ArticlePDF Available

Best Practices in Public Health Risk and Crisis Communication

Authors:
Best Practices in Public Health Risk and Crisis
Communication
VINCENT T. COVELLO, PhD
Director, Center for Risk Communication, New York, New York, USA
The World Trade Center tragedy of September 11, 2001, the subsequent anthrax
attacks, and other recent events have heightened public health agencies’ awareness of the
need to enhance their risk and crisis communication skills. The threat of chemical and
biological weapons, and the risk posed to human populations, presents a unique oppor-
tunity for public health agencies to assess and elevate their level of communication
preparedness for all risk and crisis scenarios. Following is a checklist of best practices
that should be included in any public health risk and crisis communication plan.
Best Practice 1. Accept and Involve Stakeholders as Legitimate Partners
Guidelines:
*
Demonstrate respect for persons affected by risk management decisions by involving
them early, before important decisions are made.
*
Involve all parties that have an interest or a stake in the particular risk.
*
Include in the decision-making process the broad range of factors involved in
determining public perceptions of risk, concern, and outrage.
*
Use a wide range of communication channels to engage and involve stakeholders.
*
Adhere to the highest ethical standards; recognize that people hold you professionally
and ethically accountable.
*
Strive for mutually beneficial outcomes.
Best Practice 2. Listen to People
Guidelines:
*
Before taking action, find out what people know, think, or want done about risks. Use
techniques such as interviews, facilitated discussion groups, information exchanges,
availability sessions, advisory groups, toll-free numbers, and surveys.
*
Let all parties with an interest or a stake in the issue be heard.
*
Let people know that what they said has been understood and tell them what actions
will follow.
*
Empathize with your audience and try to put yourself in their place.
*
Acknowledge the validity of people’s emotions.
Address correspondence to Vincent T. Covello, PhD, Director, Center for Risk Communication,
29 Washington Sq W, Ste 2A, New York, NY 10011, USA. E-mail: vincentcovello@ix.netcom.com
Journal of Health Communication, 8: 5–8, 2003
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 1081-0730 print/1087-0415 online
DOI: 10.1080/10810730390224802
5
*
Emphasize communication channels that encourage listening, feedback, participation,
and dialogue.
*
Recognize that competing agendas, symbolic meanings, and broader social, cultural,
economic, or political considerations may complicate risk communication
Best Practice 3. Be Truthful, Honest, Frank, and Open
Guidelines:
*
Disclose risk information as soon as possible; fill information vacuums.
*
If information is evolving or incomplete, emphasize appropriate reservations about its
reliability.
*
If in doubt, lean toward sharing more information, not less—or people may think
something significant is being hidden or withheld.
*
If you don’t know or are unsure about an answer, express willingness to get back to the
questioner with a response by an agreed upon deadline. Do not speculate.
*
Discuss data and information uncertainties, strengths, and weaknesses—including
those identified by other credible sources.
*
Identify worst-case estimates as such, and cite ranges of risk estimates when
appropriate.
*
Do not minimize or exaggerate the level of risk; do not over-reassure.
*
If errors are made, correct them quickly.
Best Practice 4. Coordinate, Collaborate, and Partner with Other
Credible Sources
Guidelines:
*
Coordinate all inter-organizational and intra-organizational communications.
*
Devote effort and resources to the slow, hard work of building partnerships and alli-
ances with other organizations.
*
Use credible and authoritative intermediaries between you and your target audience.
*
Consult with others to decide who is best able to take the lead in responding to
questions or concerns about risks. Document those decisions.
*
Cite credible sources that believe what you believe; issue communications with or
through other trustworthy sources.
*
Do not attack individuals or organizations with higher perceived credibility.
Best Practice 5. Meet the Needs of the Media
Guidelines:
*
Be accessible to reporters; respect their deadlines.
*
Prepare a limited number of key messages before media interactions; take control of
the interview and repeat your key messages several times.
*
Keep interviews short. Agree with the reporter in advance about the specific topic of
the interview and stick to this topic during the interview.
*
Say only what you want the media to repeat; everything you say is on the record.
*
Tell the truth.
*
Provide background materials about complex risk issues.
6 V. T. Covello
*
Provide information tailored to the needs of each type of media. For example, provide
sound bites and visuals for television.
*
If you do not know the answer to a question, focus on what you do know and tell the
reporter what actions you will take to get an answer.
*
Be aware of, and respond effectively to, media pitfalls and trap questions.
*
Avoid saying ‘no comment.’
*
Follow up on stories with praise or criticism, as warranted.
*
Work to establish long-term relationships with editors and reporters.
Best Practice 6. Communicate Clearly and with Compassion
Guidelines:
*
Use clear, non-technical language appropriate to the target audience.
*
Use graphics and other pictorial material to clarify messages.
