from low levels of radiation.
¦ It is reasonable to assume that less radiation
exposure is better.
¦ To be safe, take all reasonable precautions to
reduce exposure.
- It may be difficult to reduce exposure to low-level
radiation in our everyday lives.
Communicating Radiation Risks 17
6. What are the reasonable steps to take in an emergency?
¦ Follow safety instructions from public officials.
¦ Minimize the time you spend in areas with elevated
radiation levels.
¦ Avoid areas where radiation levels are elevated.
7. What happens when I am exposed to radiation?
¦ You may not experience any health effects.
¦ A very large dose of radiation may cause skin
burns, nausea and vomiting.
¦ If you have these symptoms, seek medical
attention immediately.
3. What is radiation exposure?
¦ Exposure occurs when radiation energy interacts
with the body.
¦ Exposure can be caused from external or
internal sources.
- Internal exposure happens when radioactive
materials are eaten, inhaled, injected or absorbed.
9. What is radioactive contamination?
¦ Contamination occurs when radioactive material
settles on a surface.
- That surface could be your body or clothing, a
structure, or an object.
¦ Contamination also can be internal when radioactive
materials are eaten, inhaled, injected or absorbed.
-------
18 Communicating Radiation Risks
10. Are there different types of radioactivity?
¦ There are three major types of radiation:
- Alpha and beta radiation can be stopped by a
layer of clothing, but can be harmful if eaten,
inhaled, injected or absorbed.
- Gamma rays are much more difficult to stop.
• Several feet of concrete or several inches of lead
may stop gamma rays.
• They can be harmful to the body.
¦ Health effects from exposure vary depending on
the amount of exposure.
- This relates to the length of time exposed, and
the distance from and shielding against the
radiation source.
11. What is the difference between contamination
and exposure?
¦ You can be exposed to radiation without
contamination, such as during an x-ray.
¦ You cannot be contaminated without being exposed.
12. How can i tell if I have been exposed?
¦ If you are near an incident, you may have been
exposed to or contaminated by radiation.
¦ Skin burns, nausea and vomiting can result from large
doses of radiation,
- Seek medical attention immediately if you have
these symptoms.
Communicating Radiation Risks 19
¦ If you think you have been contaminated, shower and
change into clean clothes.
- Place contaminated clothing in a plastic bag and
seal it.
- Place the bag as far away as possible from humans
and animals.
- Bagged clothing can be examined later to determine
if you were contaminated.
IB. Am I going to get cancer?
¦ There are many causes of cancer, both environmental
and genetic.
¦ Radiation is a minor contributor to our overall
cancer risk.
¦ The risk of radiation causing cancer increases with the
level of radiation exposure.
¦ Sheltering-in-place or evacuation can help minimize
cancer risk.
Radiological Emergencies
14. What type of emergency is this?
¦ Our monitors detect radiation, and we are working
to identify the source.
¦ Public safety officials are on the scene.
¦ Public officials will provide updates with current
information.
-------
20 Communicating Radiation Risks
15. Was this a terrorist event?
¦ Law enforcement officials are working to determine if
this was a terrorist act.
¦ Public safety and law enforcement officials will provide
updates with current information.
16. What is a dirty bomb?
¦ A dirty bomb is a type of radiation dispersal device
(RDD) that spreads radioactive materials with
explosives.
¦ The effects from a dirty bomb depend on a number
of factors:
- The amount of explosive.
- The atmospheric conditions like wind direction
and speed at the time of the explosion and
afterwards.
- The relative type and amount of radioactive
material used.
¦ These devices are designed to cause fear and
disruption in our lives.
17. What should I do if I am asked to shelter-in-place?
¦ Shelter-in-place means get indoors as soon as possible.
- Buildings provide shielding from radiation.
- Close all exterior vents and windows,
- If needed, use air-conditioning (and heat), preferably
in recirculation mode.
¦ If you think you have been contaminated, shower and
change into clean clothes.
- Place clothing in a plastic bag and seal it.
Communicating Radiation Risks 21
- Place the bag as far away as possible from humans
and animals.
- Bagged clothing can be examined later to determine
if you were contaminated.
¦ Listen to radio and TV for additional guidance.
18. How can I lessen my exposure?
¦ Follow the recommendations of your local officials.
¦ You may be asked to take shelter or evacuate the area.
¦ These recommendations are based on well-established
public safety procedures.
19. What should I do if I think I may have been
contaminated?
First, stay informed.
¦ Listen to your local Emergency Alert System and public
safety officials on radio or TV.
¦ Act promptly on the guidance from local public
health officials.
¦ Visit [Web site address] for continued updates.
Second, remove your clothes.
¦ Place the clothing in a plastic bag and seal it.
¦ Place the bag as far away as possible from humans
and animals.
¦ Bagged clothing can be examined later to determine
if you were contaminated.
-------
22 Communicating Radiation Risks
Third, wash yourself and your valuables.
¦ Take a long shower using lots of soap and water.
- If you can't shower, clean yourself thoroughly
using lots of soap and water.
¦ Be careful not to scratch or irritate your skin
while washing.
¦ Shampoo your hair.
¦ Gently blow your nose and wash out your eyes, ears
and mouth.
¦ Put on clean clothing.
¦ Wash valuables and identification that may have been
contaminated; wash your hands again.
20. What should I do if I think I am contaminated and
am asked to evacuate?
¦ Follow the instructions of your local emergency
responders.
¦ Evacuate first, then follow steps for decontamination
or go to a monitoring center.
21. My dog or cat is outside and may have been exposed
or contaminated. What should I do?
¦ Follow instructions of your local authorities.
¦ Wash yourself first if you have been exposed
or contaminated.
Communicating Radiation Risks 23
¦ If possible, wash your pet outside.
- This prevents tracking contamination inside
your shelter.
¦ Wash yourself and change your clothing again
after cleaning your pet.
22.1 need to get my pet inside as soon as possible.
What should I do if it has been contaminated?
¦ Get your pet inside and confine it to a small area.
- A cage or small room is preferable.
- Confining the pet limits contamination inside
your shelter.
¦ Wash yourself first if you have been exposed or
contaminated.
¦ Wash your pet thoroughly using soap or pet shampoo
and water.
¦ Wash yourself again after cleaning your pet and
change your clothing.
¦ Continue to provide your pet with food and water.
23. What about livestock?
¦ Follow instructions from local authorities.
¦ Shelter your livestock if possible.
¦ Wash your livestock thoroughly.
¦ Use stored feed and covered water if possible.
-------
24 Communicating Radiation Risks
24. Should I take potassium iodide during a
radiological emergency?
¦ Potassium iodide (Kl) or iodate is used to decrease the
chances of thyroid cancer from radioactive iodine.
¦ Follow instructions from your local public health
officials on how to and whether you should take Kl,
25. What are you doing to protect public health
and the environment?
¦ Our primary concern is the health and safety
of the public.
¦ We are working closely with local, state and federal
partners to determine the degree and extent of
contamination and what we need to do next.
- We are monitoring the air, water, soil and
agricultural products.
¦ Through this partnership, we will continue to provide
updates with the most current information.
