15.1 Introduction
Increasing emergencies and disasters in Australia and worldwide are leading to the realisation that response agencies do not have the resources to be everywhere and that communities have been (and always will be) the first responders in any emergency or crisis. Recent Australian and international events (earthquakes, wildfires and floods) have highlighted wide discrepancies in the capabilities of communities to adequately respond before the arrival (and, in many cases, non-arrival) of emergency and rescue agencies. Australia’s size and population spread exacerbate this situation and mean that local community communication networks play an essential role in emergency responses as well as preparedness. The complex emergency media ecosystem in Australia sees an interweaving of different media channels, including the national public broadcaster the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), commercial local media and direct communication from the emergency sector websites and apps. Communication occurs via traditional media channels, such as radio as well as SMS and social media. Due to its immediacy, social media platforms play a crucial role “in the dissemination of information and the coordination of community responses” (Bruns, 2014).
The role that community members play in emergencies has become increasingly visible through the use of digital technologies and social media. A recent comprehensive report into how people experienced Australia’s damaging floods in early 2022 clearly displayed the changing role of communities in responding to and managing emergencies. It emphasised a move away from reliance on official channels towards established and trusted community sources on social media to meet the need for timely, accurate and relevant local information and to provide and receive support and assistance:
Many people [rely] on local knowledge—[whether] their own, or that of others—to contextualise the potential impacts they might face and to take protective action…There are increasingly well-informed, experienced, and knowledgeable individuals and groups working through informal networks and basing their information on evidence, technology, and modelling. (Taylor et al., 2023)
Anzeige
One participant in the Taylor et al. report stated: “I learnt more from our [community] Facebook group than I did from watching the news and trying to get weather reports and stuff” (2023).
This chapter examines how people use these technologies and platforms not just for information-seeking but to fulfil other needs, such as to create and share meaningful, relevant hyperlocal information, seek and offer social and emotional support and coordinate immediate and local response activities (Austin et al., 2012; Bruns, 2014). It will also attempt to address the question of preparedness in the context of crisis communication and identify knowledge gaps and future opportunities for research: What do we not know and what can we do? What has been discovered in the research literature is a heavily skewed focus on response and recovery, with very little on what can be done from a crisis communication perspective before an event occurs to prepare communities and individuals. Ng’s (2022) definition of disaster preparedness is helpful here, drawing on Paton (2019) and Dasgupta et al. (2020), to “refer[–] to activities and measures taken in advance to ensure an effective response to the impact of hazards”. Social media has become an integral part of our daily lives. Globally 95% of adults use social media on a weekly basis, and in Australia, this figure is 92% (Newman et al., 2023; Park et al., 2023). In this chapter, we refer to all types of digital platforms that enable interactions between individuals to communicate and share information as social media, mainly focusing on social networking sites (Meta, X, Instagram, etc.) and instant messaging applications (WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, WeChat, etc.). Due to the pervasiveness of social media platforms, it has the potential to disseminate essential official information during natural disasters as well as serve as a platform to exchange information and support among citizens. In contemporary emergency management practice, the term “natural hazards” is preferred over “natural disasters” as all hazards (including security-related events, public demonstrations or major IT incidents, as well as floods, wildfires and heatwaves) are managed within the same framework. In the crisis communication field, the term “natural disasters” is used when discussing crisis events that have an environmental genesis. As we straddle both these fields of research, the terms are used interchangeably in this chapter.
During an emergency, people encounter a large volume of information, including unverified information. Filtering accurate and relevant information is challenging as social media facilitates inadvertent as well as deliberate spread of inaccurate information—although this has been found to be less likely during a disaster (Palen et al., 2009; Simon et al., 2015). Some research has shown that social media often serves as a self-regulating device where users fact-check and share the corrected information (Simon et al., 2015).
While access to timely and accurate information is a critical component of emergency response, and successful communication undoubtedly contributes to better outcomes (Steelman & McCaffrey, 2012), it is only part of the picture. For individuals, sourcing and sharing information to make better-informed decisions is essential. Furthermore, during emergencies, people engage with and communicate with others for many other reasons, the importance of which can be lost if focus is narrowly concentrated on content, messages, channels and information flows. These reasons include understanding local conditions by talking with others; making judgements about what specific information might mean for them; coordinating assistance for themselves and others; offering and receiving emotional support; and making people feel safer through personal connection (Sharp & Carter, 2020; Simon et al., 2015; Stephens & Robertson, 2022). Engagement and communication, particularly through social media, are key elements in building community cohesion and connectedness, which research has determined to be essential for preparedness, response and recovery from disasters and in building what has been defined as community resilience (Liu, 2022).