*
Personalize risk data. Use stories, narratives, examples, and anecdotes to make tech-
nical data come alive.
*
Avoid embarrassing people.
*
Respect the unique communication needs of special and diverse audiences.
*
Express genuine empathy. Acknowledge, and say, that any illness, injury, or death is
a tragedy to be avoided.
*
Avoid using distant, abstract, unfeeling language when discussing harm, deaths,
injuries, and illnesses.
*
Acknowledge and respond in words, gestures, and actions to emotions that people
express, such as anxiety, fear, anger, outrage, and helplessness.
*
Acknowledge and respond to the distinctions that the public views as important
in evaluating risks.
*
Use risk comparisons to help put risks in perspective; make sure those comparisons
take into account the distinctions the public considers important.
*
Identify specific actions that people can take to protect themselves and to maintain
control of the situation at hand.
*
Always try to include a discussion of actions that are under way or can be taken.
*
Be sensitive to local norms, such as speech and dress.
*
Strive for brevity, but respect requests for information and offer to provide desired
information within a specified time period.
*
Only promise what you can deliver, then follow through.
*
Understand that trust is earned—do not ask or expect to be trusted by the public.
Best Practice 7. Plan Thoroughly and Carefully
Guidelines:
*
Begin with clear, explicit objectives—such as providing information, establishing
trust, encouraging appropriate actions, stimulating emergency response, or involving
stakeholders in dialogue, partnerships, and joint problem solving.
*
Identify important stakeholders and subgroups within the audience; respect diversity
and design communications for specific stakeholders.
*
Recruit spokespersons with effective presentation and personal interaction skills.
*
Train staff—including technical staff—in basic, intermediate, and advanced risk and
crisis communication skills. Recognize and reward outstanding performance.
Best Practices 7
*
Anticipate questions and issues.
*
Prepare and pretest messages.
*
Carefully evaluate risk communication efforts and learn from mistakes.
*
Share what you have learned with others.
8 V. T. Covello
... Studies show that how the media cover the pandemic makes people anxious (Fischhoff et al., 2005;Covello, 2003). Media coverage affected PBC by the people and affected declared behaviour directly; media coverage also affected declared behaviour by mediating through intentions as in the case of Sweden. ...
... Media coverage affected PBC by the people and affected declared behaviour directly; media coverage also affected declared behaviour by mediating through intentions as in the case of Sweden. Perceived threats impact behaviour directly and through attitude, and threatening news related to health and/or safety leads to cognitive, emotional, and behavioural responses (Fischhoff et al., 2005;Covello, 2003). Since citizens in Germany were more distressed and depressed due to the pandemic, their government needs to manage how news related to the pandemic is covered along with communicating about acceptance of these negative emotions and the need for a healthy lifestyle (Petzold et al., 2020). ...
... Health communication now involves not just sharing information but also how it is presented, the channels to use, and the opinions and involvement of the intended audience (Noar, 2006). Risk communication, which entails the timely and transparent broadcast of information to the public to help them understand the nature of the risks and the preventive measures when public health issues develop, is one of the main objectives of health communication (Covello, 2003). Risk communication has been crucial during the COVID-19 pandemic. ...
... Effective crisis communication involves timely, transparent, and accurate dissemination of information, which can help build public trust and counteract the spread of misinformation (Reynolds & Seeger, 2005). Governments, public health agencies, and emergency management organizations should prioritize clear and consistent messaging, engage with the public through multiple channels, and collaborate with trusted community leaders and influencers to amplify accurate information (Covello, 2003). Proactive communication that anticipates and addresses potential misinformation can also reduce the impact of fake news by providing the public with reliable information before false narratives gain traction (Gollust, Nagler, & Fowler, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
The proliferation of fake news has become a significant concern, particularly during crisis situations when accurate information is crucial for public safety and decision-making. This article explores the impact of fake news on public opinion during crises, analyzing how misinformation spreads and influences perceptions and behaviors. Fake news often leverages the heightened emotions and uncertainties of crises, such as natural disasters, pandemics, or political turmoil, to manipulate public opinion, exacerbate panic, and erode trust in legitimate sources. The paper examines the psychological mechanisms that make individuals more susceptible to fake news, including cognitive biases and the tendency to seek information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs. It also investigates the role of social media platforms in amplifying misinformation, where algorithms prioritize sensational content that often includes false or misleading information. Through case studies and empirical research, this article highlights the consequences of fake news on public opinion, such as the spread of fear, the polarization of communities, and the challenge of implementing effective crisis management strategies. To counteract these effects, the article suggests a multi-faceted approach, including media literacy education, enhanced fact-checking practices, and robust policies to regulate misinformation online. This research aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the relationship between fake news and public opinion during crises, advocating for more resilient communication strategies to maintain public trust and ensure informed decision-making.