26. Are my food and water safe?
¦ Avoid eating food from your garden if you suspect
that radioactive material has settled on it.
- Local officials can tell you if your neighborhood is
in the area of concern.
¦ You may continue to drink tap water until
told otherwise.
¦ Sealed or frozen foods and liquids may be used.
- Rinse the outside of packages before opening them.
- Rinse all plates, pots and eating utensils before use.
Communicating Radiation Risks 25
27. When can I return to my home?
¦ Our primary concern is your health and safety.
¦ Listen to your television and radio for updated
information.
¦ Public officials will inform you when you may
return home.
23. Will my home be safe?
¦ Our primary concern is your health and safety.
¦ You will be informed about whether your
neighborhood is in the area of concern.
¦ Listen to public health officials for instruction on
when to return and how, if necessary, to clean your
home properly.
29. What is the role of your agency?
For example, the following is EPA's role in a radiological
emergency:
¦ Working with our federal, state and local partners
to protect public health and the environment.
¦ Monitoring the air, water and soil for radioactive
contamination.
- to help characterize the degree and extent of
contamination.
¦ Providing guidance and advice to policy makers.
-------
26 Communicating Radiation Risks
D Messengers,
Messages and Means
THE "MESSENGERS, MESSAGES AND MEANS" ARE THE
KEY ELEMENTS In communicating with the media and
the public during radiological emergencies. There are
three main types of
questions to ask yourself
that can affect the
perceptions of the media
and public.
¦ FIRST; Is the spokes-
person empathetic,
speaking clearly
and calmly?
¦ SECOND: Are the messages concise and clear?
Too many messages will make it difficult for the
public to determine what is important.
¦ THIRD: Are the messages getting out to the people
that need it?
MESSENGERS: Roles and Responsibilities
of a Spokesperson (Hyer & Covello, 2007)
The messenger or spokesperson responsible for
responding publicly to a radiological emergency can
make or break the situation. No matter how important
or well-developed the messages are, if the spokesperson
that delivers the messages is not a well-spoken,
empathetic and credible source, the messages most
likely will be lost.
Communicating Radiation Risks 27
You or your technical experts who may be called
upon to be spokespersons should be media-savvy and
knowledgeable. Spokespersons should be able to:
¦ Convey empathy and caring.
¦ Demonstrate competence and expertise.
¦ Communicate honestly and openly.
¦ Exhibit commitment and dedication.
¦ Be sensitive and responsive to public concerns.
¦ Express optimism.
¦ Stay calm and collected under pressure.
¦ Exhibit positive body language.
Securing Public Confidence
One of your main responsibilities as a spokesperson
is to show empathy for the feelings of your audience
and to assure them that your most important concern
is their health and welfare. When people believe you
care about them, they are more likely to accept your
guidance. This alone is not enough—to build credibility
you need to support empathy with facts and actions.
Be respectful of public fears and concerns; even if
unfounded, they are real to those feeling them.
QUICK TIP
People need to know that you care, before they care
what you know. _WiN Rog
rs
-------
28 Communicating Radiation Risks
Your aim as a spokesperson is to have your audience:
¦ View you as being credible and competent,
¦ Believe you have their best interests at heart.
¦ Hear you addressing their key concerns.
To build trust and credibility as a spokesperson:
(Peters et a I., 1997)
¦ Stay "on message." Staying on message drives home
the messages, keeps you focused on the issues, and
reduces the chance of mistakes.
¦ Recognize the public's specific concerns. People are
dissatisfied when information does not address their
needs; in addition, the messenger may
lose credibility.
a Be open and honest. People are more accepting of
information when spokespersons display truthfulness,
honesty and a willingness to address tough issues.
¦ Coordinate with other credible sources. People are
dissatisfied when different agencies deliver
inconsistent messages.
¦ Meet the media's needs. If the media are working on
a story, they will report it with or without your help.
Tell the media what you want the public to know.
(Covello & Allen, 1988)
Non-Verbal Communication (Hyer & Covello, 2007)
Another important element to establishing credibility
is to be mindful of your body language and what it
can mean to your audience. In high-stress situations,
the public's attention shifts from focusing on verbal
Communicating Radiation Risks 29
to non-verbal communication—that is, a spokesperson
is judged primarily by actions or non-verbal
communications before audience members ever
listen to the message.
Positives
¦ Frequent eye contact: honest, open, concerned about
your audience.
¦ Well-modulated, confident voice tone: honest,
knowledgeable, trustworthy.
¦ Keep your hands in sight (while
keeping hand movements to
a minimum): honest, open,
caring, confident.
¦ Posture (if standing, stand tall
and straight, but not rigid; if
seated, sit forward in the
chair and lean forward
slightly toward the
audience): honest, open,
caring, confident.
¦ Dress appropriately (perhaps slightly more casual
than your normal business attire): approachable,
audience-appropriate, honest, credible.
¦ Well-groomed (but not elaborate): knowledgeable,
credible.
Negatives
¦ Poor Eye Contact: dishonest, closed, unconcerned,
nervous, lying.
-------
30 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ Constant throat clearing: nervous, lacking self-confidence.
¦ Arms crossed on chest: arrogant, not interested,
uncaring, not listening, impatient, defensive, angry,
stubborn, not accepting.
¦ Frequent hand gestures/body movements or fidgeting:
dishonest, deceitful, nervous, lacking self-confidence.
¦ Hidden hands: deceptive, guilty, insincere.
¦ Speaking from behind barriers (podiums, lecterns, tables,
desks) or from an elevated position: dishonest, deceitful,
too formal, withdrawn, distancing oneself,
unconcerned, not interested, superior.
¦ Touching and/or rubbing nose or eyes: in doubt,
disagreeing, nervous, deceitful
¦ Jingling money/items in pockets: nervous, lacking
self-confidence, lacking self-control, deceitful.
A good tip: empty your pockets before an interview
or presentation.
¦ Drumming on table, tapping feet, or twitching: nervous,
hostile, anxious, impatient, bored.
MYTH VS. TRUTH
Risk Communication Myth: What you say is more
important than how you say it.
Truth: In crisis the public and the media will trust the
messages they receive if they believe officials have their best
interests at heart. It is critical to demonstrate empathy,
compassion, and concern when delivering information.
Communicating Radiation Risks 31
MESSAGES: The Importance of
What to Say and How to Say It (Hyer & Coveiio, 2007)
Having the right messenger is one factor in effective
crisis communications. Another critical factor is having
clear, concise messages. Messages, especially those
about risk, need to be crafted carefully, keeping the
principles of risk communications in mind.
Prepare your messages before a radiological
emergency, and update them to reflect the facts of the
emergency. Messages that are developed and rehearsed
in advance are one of your most important tools in a
crisis. The developed messages help you to:
¦ Avoid negatives,
scientifically complex
terms, and false
assurances or guarantees.
¦ Be prepared for a variety
of questions and follow-up
questions.
¦ Be concise and consistent.
¦ Stay on message.
MYTH VS. TRUTH
Risk Communication Myth: You can't anticipate what
people will ask.