Anzeige
The use of social media and “unofficial” media is not a new phenomenon, but, increasingly, there is an expectation of immediate, local information and a move towards established and trusted community sources (Taylor et al., 2023). People value local knowledge and information as it enables them to contextualise the potential impacts of a crisis, make their own decisions and take necessary actions. Hyperlocal knowledge is often more relevant to individuals as well. When official information is absent, perceived as inaccurate or lacking in some way, people rely on unofficial sources of information such as community Facebook groups and their own personal networks for real-time localised information (Stephens & Robertson, 2022; Taylor et al., 2023; Zander et al., 2022). These communities can also be maintained during non-emergency periods for citizens to maintain connections and prepare for the next disaster.
This chapter includes a review of scholarly research on the role of social media in emergency communication to identify the insights and gaps in understanding how social media might be used in preparing individuals and communities for natural disasters.
15.2 Social Media and the Changing Communication Landscape During Disasters
15.2.1 Social Media as an Expansion of Official Communication Channels Assisting Emergency Communication
Research consistently shows that citizens “perceive official sources, such as [government] agencies, as more credible for disaster information than unofficial sources, such as members of the public, both via traditional and social media” (Fisher Liu et al., 2016). People tend to “use social media during crises for insider information and to check in with family and friends, while they use traditional media for educational purposes, i.e., seeking official information and warnings” (Sheldon, 2018). However, people “typically use a combination of unofficial and official sources to make sense of disaster information” (Fisher Liu et al., 2016). Here, social media can play an important role in seeking trusted sources of information. During disasters, people seek information to locate family and friends and reduce uncertainty. For this, they usually turn to familiar channels like phone calls, text messages and emails to gather information, and, if unsuccessful, they resort to alternative and official sources of information (Simon et al., 2015).
Research by Bruns and others (notably Austin et al., 2012; Fisher Liu et al., 2016; Liu, 2022) has emphasised that the unique characteristic of social media, its capacity to facilitate immediate transmission from many-to-many, is why it must be included in emergency agencies’ communication strategies, but not just as one-way communication channels. However, research has shown that responders (i.e. emergency authorities) prefer to receive information rather than share it, making it challenging to coordinate and share information and missing opportunities to engage citizens in information gathering and sharing (Simon et al., 2015).
From a practitioner perspective, many studies focus on effective uses of social media among crisis communication professionals (see Eriksson, 2018; Eriksson & Olsson, 2016; Maal & Wilson-North, 2019). Eriksson (2018), for example, recommends five effective uses of social media in crisis communication: (1) “[create dialogue and] choose the right message, source and timing”; (2) pre-crisis work; (3) “social media monitoring”; (4) “continuing to prioritize traditional media in crisis situations”; and (5) “strategic crisis communication”. Note that Eriksson’s model includes pre-crisis work, a step that is crucial in preparing for an extreme event, although Eriksson is discussing how communication professionals prepare rather than a community or individual.
Bruns (2014) emphasises the critical role of social media in further disseminating “emergency alerts and other messages and in the community self-organisation of local responses”. As well as facilitating the dissemination of information from traditional emergency management actors, social media facilitates the emergence of new actors such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other civic organisations, active Internet actors and locals sharing first-hand information or organising local emergency response activities.
However, the affordances of social media platforms come with challenges. Maal and Wilson-North (2019) note the amplifier effect that social media has on crisis communication and the challenges in ensuring accurate messages are heard and unverified information is confirmed or refuted. Their guidelines for using social media in crisis communication encourage organisations to carefully consider how people use different platforms and tailor communication strategies accordingly. In the Western context, for example, X (formerly Twitter) may be used for daily safety messages, incident information and retweets of key messages from partner organisations, while Facebook should be used for more detailed stories and safety campaigns. Maal and Wilson-North (2019) recommend testing message formats on various channels and monitoring engagement statistics to evaluate different approaches.
There is very little control over messages once they are distributed on social media. While organisations can target audiences with their own messages, they do not know what other sources people are using and what other information people are seeking (Stephens & Robertson, 2022). In discussing the different affordances of social media platforms, they differentiate between public, semi-public and shared-private profiles that people use to connect with others. A significant challenge that official emergency communicators face is an increase in the public’s belief that the official organisations are monitoring their social media and will respond. In reality, response organisations often lack the resources and training to effectively monitor these platforms, leading to a disconnect between public expectations and reality (Stephens & Robertson, 2022).
