Social Media in Crisis Situations: Where the Rubber Hits the Road

Coming up this weekend is CrisisCamp, an unconference event focusing on how social and communication technologies can be used (to help, of course) during crises (see more info on the CrisisCamp wiki).

I will again be interloping, not simply because it’s a free unconference about social media and social communication, or because we’re still dealing with the H1N1 swine-ish flu issue — I’ve been interested in how we can use communications technology during emergencies, because crises are real “rubber hits the road” moments that truly, madly, deeply impact peoples’ lives. None of this abstract, dithering over the metrics stuff.

I’m also interested because not being a super-technical type can be an asset, instead of just a neutral, in these situations. For example, first BarCamp unconference I went to was the first BarCamp NYC in January, 2006. This was just a few months after Hurricane Katrina, and one of the closing sessions was about using social technologies for Katrina-type events.

Being a technology-oriented group, the solutions being tossed around were pretty exclusively technological in nature, even though many of the problems were not technology problems at their core.

Here’s a fer instance: In the immediate wake of Katrina, lots and lots of Web sites were running around creating registries of survivors, victims, and seekers. They were mostly ad hoc, uncoordinated, with no data standards, validation, correction mechanisms, and similar issues, which limited their usefulness, so some of the discussion was built around mechanisms for building and maintaining useful databases — even though many of the most effected from Katrina wouldn’t have been on any of them. Or any number of uses for smartphones and fancy mobile devices that lots of people still don’t have.

Another interesting thing to ponder is: What’s the proper role of social communications in crises? Obviously, there’s the critical nature of timely warnings, or the ability to take eyewitness and observer reports. How about immediately after the precipitating event, when there are other pressing needs like food, water, shelter, and sanitation?

One example from post-Katrina was efforts by some activist geeks (ultimately thwarted) to set up a low-power FM transmitter in the Houston Astrodome for evacuees. While some folks might think this would be low priority, I would say there’s a huge role in disseminating information to the affected (and even the unaffected), if only for the sake of rumor control and preventing panic. Misinformation thrives in a vacuum, so why not set up low-power FM, so you can get your message out without having to blast out unintelligible and disruptive loudspeaker announcements?

Speaking of misinformation, we also need to account for how it spreads over social networks, and how we can flip it and harness it. H1N1 is still fresh on the mind, of course. But there’s also a basic, and near-universal message that well-meaning onlookers still haven’t gotten, despite being hammered on during other recent disasters — 9/11, the Asian Tsunami, Katrina, etc. — instead of donating items to aid organizations that are at best irrelevant, and at worst, burdensome, they should just send money.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to CrisisCamp, to participate in some thinking on how we can use social media, social broadcasting, and every other form of social technology, before, during, and after crises.

If you’re going to be participating in CrisisCamp, or have your own ideas on social media in crises, please leave a comment.