Truth: 95 percent of all questions and concerns of all
stakeholders for all controversies are predictable and can
be anticipated in advance.
ill
Joint
f 'nformatii
-------
32 Communicating Radiation Risks
How the Public Perceives Risk
(Slovic et al., 2001; Covello & Sandman, 2001)
During an emergency it is important to understand how
the audience thinks, what concerns them, and what is
important to them. People do not like to be "put" at risk
in any situation. While they may engage willingly in
"risky behaviors," they reject being forced into risky
situations they did not choose.
Research shows that "situations involving radioactive
materials have a remarkable capacity to produce
widespread fear, a profound sense of vulnerability, and
a continuing sense of alarm and dread" among people
(Becker, 2004).
In light of this deep-rooted fear, communications
about risk must go beyond simply providing
information. Remember:
¦ Facts alone cannot overcome strong emotions, and
¦ When confronting fear, who gives the information and
how it is perceived overpowers what is being said.
Perceptions of the seriousness of risk are affected by
factors unrelated to data or actual risk (Fischhoff et al.,
1981). Understanding how the public's perceptions of
MYTH VS. TRUTH
Risk Communication Myth; Communicating risk is more
likely to alarm than calm people.
Truth: slot if done properly. Educate and inform, don't
simply alert and alarm. Give people the chance to voice their
concerns, ask questions, and process the answers.
Communicating Radiation Risks 33
risks are influenced will help you understand and
effectively address the public's reactions to risk.
For example, statistics show that a familiar and
voluntary act like driving a car is a very high risk activity.
Flying in a commercial aircraft is considered more risky
by many, because it is controlled by others and
accidents can be catastrophic, but it is far safer than
driving when examined statistically.
Risks viewed as...
...are more accepted than risks viewed as...
voluntary
being imposed.
under an individual's
control
controlled by others.
having clear benefits
having little or no benefit.
distributed fairly
unfairly distributed.
natural
man-made.
statistical
catastrophic.
generated by a
trusted source
generated by an untrusted source.
familiar
exotic.
affecting adults
affecting children.
(Covello et al., 2001; Covello, 2005)
KEEP IN Mihin
The public often personalizes risk with the same conviction
that scientists strive to depersonalize it! A one-in-a-million
comparison could be viewed by the health or scientific
community as low; the general public will personalize risk
and recognize that the one likely could be themselves or
a loved one.
-------
34 Communicating Radiation Risks
Message Development
When preparing to respond to radiological emergencies,
it is important to think about what questions might be
asked, develop messages to respond, and practice them
so that what you say is clear, concise, brief and free of
negative words.
Preparing Different Types of Messages (Covello, 2006)
There are three main types of messages that you
will need to prepare:
(1) Overarching—Messages that address questions
about what is critical to the situation, i.e., what you
want the audience to know regardless of the questions
that are asked.
¦ What is the government doing to respond?
¦ What actions should the public take?
¦ What is the most important thing people should know
about what has happened?
(2) Informational—Messages that respond to questions
about the who, what, when, where and how of the
situation. These are usually questions that either ask
specifics about types of emergencies or request
event-specific information.
¦ What has happened—when and where?
¦ Who is involved?
¦ Where should the public go to get more information?
Communicating Radiation Risks 35
(3) Challenge—Messages that address or bridge away
from questions that are antagonistic, make allegations,
question credibility, or ask for guarantees.
¦ You have failed before, how can we trust you?
¦ Aren't you really responsible for this situation?
¦ Can you guarantee that my family is safe?
KEEP IN MIND (Covello, 2003; Hyer & Covello, 2007)
Research shows that effective messages are
developed when the following are kept in mind:
¦ KEEP IT SIMPLE: Develop messages at a 6th grade reading
level—target your message to an average 12-year-old child,
avoiding jargon and scientifically complex terms.
¦ KEEP IT BRIEF: Make messages for the public brief, concise
and clear.
¦ KEEP IT TO THE POINT: Follow the 27/9/3 rule.
27 WORDS total is all print media usually allow for a quote.
9 SECONDS is what television and radio media outlets usually
allow for a sound bite.
3 KEY MESSAGES is all the public can process during a high
stress situation.
-------
36 Communicating Radiation Risks
Creating Your Messages (Covello, 2006; Hyer & Covello, 2007)
During crises, people cannot process large amounts of
information. To assist your audience in understanding
what is happening, develop your messages following
these guidelines:
¦ Length: No more than 3 key messages. No more than
a total of 27 written words or 9 seconds of speech.
¦ Language: Put messages in plain, simple-to-
understand language.
¦ Sequence: When people are highly stressed, they
usually only remember what they hear first and last.
Put the most important piece of information first, the
second most important last, and the least important
in the middle.
Structuring Your Messages (Covello et al., 2007)
Keeping messages organized and to the point is very
important during crises. Remember, people are more
likely to recall the first and last messages, so put the
least important message in the middle. The following
is an easy-to-use structure that allows messages to be
clear and concise.
Key Message 1
(most important)
Supporting
Message 1
Supporting
Message 2
Supporting
Message 3
Key Message 2
(least important)
Supporting
Message "I
Supporting
Message 2
Supporting
Message 3
Key Message 3
(second-most important)
Supporting
Message 1
Supporting
Message 2
Supporting
Message 3
Communicating Radiation Risks 37
MESSAGE MAP TEMPLATE EXAMPLE
Scenario: Radiological Emergency
Stakeholder: Public
Question or Concern: What should I do if I think I may have
been contaminated?
Key Message 1
Stay informed.
Key Message 2
Remove your clothes.
Key Message 3
Wash yourself and
your valuables.
Supporting Fact 1-1
Listen to your local
Emergency Alert
System and public
safety officials on
radio or TV.
Supporting Fact 2-1
Place the clothing
in a plastic bag and
seal it.
Supporting Fact 3-1
Take a long shower
or clean yourself
thoroughly using
lots of soap and
water. Be careful
not to scratch or
irritate your skin
while washing.
Supporting Fact 1-2
Act promptly on
the guidance from
local public health
officials.
Supporting Fact 2-2
Place the bag as far
away as possible from
humans and animals.
Supporting Fact 3-2
Gently blow your
nose and wash out
your eyes, ears and
mouth.
Supporting Fact 1-3
Visit [Web site
address] for
continued updates.
Supporting Fact 2-3
Bagged clothing can
be examined later to
determine if you were
contaminated.
Supporting Fact 3-3
Wash valuables and
identification that
may have been
contaminated; wash
your hands again.
-------
38 Communicating Radiation Risks
MEANS: Working With the Media
(Hyer & Covello, 2007)
The media greatly influence what people think about and
the opinions they form during emergencies. In times of
crises, the public turn to the media—television,
newspaper, Web sites, and radio—for information about
what has happened, what they should do, and what wil I
happen.
In emergencies, taking
advantage of existing
communication methods and
channels is critical. Learn what
appropriate channels are likely
to be used and communicate
the messages through these
channels. Plan in advance to
achieve the best mix of:
¦ Media: print, television,
radio, Web sites, e-mail.
¦ Face-to-face forums: town hall
meetings, public gatherings.