There is increasing demand for localised and real-time information before and during disasters, and research is finding a shift towards relying on community-curated information on social media platforms (Taylor et al., 2023). However, there are more studies that focus on how official agencies and practitioners use social media as a communication channel than on how people actually use social media to find, co-create and share information to support each other during crises (Macnamara, 2016).
15.2.2 Social Media Use by the Public During Disasters
For individuals and communities, social media is much more than an information source. Research has shown that in addition to searching for official information such as weather updates, river gauge heights and fire ground information, individuals use local online communities to find and share hyperlocal information. They do so to maintain social connection with friends, family and community members and to coordinate response and support activities—all activities that contribute to greater community cohesion and resilience (Liu, 2022; Sharp & Carter, 2020; Taylor et al., 2023). As Simon et al. (2015) claim, as well as becoming an essential conduit for information gathering and sharing, social media provides a platform for public participation and civilian journalism, enabling individuals and groups to seek, share and synthesise information.
Research going back a decade highlights the ongoing need to understand better how citizens use different social media platforms in times of crisis (Fraustino et al., 2012). This has been echoed by many scholars since (Eriksson & Olsson, 2016; Liu, 2022; Simon et al., 2015). As well as a communication channel, “social media provides opportunities for engaging citizens in emergency management by disseminating information [to a broader network] and accessing information from them” (Edwards et al., 2022). The importance of community connectedness and the diverse roles played by friends, family and neighbours during disasters have been highlighted by various studies (Liu, 2022; Simon et al., 2015; Spialek & Houston, 2019; Taylor et al., 2023). These community members are the first responders, alerting others to the threat of flooding, sharing vital information and providing support in numerous ways such as assisting with evacuations, participating in clean-up efforts and aiding in recovery. Taylor et al.’s study revealed that community members “were identified as the most trusted and the most appreciated groups” and that “community cohesion and connectedness acts as a much-needed force multiplier when it comes to disasters” (2023).
Social media use has a clear value to communities during emergency events. For example, crowdsourcing information during an emergency enables “human sensors” who can regularly and rapidly update the situation on the ground, which may not be possible via official channels (Bruns, 2014). Due to these affordances, research finds a shift towards relying on community-curated information on social media platforms (Taylor et al., 2023). Atkinson and Lee’s (2023) study on how the general public utilised the official pages of emergency organisations during natural disasters reveals that users engage with different types of content in different ways and that community-related information, as opposed to event-specific information, generated the highest levels of engagement. Taylor et al. (2012) found that during tropical cyclone Yasi, the public relied on a mix of formal and informal information sources, often using social media to re-post information from government websites that they felt would be useful to other people. Individuals were acting as “filters and amplifiers of official information”. The core strength of social media use during a crisis is its “timely information exchange and promotion of connectedness”. The study found that social media was used as “psychological first aid in the early stages of disaster”, providing support among the community.
Community-curated content on social media, particularly Facebook, played a significant role in the catastrophic floods in Northern New South Wales and Queensland in 2022, with several Facebook pages in flood-affected regions emerging as reliable sources of high-quality information upon which residents increasingly relied. These pages effectively shared and amplified official emergency messaging, highlighting the potential for better collaboration between official agencies and community groups (Taylor et al., 2023).
Taylor et al.’s (2023) flood report stated that almost two thirds of respondents to the survey indicated that they used social media, with the most preferred sites being local community groups followed by official sources such as Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES), New South Wales State Emergency Services (NSW SES) and the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). Taylor et al.’s report quotes residents who found community Facebook pages to be centralised points of information where major updates were pinned, and individuals with direct access to the affected areas could provide real-time updates. Critical to these pages working well were the page administrators who did their best to validate information and promote the most recent information, including from official sources. Studies have shown that people often prefer this type of content because of its timeliness, accuracy, local relevance, community connection, use of visuals/photos and availability.
Taylor et al.’s report highlights a loss of trust in institutions and a growing “[preference] for relying on community-generated information on social media and local knowledge”. This shift in trust and reliance underscores the need for effective engagement with community social media platforms and the incorporation of local knowledge into formal emergency management systems.