... There are several guidelines that are helpful for public health organizations and governments to refer to. The Center for Risk Communication suggest six best practices in public health risk and crisis communication, including (1) accept and involve stakeholders as legitimate partners, (2) listen to people, (3) be truthful, honest, frank, and open, (4) coordinate, collaborate, and partner with other credible sources, (5) meet the needs of the media, and (6) communicate clearly and with compassion [37]. Recent research on COVID-19 also suggests providing relevant, accurate, and sensitive information to key public groups to minimize communication noise and guide desirable coordinated actions [34]. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Background: Online toxicity, encompassing behaviors such as harassment, bullying, hate speech, and the dissemination of misinformation, has become a pressing social concern in the digital age. The 2022 Mpox outbreak, initially termed "Monkeypox" but subsequently renamed to mitigate associated stigmas and societal concerns, serves as a poignant backdrop to this issue. Objective: In this research, we undertake a comprehensive analysis of the toxic online discourse surrounding the 2022 Mpox outbreak. Our objective is to dissect its origins, characterize its nature and content, trace its dissemination patterns, and assess its broader societal implications, with the goal of providing insights that can inform strategies to mitigate such toxicity in future crises. Methods: We collected more than 1.6 million unique tweets and analyzed them from five dimensions, including context, extent, content, speaker, and intent. Utilizing BERT-based topic modeling and social network community clustering, we delineated the toxic dynamics on Twitter. Results: We identified five high-level topic categories in the toxic online discourse on Twitter, including disease (46.6%), health policy and healthcare (19.3%), homophobia (23.9%), politics (6.0%), and racism (4.1%). Through the toxicity diffusion networks of mentions, retweets, and the top users, we found that retweets of toxic content were widespread, while influential users rarely engaged with or countered this toxicity through retweets. Conclusions: By tracking topical dynamics, we can track the changing popularity of toxic content online, providing a better understanding of societal challenges. Network dynamics spotlight key social media influencers and their intents, indicating that addressing these central figures in toxic discourse can enhance crisis communication and inform policy-making.
... Research indicates that visual images often stay longer in people's minds and are especially important during high-stress situations where informationprocessing may be compromised. 27 Given the multimedia nature of social media, attention to both the use of text and images in health communications is vital to fostering healthy behavior. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study examines COVID-19-related messages disseminated by major health and government organizations on Twitter during the overlapping holidays of Easter and Ramadan in 2022. Recognizing the importance of tailored health communication, the research focuses on the textual and visual content of tweets to understand how messages attend to diverse cultural, religious, and ethnic groups. Qualitative analysis of 382 Tweets revealed 3 Major Themes related to COVID-19 and Easter and 4 Major Themes associated with Ramadan. Easter-related tweets emphasized celebrating safely and the importance of vaccinations using science-based messaging, slang, and playful imagery. Ramadan-related tweets prioritized safety during religious practices, incorporating traditional symbols and religious references; countering vaccine-related myths; and social responsibility. The findings highlight culturally relevant health communication and tailoring messages to specific cultural contexts. The study contributes insights for public health organizations aiming to improve communication strategies during pandemics, fostering engagement, and addressing the unique needs of diverse populations.
... Traditionally, crisis and emergency management structures and frameworks are reactive with the primary focus of funding, resourcing, and attention being placed on the response pillar of the emergency management cycle (Coppola, 2015;Kapucu, & Özerdem, 2013;Marcus et al., 2019;Mileti, 1999;Pearson, & Mitroff, 1993). Organizational crisis management literature and research largely focuses on weathering the crisis, treating it as a one-off exception (Roux-Dufort, 2007) and crisis communications frameworks (Coombs, 2009;Covello, 2003). Through repeated experience, this evolved into an integrated framework approaching crisis management through an analysis of the internal dynamics of a crisis and the management of external stakeholders, which enabled crisis leaders to determine the necessary actions for an organization in the throes of a crisis (Bundy et al., 2017;Paton & Johnston, 2017). ...
Article
Is your organization ready to survive and exploit the opportunities that arise in every crisis? Disasters are increasing in scale, scope, and complexity and the structures currently in place are not designed to handle the now-common ‘disaster within a disaster’. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us that our current systems need revision and updating. Black Swan events—the exceedingly rare and highly disruptive events that can trigger existential crises for organizations and societies (Taleb, 2010)—once seen as generational events are now commonplace, interrelated, and compounding components of daily life (Kayyem, 2022; Marcus et al., 2019; Roux-Dufort, 2007). Despite this reality, the reactive design of many humanitarian and disaster response organizations leaves them vulnerable during major events thus at risk of being unable to fulfil their mandates. The mantras “it cannot happen here” and “it will not happen again” are naïve and dangerous.