¦ Community groups: outlets for special population
groups.
Understanding the forces that drive the media:
When working with the media, it is important to
consider their needs and concerns:
Communicating Radiation Risks 39
Short deadlines
¦ Reporters must meet tight deadlines.
¦ Reporters need follow-up information and updates
in a timely manner.
¦ Reporters appreciate it if you ask when their deadline
is, then meet it.
Space limitations
¦ Reporters cannot always include the background
information you provide.
¦ Reporters prefer succinct responses. Keep information
to no more than three points.
¦ Reporters love concise sound bites. Provide your
message in 27 total words.
Competition
¦ Reporters are competitive.
¦ Reporters should be given information equally. Avoid
"exclusive" interviews that favor specific media outlets.
KEEP IN MIND
Retention of Information
¦ After three hours: Radio - 70 percent
Newspaper - 72 percent
Television - 85 percent
¦ After three days: Radio - 10 percent
Newspaper - 20 percent
Television - 60 percent
-------
40 Communicating Radiation Risks
Be prepared to provide the media:
Information in a timely manner.
Prevent information vacuums where speculation
and rumor can grow and have a serious impact on
the situation,
Facts, sources, and relevant materials.
Have easy-to-read materials with important information
ready for distribution.
Readily available points of contact.
Identify people who can speak with the media directly
or arrange interviews with subject matter experts.
Provide 24-hour contact information.
TEMPLATE TOOL
IDK (I Don't Know)
When you don't know, can't answer, or are not the best source
for information:
¦ Repeat the question (trying to avoid negative words or
allegations).
¦ Say "I wish I could answer...or"My ability to answer is
limited ... or"We are still looking into the situation ..."
¦ Say why you can't answer. Don't say "No comment!"
¦ Give a follow-up (what appropriate contact person will call)
with a deadline.
¦ Bridge to what can be said (convey your prepared messages).
(Covello, 2006)
Communicating Radiation Risks 41
Interacting with the media:
There are a number of methods to get your messages
out to the public through media interaction.
Live interviews
News conferences
¦ Conducted onsite or at a
pre-designated location.
¦ Media from all outlets should
be invited.
¦ Format should provide time for your message and a
limited number of questions.
¦ A short agenda of the briefing and time for questions
helps structure the event.
¦ Conducted on television or radio by invitation.
¦ Before accepting the invitation ask yourself:
- Am I the right person?
- Do I have the answers to the
questions that
will be asked?
- Is this interview needed or
the right venue?
-------
42 Communicating Radiation Risks
Public meetings
¦ Conducted as a town hall or public gathering.
¦ Media from newspaper and television are the most
likely to attend,
¦ Media usually record public's questions and
representatives' responses.
¦ Media will ask questions, especially before and after
a session.
On-the-spot, impromptu, or "ambush" interviews
¦ Conducted wherever you are.
¦ Before answering any questions, ask yourself:
- Am I the right person?
- Do I have the appropriate answers?
- Is this the right time or place?
KEEP IN MIND. (Hyer & Covello, 2007)
When responding to reporting errors and rumors,
remember to:
¦ Squelch rumors. Be clear and unequivocal. Don't leave
comments open to interpretation.
¦ Never overreact! Usually mistakes are just that: mistakes.
¦ Fix substantive inaccuracies. Calmly and privately contact
the reporter to set the facts straight. Follow up to ensure
corrections are publicized.
¦ Correct inconsequential or isolated mistakes. Emphasize the
facts whenever possible. If a small mistake is made before a
limited audience, correct the mistake within that group only.
¦ Don't make it a big deal. Bringing up rumors and mistakes
only reemphasizes them. Fight back with facts!
Communicating Radiation Risks 43
¦ Decide if you go or stay. If you decide to go:
- Be sure to explain politely why you are choosing
not to respond.
- Avoid using the words "no comment."
- Provide the time for the next media briefing,
if one is scheduled.
Being at your best for an interview.
To be at your best during an interview, it is important to
anticipate questions, prepare messages, and practice
your delivery.
Before the interview:
¦ Do your homework on issues.
¦ Decide if the issue is
causing high concern
locally, statewide or
nationally, and tailor
your messages
accordingly.
¦ Develop a list of
questions the media
are likely to ask.
¦ Develop and practice key messages and responses to
anticipated questions.
¦ Practice speaking without jargon or acronyms.
¦ Be familiar with all related current events.
-------
44 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ Last-minute details:
- Check dress and grooming.
- Remember that everything you say can be reported.
- There is no such thing as "off the record" replies
or commentary.
During an interview:
¦ Direct the interview toward your three key messages.
¦ Stay "on message."
¦ Be confident, but
not arrogant.
¦ Listen carefully and
repeat questions if
necessary
to clarify.
¦ Avoid hypothetical
questions.
¦ Avoid referring to the interviewer as "Sir" or "Ma'am."
¦ Never lie or knowingly mislead.
¦ Correct any information errors upon discovery.
Do not delay!
¦ Never comment on issues outside your area
of expertise.
¦ Never speculate on what has happened or could.
Communicating Radiation Risks 45
¦ Treat all questions as serious.
¦ Look at the interviewer rather than the camera
or monitor.
¦ Keep your cool, even if the interviewer
becomes hostile.
KEEP IN MIND (Covello, 2006; Hyer& Covello, 2007)
Supporting your message
Use the following to reinforce your message with the media
and public.
¦ Visuals
- Photos
- Maps
- Graphs
¦ Facts
- Event specific information
- Percentages or figures
¦ Experience
- "Our extensive research confirms that
- "Through past experience we have seen ..
-------
46 Communicating Radiation Risks
m Quick Response Guide for
Radiological Emergencies
THE QUICK RESPONSE GUIDE WILL HELP YOU prepare for
and respond to radiological emergencies.
This quick response
guide provides:
¦ Quick suggestions for
speaking with the
media.
¦ Three radiological
scenarios.
- Radioactive Materials Transportation Incident.
- Radiological Dispersal Device.
- Improvised Nuclear Device.
Each scenario includes:
¦ Messages that may be appropriate to use during
radiological emergencies.
¦ Information on what you can expect to find during
these types of radiological incidents.
- The scene.
- The hazards.
- The communications challenges.
Use the messages carefully.
Your messages should be clear, concise and accurate.
The scenario messages may not be suitable to respond
to the specific incident you are facing. For additional
Communicating Radiation Risks 47
messages, see Section I, Explaining Radiation Issues in
an Emergency.
The scenarios also provide a template that can be
used to practice for other emergencies by developing
an emergency scenario, messages for that scenario, and
expectations for that type of scenario.
Remember to:
Consider the needs of special populations.
Be sure to have plans in place to communicate with
special populations such as:
¦ Schools.
¦ Health care institutions.
¦ Non-English speaking groups.
¦ Home-bound and disabled individuals.
¦ Homeless people.
Be aware that standard communications channels
may not be working.
Provide the public and media with the most current
information available and remind them that
the situation may change.
For example:
¦ We are continuing to monitor the situation.
¦ We are providing you with information based on
our current knowledge of the situation.