The content that ordinary citizens create and share during a crisis, however, is not solely about information sharing. People create content that “is tied to social [functions] and ego-defensive functions, [and] not to utilitarian knowledge functions” (Austin et al., 2012). Austin et al. found that “young adults’ motivations for use of newer communication technologies is [most] related to their need for connectedness”, for “self-expression” and, to a lesser extent, for “utilitarian purposes” (ibid.). People’s differing motivations for using social media have implications for channel selection, type of content sought and perceived usefulness of a specific platform or group, and these may change radically during a crisis to meet changing needs. What has also been found is that in some cases, information overload may discourage the use of social media when people feel overwhelmed by the frequency and amount of information in their feeds (Austin et al., 2012). Generally, though, audiences’ social media use increases during crises, and, “in some situations, audiences perceive social media to be more credible than [traditional] media”, particularly for hyperlocal information (Austin et al., 2012). Using social media beyond information sharing, such as gaining social support, has the potential to enable stronger ties within local communities.
15.3 The Role of Social Media Before, During and After Disasters
While there is research around the role of social media during and after disasters, there is less about how it can be used, or is used, before an event. If preparedness is noted, it is typically brief. Nevertheless, in Zander et al.’s (2022) examination of how Australians use social media during natural disasters, they also asked their respondents about preparedness. While the research primarily covered individual and community use of social media during a crisis, they briefly noted household preparedness. Zander et al. claim that when information is given to households on how to prepare, this information can motivate individuals to prepare more effectively and recover more quickly. In this research, it was found that “[Being] acquainted with local emergency systems was positively associated with the use of social media during natural hazards” (2022), with the opposite also true: If a citizen depended on information from authorities, it was more likely to have a negative effect on their use of social media. In other words, those who trust the authorities do not feel the need to search out information elsewhere, and those who doubt the decision makers search for other communication sources: in this case, according to Zander et al. (2022), social media. It should also be noted that Zander et al.’s research included a literature review of research that examined how Australians use social media during emergencies (21 studies in total), and none of these investigated how social media was used as a tool for preparedness. Sharp and Carter (2020), in research that examined “the role of social media in preparation for, and response to, flooding”, also primarily focused on response but made the observation that social media can strengthen community cohesion, implying that a strong community is more resilient and, thus, able to better manage risk during a disaster, an observation consistent with other researchers such as Liu (2022), Sharp and Carter (2020) and Taylor et al. (2023). Other research (e.g. Allaire, 2016) use prepare in the context of what a household can do during an event: “With knowledge of current flood conditions, social media households could prepare effectively and successfully move their [belongings] in time”.
In 2014, Houston et al. developed a framework to map disaster social media by conducting a review of literature. This review generated 15 social media uses, including two pre-event phases: preparedness information, both developing and receiving it, and disaster warnings. Houston et al. note that social media can connect organisations and governments to individuals to disseminate information for households to prepare. They also point out that social media can lead to individuals unintentionally learning about preparedness from their feeds:
[A] user may encounter disaster preparedness information via a posting from an account they follow on Facebook or Twitter (one that is not specifically disaster-focused, but has still posted or tweeted the information), thereby expanding the effect of disaster preparedness information beyond those who are motivated to look for the content. (Houston et al., 2014)
There is no doubt that social media has “changed the traditional information dissemination pathways during emergencies”, resulting in “many more information providers and higher involvement of the public using official and unofficial sources” (Simon et al., 2015). This provides both challenges and opportunities (Bruns, 2014; Houston et al., 2014). Lui (2022) quotes Spialek et al. when noting that “social media are rapidly becoming an alternative for individuals to acquire and disseminate disaster-related information. In fact, [compared to traditional] media, social media can contribute to the building of community resilience to a greater degree”. They find that “social media enable real-time updates of a disaster, making residents not only recipients but also [creators and] providers of information” (Liu, 2022). However, a key challenge is that disinformation and inaccuracy can spread more rapidly than via traditional media. All the while, emergency responders face challenges in validating information accessed by the public (Mehta et al., 2017; Simon et al., 2015; Stephens & Robertson, 2022).
At the community level, the disaster communication ecology is complex and multilayered, and official emergency management communication is only one component. Community-level “communication resources are distributed at multiple levels” within a community, and “the strength of communication ecology can be enhanced or restricted by various characteristics of [neighbourhood] context” (Liu, 2022). These “communication resources [include] interpersonal connections, local media storytelling and community-based organizations, and official emergency management communication” (ibid.). Different individuals rely on these resources differently, depending on their goals. Austin, Liu and Jin note that “[during] crises, social media allows users to share unfiltered, [immediate and local] information and news, which provide unique crisis information that audiences cannot get elsewhere. Audiences also use social media for emotional support and recovery from crises”.