... However, given that the intervention was implemented during an ongoing pandemic, which was a rapidly evolving context, it was necessary to review and update all content immediately before scheduled delivery to ensure that the messaging was still consistent with current public health guidelines, overall risk levels, and vaccine recommendations. With the abundance of misinformation and mixed messaging on social media, this is highly important for establishing and maintaining trust and credibility in participants' eyes [50][51][52][53]. Future interventions seeking to replicate this approach, especially in rapidly changing contexts, should also prioritize the review of scheduled content before delivery to ensure the accuracy and consistency of messaging and alignment with the latest guidelines. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Misinformation in Spanish on social media platforms has contributed to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Latino parents. Brigada Digital de Salud was established to disseminate credible, science-based information about COVID-19 in Spanish on social media. Objective This study aims to assess participants’ reactions to and engagement with Brigada Digital content that sought to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake among US Latino parents and their children. Methods We conducted a 5-week intervention in a private, moderator-led Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc) group with Spanish-speaking Latino parents of children aged ≤18 years (N=55). The intervention participants received 3 to 4 daily Brigada Digital posts and were encouraged to discuss the covered topics through comments and polls. To assess participants’ exposure, reactions, and engagement, we used participants’ responses to a web-based survey administered at 2 time points (baseline and after 5 weeks) and Facebook analytics to calculate the average number of participant views, reactions, and comments. Descriptive statistics were assessed for quantitative survey items, qualitative responses were thematically analyzed, and quotes were selected to illustrate the themes. Results Overall, 101 posts were published. Most participants reported visiting the group 1 to 3 times (22/55, 40%) or 4 to 6 (18/55, 33%) times per week and viewing 1 to 2 (23/55, 42%) or 3 to 4 (16/55, 29%) posts per day. Facebook analytics validated this exposure, with 36 views per participant on average. The participants reacted positively to the intervention. Most participants found the content informative and trustworthy (49/55, 89%), easy to understand, and presented in an interesting manner. The participants thought that the moderators were well informed (51/55, 93%) and helpful (50/55, 91%) and praised them for being empathic and responsive. The participants viewed the group environment as welcoming and group members as friendly (45/55, 82%) and supportive (19/55, 35%). The 3 most useful topics for participants were the safety and efficacy of adult COVID-19 vaccines (29/55, 53%), understanding child risk levels (29/55, 53%), and the science behind COVID-19 (24/55, 44%). The preferred formats were educational posts that could be read (38/55, 69%) and videos, including expert (28/55, 51%) and instructional (26/55, 47%) interviews. Regarding engagement, most participants self-reported reacting to posts 1 to 2 (16/55, 29%) or 3 to 4 (15/55, 27%) times per week and commenting on posts 1 to 2 (16/55, 29%) or <1 (20/55, 36%) time per week. This engagement level was validated by analytics, with 10.6 reactions and 3 comments per participant, on average, during the 5 weeks. Participants recommended more opportunities for engagement, such as interacting with the moderators in real time. Conclusions With adequate intervention exposure and engagement and overall positive participant reactions, the findings highlight the promise of this digital approach for COVID-19 vaccine–related health promotion.
Article
Full-text available
Objective: To analyze the risk communication about the COVID-19 pandemic carried out on the website of the Health Department of Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil. Theoretical Framework: Risk communication in public health emergencies, according to the WHO guideline for policy and practice of this health communication in crises. Method: Qualitative study, focused on the content analysis of the publications made on the website of the Health Department of Campina Grande, Paraíba, from March 2020 to December 2021. Results and Discussion: The Health Department of Campina Grande, Paraíba, effectively used its website to disseminate information about the COVID-19 pandemic, such as social isolation measures and partial lockdown in areas with a high incidence of cases; sanitary barriers to monitor symptoms and control circulation; the installation of a field hospital, expansion of testing in Basic Health Units and distribution of masks and hygiene kits in vulnerable areas. The most frequent words on the portal in 2022 were “pandemic”, “mask” and “coronavirus”, in daily updates, guidelines on prevention measures, service protocols, decrees and restrictions, education and awareness and vaccination campaign at the end of the year. Research Implications: There was publication of accurate and accessible information, publication of administrative acts, positive culture in public health and, therefore, these actions demonstrate a significant effort by the Campina Grande Health Department to use digital communication to face the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with the UN guideline. However, it was observed that in terms of clarity, some messages used technical terms that may have made it difficult for less educated audiences to understand. The portal did not provide accessible versions for people with visual impairments. Originality/Value: This study contributes to demonstrating that during the pandemic, the Campina Grande Health Department portal was an essential tool for residents of Campina Grande-PB in a practical and accessible way, with constant updates, disseminating information on the progress of the disease, vaccination campaigns and preventive measures, such as the use of masks and social distancing, with potential contribution to the implementation of preventive measures and adherence to vaccination. It is suggested that there could be greater accessibility for people with less education and sensory disabilities.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.