¦ We will keep you informed of the status of the
situation as we learn more.
-------
48 Communicating Radiation Risks
Work with the other local, state and federal
agencies responding to the incident.
It is important to have a consistent message coming
from responders. Work through any disagreements out
of the public eye and emphasize the coordinated
response efforts.
Quick Suggestions for Speaking with the Media
(Hyer & Covello, 2007)
BEFORE
Be prepared
¦ Develop three key messages.
¦ Anticipate questions.
¦ Develop short, concise responses.
¦ Make sure you are dressed appropriately.
DURING
Take control
¦ Deliver your messages: not a debate, educational
exchange or a friendly chat.
¦ Use each question as an opportunity to "bridge" to
key messages.
¦ Demonstrate conviction and confidence.
¦ Keep your language clear and simple—no jargon.
Do's
¦ Show empathy for concerns if appropriate.
¦ Use negative questions as an opportunity to deliver
positive messages.
Communicating Radiation Risks 49
¦ Answer the easiest question when asked multiple
questions.
¦ Finish your answer even if interrupted.
¦ Correct misinformation in a question.
¦ Ask the reporter to restate or clarify the question if you
don't understand it.
¦ Say you are not familiar with facts or figures presented
by reporter if you are not.
¦ Remember everything is on the record and the
microphone is always on.
TEMPLATE TOOL
Bridging
It is important to stay on message. Use these types of sample
statements when you want to return to your key points or
redirect the interview.
"That is a good question ...
... however, the reason we are here ..."
... however, what is most important to look at is ..."
... however, the real issue is ..."
-------
50 Communicating Radiation Risks
NEVER
¦ Raise negatives yourself or repeat negative language.
¦ Speculate or respond to "what if" questions.
¦ Say "no comment."
¦ Let reporters intentionally or accidentally put words
in your mouth.
¦ Get angry or emotional if the reporter is annoying
or even belligerent.
QUICK HP
Alternatives to "Mo comment"
* "We are assessing that situation right now, and will share
information with you as soon as we have it."
¦ "Right now we don't have the full answer on that, as we are
still focusing our efforts on the priority of..."
* "I'd rather have you speak with an authority on the subject
who can give you more thorough information. II III have [name]
call you back."
¦ "We are just finishing up preparing that information for you
and will have it to you in [time frame]."
Communicating Radiation Risks 5 7
SCENARIO 1:
Radioactive Materials
Transportation Incident
What. A properly marked and licensed truck carrying
"yellow cake," the raw material used to make nuclear
power plant fuel, was hit by a train at a railroad crossing
on the outskirts of a large East Coast city.
Barrels of yellow cake were bumped off of the truck
and opened due to the force of the impact. The accident
has forced closure of a major commuter route during
the afternoon rush hour and the media is out in full
force. The area is contained and local hazmat teams are
at the scene. Although radiation experts have
determined the threat to the public is low, the media
attention is extremely high.
When These messages are designed for use after the
area is contained and the media are on the scene.
What to Expect During a Radiological
Hazmat Scenario:
¦ The communications challenge for most hazmat
scenarios is to assure both the media and the public
that, other than the accident itself, there is no threat
to human health or the environment.
¦ There may be intense media interest in a situation
which poses little threat of harmful health effects.
-------
52 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ In an intense media scenario, you can expect:
-The media to arrive with trucks equipped for live
feed at the scene of the accident.
- The media will want on-scene interviews about the
response and the potential threats.
- The media will want information on what is
anticipated to happen in the future.
Messages:
¦ This is a spill of hazardous material that is radioactive.
¦ Radioactive material is a hazardous material; local
response teams are trained to respond to a variety of
hazardous materials including radioactive materials.
¦ Emergency responders are on scene and following
well-established procedures to protect the public.
¦ The extent of the problem is limited to the immediate
area of the accident.
¦ The radioactive material has been contained.
¦ Responders will make recommendations for protective
actions if they are needed.
¦ We are working to detour traffic around the accident.
¦ We continue to monitor the situation and will
provide updates.
¦ We expect cleanup to proceed rapidly.
Communicating Radiation Risks 53
SCENARIO 2:
Radiological Dispersal Device
(RDD)—Dirty Bomb
What: An explosion in an inner city has killed two
people and injured four. Readings by local emergency
responders have determined that the explosive device
contained radioactive materials. A portion of the inner city
area has been evacuated and blocked off as a
crime scene, and state and federal officials are also
on the scene.
When These messages are designed for use immediately
following the explosion when it is likely that dispersal
is still occurring. The area where the explosion occurred
has been contained. The spokesperson is receiving
information from the highest ranking federal official.
What to Expect During a Dirty Bomb Incident:
¦ A dirty bomb is a type of RDD that spreads radioactive
materials with explosives.
- First responders will cordon off the area for safety
and for investigative purposes.
-The area may be evacuated as a safety precaution.
-------
54 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ The effects from a dirty bomb depend ori a number
of factors:
- The amount of explosive.
- Weather conditions like wind speed and direction
during and after the explosion.
- The relative quantity and type of radioactive
material used.
¦ In some cases, radioactivity may attach to fine dust
or other material and be distributed by winds for
several miles.
¦ Because of the limited amount of radioactive material
anticipated in RDDs, measurable health effects are
unlikely. [Note: This is incident specific; recent training
exercises have considered the possibility of fairly large
radiological sources.]
- The more significant effects of an RDD are fear and
disruption of everyday life.
- Casualties and injuries are likely to be limited to
the area affected by the explosion.
Messages:
¦ This was an explosion that spread radioactive material.
- It was not a nuclear bomb.
- Because of the limited amount of radioactive
material anticipated in a dirty bomb, measurable
health effects are unlikely.
Communicating Radiation Risks 55
¦ Special equipment and response methods may
be needed.
-There are well-established protective actions
designed to minimize public risk.
¦ Avoid the immediate vicinity of the explosion.
¦ If you have been injured, seek medical attention.
¦ If you thinkyou have been contaminated, shower and
change into clean clothes.
- Place clothing in a plastic bag and seal it.
- Bagged clothing can be examined later to determine
if you were contaminated.
¦ Listen for detailed recommendations from public safety
professionals.
- Indoors may be the safest place for now.
¦ We are continuing to monitor the situation and will alert
you to any actions you should take to protect yourself.
-------
56 Communicating Radiation Risks
SCENARIO 3:
Improvised Nuclear Device
(IND)
What: in a large metropolitan area, an improvised
Nuclear Device (IND) has exploded in the city's center.
Local emergency responders and state and federal
officials are beginning to organize a response.
When These messages are designed for use
immediately following the explosion when it is
likely that dispersal (fallout) is still occurring. The
spokesperson is receiving information from a radiation
expert who is responding to the emergency, and
is to communicate with the public via radio and
television from outside the affected area.
What to expect from an IND:
¦ An Improvised Nuclear Device is a weapon made from
stolen or illegally produced nuclear material capable of
creating a nuclear explosion.
-The blast, heat, and radiation from an IND
detonation can cause massive casualties and
significant damage to infrastructure.
- There is likely to be significant radiation sickness
and death.