Liu (2022) proposes a four-component model for disaster assessment and intervention, which emphasises four key elements that are essential for effective disaster response. The first component is robust communication systems, which play a critical role in coordinating relief efforts and keeping the affected population informed. The second component is strong community relationships, which can facilitate the sharing of information and resources and promote social cohesion. The third component is positive community attributes, which are essential for building resilience and fostering a sense of community ownership over the relief and recovery process. Finally, the fourth component is effective strategic communication processes, which can help to coordinate the efforts of different stakeholders and ensure that the right information is conveyed to the right people at the right time.
Here, the role of interpersonal communication is a vital component of disaster communication ecology (Kim & Kang, 2010). Talking to family, friends and neighbours can serve several important functions. People tend to trust information from family and friends and it is often hyperlocal. Another important function of interpersonal communication is that it can lead to collective action in the community, which is critical during preparation for disasters and recovery from them. Finally, connecting with others during a disaster fosters a sense of connectedness and can encourage community activities (Liu, 2022).
Studies have shown that interpersonal disaster communication can reinforce the effects of news media and enhance community resilience perception, collective efficacy and disaster self-efficacy. Interpersonal communication combined with news media can increase individuals’ engagement before and during disasters (Kim & Kang, 2010). Similarly, Spialek and Houston’s (2019) study found that people’s disaster communication activities were related to a sense of belonging and resilience, confirming the important role of interpersonal disaster communication in shaping community resilience.
15.4 Conclusion
A key inference from research into this area of crisis communication is “that social media [should] not [be considered] a homogenous phenomenon with [one] coherent role in crisis management and communication [practice]” (Atkinson & Lee, 2023). Communication professionals and citizens assign important distinguishing characteristics to different social media platforms. Groups diverging in profession, age, gender, interests and experience will likely continue assigning different roles to diverse social media platforms, both in everyday use and during crisis events. This variability will influence how community communication networks are understood and how authorities may develop their strategies.
Most of the literature examined here focuses on organisations and conceptualises communication as one-way message delivery, relegating social media to something that complements the existing media and communication systems. It is, however, prudent to consider social media from multiple perspectives. From an organisation’s perspective, social media has demonstrated its usefulness in extending official channels of communication and has the potential to be a source of situational intelligence and a platform to engage with communities. From an individual’s perspective, social media can be an effective tool to manage the flow of information and social support and coordinate response efforts. Credibility is higher for official social media sources (Fisher Liu et al., 2016) than for unknown sources, although it must be argued that trust is high for interpersonal information, mainly local information.
However, a key finding is how important it is to build community preparedness, capability and resilience and how significant intra-community communication is as an enabler. Much of the literature examines strategies to share information during a crisis, with very little done on how individuals and communities can effectively use platforms such as social media, digital technologies and messaging apps to manage communication before, during and after an event. Here, we have uncovered several gaps in the research, particularly on preparedness, but also around concepts such as the value of different information sources, and how social media can be used after an event to prepare for future emergencies and for emotional support during disasters. In addition, digital technologies will continue to advance and provide more opportunities to enhance community connectedness and preparedness, potentially including through the creation of community hubs where diverse communication networks could come together. These gaps should be explored empirically, including via longitudinal studies, to provide further data on improving preparedness for individuals and communities.
The following gaps were identified:
-
People prefer interpersonal communication and are less willing to share information online (Fisher Liu et al., 2016). They will use a combination of official and unofficial information sources. There needs to be more visibility of the unofficial and spontaneous information sharing. This preference can make it challenging to research but is worth exploring empirically.
-
Preparedness is not a core element of these studies; most studies are about how social media is used during response and recovery. A closer examination of how social media can be used to assist in preparing communities and individuals for catastrophic events would add a further dimension to emergency management research.
-
Existing research points to variations in how digital technologies are used in different crises, such as floods, wildfires and heatwaves; however, empirical research is required to offer a more nuanced understanding of these differences.
-
It is largely unknown how social media communities and networks established during disasters continue to evolve post-crisis. Empirical research can question and examine the ongoing value of these communities.
-
There are very few studies on emotional support, which is a part of resilience building and preparedness.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.