Communicating Radiation Risks 57
¦ ln-place communications, electricity and
transportation will be disrupted or totally disabled
by the blast or fire associated with the IND.
- Bridges and buildings are likely to be severely
damaged.
- Highways are likely to be blocked with debris and
stalled vehicles.
- Rescue attempts and treatment of casualties may
be severely hindered by contamination and fallout.
¦ The blast zone is large and will present areas of
lethal radiation.
- The blast creates winds several hundred miles
per hour.
- Within a one-mile radius of the explosion, there
are few survivors, and homes and buildings are
destroyed. (Note: This is based on a 10 kiloton
weapon; higher yield weapons will create larger
blast zones.)
- Beyond a mile, people will be injured by flying glass
and debris, and, if unprotected, will sustain
potentially lethal doses of radiation.
- There will be many casualties and wounded victims.
- Dust and debris will limit visibility within a few miles
of the blast and fire will break out.
¦ Depending on proximity to the explosion, temporary
blindness from the flash will result in numerous car
and truck accidents, and may cause aviation accidents.
¦ People may be asked to evacuate within a 10-mile
radius of the explosion.
-------
58 Communicating Radiation Risks
¦ The highest concentrations of fallout will fall closest
to the detonation. The concentration of fallout left
behind lessens as the radioactive cloud spreads.
[Note: This is weather dependent.]
¦ If electricity and normal communications channels are
out, you will have to be resourceful.
- Use what may be at hand, such as bullhorns, loud
speakers, spray paint and flyers.
- Going door-to-door may be effective.
¦ Keep in mind that phones—including cell phones—
may not work.
¦ Because this incident may require evacuation, be sure
to have plans in place to communicate with special
populations such as:
- Schools.
- Health care institutions.
- Non-English speaking groups.
- Home-bound and disabled individuals.
- Homeless people.
Messages:
¦ There has been a nuclear explosion with significant
destruction and loss of life.
¦ The cloud from the explosion is radioactive.
- The fallout from the cloud is dangerous.
- Areas downwind from the explosion are especially
susceptible to fallout.
- You should be concerned about fallout in the vicinity
of the explosion even if your location is undamaged.
Communicating Radiation Risks 59
¦ Follow instructions from local officials.
-They are following well-established public health
procedures.
¦ If you have been asked to evacuate:
- As practical, cover yourself to keep the fallout off
your skin.
- Move away from the fallout, not in front of it; move
away from the path of the cloud.
- Take water with you, if possible.
¦ If you cannot evacuate, seek shelter inside.
¦ If you think you have been exposed or contaminated,
shower and change into clean clothes.
- Place contaminated clothing in a plastic bag and
seal it.
- Bagged clothing can be examined later to determine
if you were contaminated.
-------
60 Communicating Radiation Risks
Iffl Building on
¦fl Lessons Learned
THE PREVIOUS SECTIONS OF THIS GUIDE HELPTHE
EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMUNITY to establish
successful communications within the first 24 to 48
hours after a radiological emergency. Within 72 hours,
government agencies at
all levels should have a
comprehensive and well-
defined communication
system in place to respond
to inquiries and interact
with the media and
the public.
Knowing that there can
always be a "next time," it is
essential following an emergency to analyze what
worked and what didn't work in communicating with
the media and the public. The list of questions below
help to assess the "lessons learned," and can help those
involved be better prepared in the future.
After a Radiological Emergency
Gather feedback from the organizations and key
actors involved, the public, and the media on the
communications' effectiveness.
¦ What do members of the team think worked?
What didn't?
Communicating Radiation Risks 61
¦ What challenges did they face?
¦ Were they prepared?
¦ How did they respond?
¦ What criticisms have been received?
¦ What ideas does the team have for improvement?
Review messages and delivery methods.
¦ Which messages were effective with the media
and the public?
¦ Which messages caused confusion or anxiety?
¦ Was the spokesperson empathetic and credible with
good delivery?
¦ Were processes for disseminating information
effective?
¦ How did the public respond to messages?
¦ Did the public follow guidance?
Gather and analyze available data.
¦ How well were protective action guidelines followed?
¦ How well coordinated were your actions with those of
other responding agencies?
¦ How effective were your efforts with the media?
- How many media outlets reported on the incident?
- Were your messages clearly and accurately reported?
- Were your messages timely?
-------
62 Communicating Radiation Risks
Add up results—both communications and
real-world results.
¦ Which messages arid methods worked?
¦ What didn't work?
¦ Are there patterns from which to learn?
Develop or revise crisis communications plan,
¦ Apply new knowledge to make the communications
plan more effective.
¦ Note weaknesses, challenges or pitfalls.
¦ Determine steps for improvement, then carry out
these changes.
Communicating Radiation Risks 63
APPENDIX A:
Emergency Communications
"Top 10" Planning Checklist
(Hyer & Covello, 2007)
The success of communications during an emergency
depends on anticipating and preparing for situations
yet to be encountered. What information needs to be
developed and conveyed to whom, by whom and
through what effective channels? It is important to
begin thinking about these questions before a crisis
occurs. Here are 10 steps you can take to help prepare
for an emergency:
h Form a crisis communications team.
¦ Keep it as small as practical.
¦ Select experts from all critical areas of a
radiological emergency:
- Radiation.
- Communication.
- Public health and safety.
- Legal.
¦ Make the team responsible for developing
action steps for an emergency.
-------
64 Communicating Radiation Risks
2. Develop communications goals.
¦ Inform the public of the problem arid specific dangers.
¦ Provide guidance on appropriate responses.
¦ Ease the public's concerns by being prepared to
answer their questions or refer them to the most
appropriate source of information.
3. Develop a list of anticipated questions
and messages.
¦ Develop messages for the full range of radiological
emergency scenarios.
¦ Anticipate questions for each scenario.
¦ Prepare messages in all appropriate languages.
4. Prepare fact sheets and background materials.
¦ CLEAR—Simplify technical language for easy
understanding.
¦ CONCISE—Limit each item to three key messages
with supporting information.
¦ BRIEF—Recognize that attention spans are limited
during an emergency.
5. Develop precise logistics, roles and functions.
¦ Determine roles for each member of the team.
¦ Create a backup communications plan of what to
do if technology fails or those who are designated
to be in charge are not available.
Communicating Radiation Risks 65
¦ Create a 24-hour contact list for your emergency
response team members and decide who will contact
each person and in what order.
6. Coordinate communications procedures with
other relevant agencies and organizations.
¦ Determine who speaks to the media and public on
particular subjects.
¦ Determine who are primary and secondary contacts
and experts for key offices and issues.
7. Identify and provide media training for lead
and secondary spokespersons.
¦ Include all relevant agencies and emergency
responders.
¦ Select spokespersons who:
- Remain calm and controlled when addressing
the public.
- Can communicate in non-technical, ordinary
language.
- Can retain and deliver key messages.
- Can convey empathy and concern with sincerity.
- Are knowledgeable.
¦ Use a good spokesperson trainer if necessary.
8. Determine how to get your message out.
¦ Identify normal best channels.
¦ Develop alternatives if normal communications
channels break down.
-------
66 Communicating Radiation Risks
9. Develop and maintain media lists.
¦ Include the names, phone numbers and e-mail
addresses for media contacts.
¦ Keep this list up-to-date and readily available in
and outside the office.
¦ Keep an electronic and printed version.
10, Practice
¦ Put your planning to practice with scenario-based
exercises or drills.
¦ Evaluate the outcomes of the exercises to identify
strengths and areas for improvement.
Communicating Radiation Risks 67
APPENDIX B:
Answering Difficult
Questions (Covello, 2006; Hyer & Covello, 2007)
You may be asked questions that, if answered
inappropriately, could create mistaken impressions and
fuel unwarranted concerns. Here are some typical
difficult questions with tips for handling them:
Allegation Questions
Sample question:
It's EPA's negligence towards radiation containment that
caused this mess; how are you going to fix it?
¦ Rephrase the question without repeating the
allegations or saying negative words.
¦ Acknowledge that effective response is important and
drives our actions.
¦ State three examples of what has been done and/or
what EPA is doing or will do to address the issue.
Sample response:
I think you are asking about what EPA's next steps are
to contain the radiation. Here are the steps that we
have taken ...
-------
68 Communicating Radiation Risks
Guarantee Questions
Sample question:
Can you guarantee that the radiation won't affect my family?
¦ Avoid a "yes" or "no" response.
¦ Point out that the question is about the future.
¦ Acknowledge what has worked in the past/present.
¦ Go back to known facts, processes or actions:
"What we are doing is ...
¦ Focus on processes, rather than results.
Sample response:
We are now doing X and Y to protect families in the
surrounding community.
Worst-Case Questions
Sample question:
What are the worst effects this radiation leak could have?
¦ Mention that this is a "what if" question.
¦ Indicate that it is more useful to talk about "what is."
¦ Go back to known facts.
Sample response:
I don't want to speculate about what might happen.
What I do want to comment on is what we are doing
now to protect the public.
QUICK TIP.
Avoid saying "there are no guarantees in life" or guaranteeing
something you can't control or don't know.
Communicating Radiation Risks 69
APPENDIX C:
Important Terms and
Frequently Used Acronyms
IMPORTANT TERMS
Alpha particle A type of ionizing radiation that can be
stopped by thin layers of light materials, such as a sheet
of paper. These particles pose no direct or external
radiation threat. However, they can pose a serious health
threat if eaten, inhaled, injected or absorbed.
Background radiation Ionizing radiation from natural,
long-lived sources, such as radioactive elements in the
soil or cosmic radiation originating in outer space.
Beta particle A type of ionizing radiation that can be
stopped by something like thin aluminum. These
particles can pose a serious direct or external radiation
threat and can be lethal depending on the exposure.
They also pose a serious internal radiation threat if
eaten, inhaled, injected or absorbed.
Contamination The deposition of radioactive material
on the surfaces of structures, areas, objects or people.
Contamination also can be airborne, external or internal
(i.e., inside components or people).
Decontamination The reduction or removal of
contaminated radioactive material from a structure,
object or person.
-------
70 Communicating Radiation Risks
Dose, or radiation dose Radiation absorbed by a
person's body. Several different terms describe
radiation dose.
¦ Absorbed dose: the amount of energy deposited
per unit of mass.
¦ Equivalent dose: the absorbed dose adjusted for the
relative biological effect of the type of radiation being
measured.
¦ Committed dose: a dose that accounts for continuing
exposure to internal contamination over long periods
of time (such as 30 or more years).
Exposure or radiation exposure A term relating to the
amount of ionizing radiation that strikes living beings
and inanimate material. (This is a general definition.
In the field of health physics, exposure is specifically
defined as a measure of ionization in air caused by x-ray
or gamma radiation only.)
Fallout or nuclear fallout The slow descent of minute
particles of radioactive debris in the atmosphere
following a nuclear explosion.
Gamma rays High-energy electromagnetic radiation
emitted by certain radioactive elements. Gamma rays
penetrate into tissue farther than alpha or beta particles.
Very dense materials, such as lead, are commonly used
as shielding to block this type of radiation. Gamma rays
are very similar to x-rays.
Communicating Radiation Risks 71
Half-life The time any radioactive substance takes to
decay down to half of its original amount.
Ionizing radiation Any radiation capable of chemically
altering atoms. High doses of ionizing radiation will
produce severe skin or tissue damage.
Non-ionizing radiation Radiation that has enough
energy to move atoms but not enough to alter them
chemically.
Pathway(s) The ways in which people are exposed to
radiation or other contaminants. The three basic
pathways are inhalation (contaminants are taken into
the lungs), ingestion (contaminants are swallowed), and
direct (or external) exposure (contaminants cause
damage from outside the body). Exposure can also
occur through absorption or injection.
Plume Material spreading from a particular source and
traveling through environmental media, such as air or
ground water.
Radionuclide An unstable and therefore radioactive
form of an element.
Roentgen equivalent man (rem), or Rontgen
equivalent man (rem) A unit that relates the absorbed
dose in human tissue to the effective biological damage
of the radiation. One one-thousandth (1/1000) of a rem
is called a miliirem.
-------
72 Communicating Radiation Risks
FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS
Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment
Center (FRMAC) A federally led operations center
comprised of federal agencies and usually established
near the scene of a radiological emergency from which
federal field monitoring and assessment assistance is
directed and coordinated.
Interagency Modeling and Atmospheric Assessment
Center (IMAAC) A center that produces, coordinates,
and disseminates predictions for the movement of
hazardous materials carried through the air,The IMAAC
is composed of resources from a variety of federal
agencies and generates one single federal prediction of
atmospheric dispersions and their public health impacts
using the best available resources from the federal
government.
Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) A nuclear weapon
made from illegally obtained fissile materials or a
nuclear weapon obtained illicitly. An improvised nuclear
devise is designed to inflict maximum destruction by
fissioning atoms of uranium, or plutonium, releasing
vast amounts of energy in the forms of blast, heat and
radiation. Fissile materials are capable of being made
into nuclear bombs.
Communicating Radiation Risks 73
Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD) A device that
spreads radioactive materials in the atmosphere using a
conventional explosive or other mechanical means, such
as a spray. A dirty bomb is an RDD that can kill or injure
people through the initial blast of the conventional
explosive and spreads radioactive contamination,
possibly over a large area. Such bombs could be
miniature devices or large truck bombs. A dirty bomb
is much simpler to make than a true nuclear weapon.
Protective Action Guide (PAG) Protective Action
Guides are designed to protect public health.They help
state and local authorities make radiation protection
decisions during emergencies by providing guidance
keyed to potential conditions during an emergency. The
guidance recommends actions that the government can
take to protect the public as well as actions the public
can take to protect themselves.
-------
74 Communicating Radiation Risks
APPENDIX D:
Suggested Readings
Chess, C„ Hance, B.J., & Sandman, P.M. (1988). Improving dialogue with
communities: A short guide to government risk communication. Trenton,
NJ: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
Chess, C„ Hance, B.J., & Sandman, P.M. (1989). Planning dialogue with
communities. A risk communication workbook. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University, Cook College, Environmental Communication
Research Program.
Fischhoff, B. (1989). Helping the public make health risk decisions.
In Covello, V., McCallum, D.B., & Pavlova, M.T. (Eds.). Effective risk
communication: The role and responsibility of government and
nongovernment organizations (pp. 111-116). New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, L., Read, S„ & Combs, B. (1978).
How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards
technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9,127-152.
Hance, B.J., Chess, C., & Sandman, P.M. (1990). Industry risk
communication manual. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Lewis Publishers.
Johnson, B.B., & Covello, V. (1987). The social and cultural construction
of risk: Essays on risk selection and perception. Dordrecht, Holland:
D. Reidel Publishing.
Kahnemann, D„ &Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of
decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
Krimsky, S„ & Plough, A. (1988). Environmental hazards: Communicating
risks as a social process. Dover, MA: Auburn House.
Communicating Radiation Risks 75
Lofstedt, R.E., & Renn, 0. (1997).The Brent Spar controversy: An
example of risk communication gone wrong. Risk Analysis, 17(2),
131-135.
McGuire, W.J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In Lindzey, G„
& Aronson E. (Eds.). The handbook of social psychology. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Morgan, G„ & Fischhoff, B. (2001). Risk communication: A mental models
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morgan, G„ Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., Lave, L., & Atrnan, C.J. (1992).
Communicating risk to the public. Environmental Science and
Technology, 26(11), 2048-2056.
National Research Council. (1996). Understanding risk: Informing
decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press.
Peters, R.G., Covello, V., & McCallum, D,B. (1997).The determinants of
trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical
study. Risk Analysis, 17(1 ):43—54.
Powell, D„ & Leiss, W. (1997). Mad cows and mother's milk: The perils
of poor risk communication. Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen's
University Press.
Renn, 0., Bums, W.J., Kasperson, J.X., Kasperson, R.E., & Slovic, P. (1992).
The social amplification of risk: Theoretical foundations and empirical
applications. Journal of Social Science Issues, 48,137-160.
Rodgers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of innovation (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
Free Press.
Rosenstock, I.M., Stretcher, V.J., & Becker, M.H. (1988). Social learning
theory and the health belief model. Health Education Quarterly, 15(2),
175-184.
-------
76 Communicating Radiation Risks
Sandman, P.M. (1989). Hazard versus outrage in the public perception
of risk. In Covello, V., McCallum, D.B., & Pavlova, M.T., (Eds.). Effective risk
communication: The role and responsibility of government and
nongovernment organizations (pp. 45-49). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., & Roth, C. (2000). Salient value similarity,
social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis, 20(3), 353-361.
Slovic, P., Krauss, N„ & Covello, V. (1990). What should we know about
making risk comparisons. Risk Analysis, 10,389-392.
Weinstein, N.D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39,106-120.
Weinstein, N.D. (1982). Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to
health problems. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 5,441-460.
Wildavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears
what and why. Daedalus, 112,41 -60.
Wildavsky, A„ & Douglas, M. (1983). Risk and culture: An essay on the
selection of technological and environmental dangers. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Communicating Radiation Risks 77
APPENDIX E:
References
Becker, S. (2004). Emergency communication and information issues
in terrorist events involving radioactive materials. Biosecurity and
Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science, 2(3), 195-207.
Covello, V. (1992). Risk communication, trust, and credibility.
Health and Environmental Digest, 6(1), 1-4.
Covello, V. (1993). Risk communication, trust, and credibility.
Journal of Occupational Medicine, 35,18-19.
Covello, V. (2003). Best Practice in Public Health Risk and Crisis
Communication. Journal of Health Communication, Vol. 8, Supplement 1,
June: 5-8.
Covello, V. (2005). Risk Communication. In Frumkin, H. (ed.)
Environmental Health: From Global to Local. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass/Wiley. 988-1008.
Covello, V. (2006). Risk Communication and Message Mapping : A New
Tool for Communicating Effectively in Public Health Emergencies and
Disasters. Journal of Emergency Management,Vol. 4 No.3, 25-40.
Covello, V., & Allen, F. (1988). Seven cardinal rules of risk communication.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Policy Analysis.
Covello, V., Peters, R„ Wojtecki, J., & Hyde, R. (2001). Risk Communication,
the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bio-terrorism: Responding to the
Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional
Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health,
Vol. 78(2), June: 382-391.
-------
78 Communicating Radiation Risks
Covello, V., Minameyer, S., & Clayton, K. (2007). Effecive Risk and
Crisis Communication During Water Security Emergencies: Summary
Report of EPA Sponsored Message Mapping Workshops. Report No.
EPA/600/R-07/027. Cincinnati, Ohio: US EPA National Homeland
Security Research Center.
Covello, V., & Sandman, P.M., (2001). Risk communication: Evolution
and revolution. In A. Wolbarst (Ed.; in press), Solutions to an
environment in peril (pp.164-178). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins
University Press.
Donovan, E., & Covello, V. (1989). Risk communication student manual.
Washington, DC: Chemical Manufacturers'Association.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., & Keeney, D. (1981).
Acceptable risk. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Hyer, R.& Covello, V. (2007). Effective Media Communication During
Public Health Emergencies: A World Health Organization Handbook.
Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Peters, R„ McCallum, D., & Covello, V. (1997). The Determinants of Trust
and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical
Study. Risk Analysis, Vol. 17(1):43-54.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (2001). Facts and fears:
Understanding perceived risk. In Slovic, P., (Ed.) The perception of
risk {pp. 137-153). London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Communicating Radiation Risks 79
A Note on Message
Development
EPA developed the radiation messages in this guide using an intensive
process involving EPA radiation experts, policy makers and
communications specialists. Over a two-year period, numerous steps
were taken, including:
¦ EPA emergency responders and communicators identified the
questions during a series of focus groups.
¦ Dr. Vincent Covello, Ph.D., a renowned risk communications expert,
led a series of sessions with EPA emergency responders,
communicators, radiation technical experts and policy makers to
develop the responses.
¦ The messages were tested in focus groups with the general public.
¦ The responses were also influenced by communications work done
within EPA Region 9 and by several other organizations, including:
- Department of Homeland Security
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- The State of California
- National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements
-------
80 Communicating Radiation Risks
NOTES:
-------
Top 10 Ways
to Avoid Communications Mistakes
1. Your words have consequences—make sure
they are the right ones.
2. Don't appear uncertain. Know what you
want to say, then say it. Then say it again
as appropriate.
3. If you don't know what you're talking about,
stop talking.
4. Focus on informing people, not impressing
them. Use everyday language.
5. Never say anything you don't want to see
printed on tomorrow's front page.
6. NEVER LIE!
7. Avoid making promises, false assurances
or guarantees.
8. Don't say "No comment." You'll look as if you
are hiding something.
9. Don't get angry. When you argue with the
media, you always lose—and you lose publicly.
10. Don't speculate, guess or assume.
When you don't know something, say so.
(Covello, 2003; Covello, 2005; Hyer & Covelio, 2007)
------- |