This article was downloaded by: [University of South Florida]On: 25 November 2014, At: 11:18Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Health Communication:International PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhcm20

Disaster Communication on the Internet:A Focus on Mobilizing InformationAndrea Tanner a , Daniela B. Friedman b , Alexis Koskan b & DaphneyBarr aa School of Journalism and Mass Communications , University ofSouth Carolina , Columbia, South Carolina, USAb Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior , ArnoldSchool of Public Health, University of South Carolina , Columbia,South Carolina, USAPublished online: 21 Dec 2009.

To cite this article: Andrea Tanner , Daniela B. Friedman , Alexis Koskan & Daphney Barr (2009)Disaster Communication on the Internet: A Focus on Mobilizing Information, Journal of HealthCommunication: International Perspectives, 14:8, 741-755, DOI: 10.1080/10810730903295542

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10810730903295542

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Disaster Communication on the Internet:A Focus on Mobilizing Information

ANDREA TANNER

School of Journalism and Mass Communications, University of SouthCarolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA

DANIELA B. FRIEDMAN AND ALEXIS KOSKAN

Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, ArnoldSchool of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia,South Carolina, USA

DAPHNEY BARR

School of Journalism and Mass Communications, University of SouthCarolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA

While local television news is the most cited source for seeking news and informa-tion, many individuals also report finding their news from the Internet. During a dis-aster, people need access to accurate information and clear, specific instructions tohelp them act appropriately. Therefore, it is important to assess the volume andscope of emergency information being disseminated on local television news web-sites. This study analyzed the content of 293 emergency-related stories on 119 localtelevision news websites. Mobilizing information (MI), information found in newsthat can cue people to act on preexisting attitudes, also was explored. Resultsshowed that emergency information was present on nearly all (96%) of the sitesexamined. A majority of news stories focused on natural disasters (52%) and mostfrequently discussed multiple disasters (e.g., hurricanes and pandemics). Mobilizinginformation was present in fewer than half of the stories (44%); stories were morelikely to contain identificational MI than either locational or tactical MI (p< .05).There were also significant differences in type of MI present according to U.S.region. More stories by wire and syndicated services included MI (p< 0.05).Implications for future research on inclusion of MI in general health and emergencystories are discussed.

In this decade alone, natural and man-made disasters including hurricanes, torna-does, tsunamis, fires, earthquakes, wars, and terrorist activities have led to death,injury, and devastation of lives and property. These events highlight the need formultiple forms of timely emergency preparedness and response information fromboth mediated and nonmediated outlets (Vanderford, 2007). The Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) considerimproving timely emergency communication a top research priority (CDC, 2006;

Address correspondence to Daniela B. Friedman, Department of Health Promotion,Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina,Columbia, South Carolina, USA. E-mail: dbfriedman@mailbox.sc.edu

Journal of Health Communication, 14:741–755, 2009Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1081-0730 print=1087-0415 onlineDOI: 10.1080/10810730903295542

741

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

IOM, 2008). Especially after disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the IndianOcean tsunami, various organizations are now held responsible for mitigating disas-ter preparedness and response information to the public (Laituri & Kodrich, 2008).

In the event of a disaster, the public seeks crisis management information regard-ing whether the crisis will affect them, and what they should do (Reynolds & Seeger,2005). They search for this information from various types of media (e.g., broadcast,print, online), particularly news media. While local television news is the most citedsource for seeking information, almost one quarter of the public (24%) also reportfinding their news from the Internet (Pew Research Center, 2006). As pertainingspecifically to local news on the web, 39% of general Internet users say they frequentlylog onto their local television station site (The State of News Media, 2006).

In an effort to keep up with audience demands in today’s convergent newsenvironment, most media organizations have moved their news product onto theweb. Although nearly all local television stations (97%) have websites (Papper, 2007),research suggests that many of these sites provide little more than text-only informationthat is repurposed directly from a station’s newscast and provides few additional factsor new information (Chan-Olmsted & Park, 2000; Papper, 2005; Smith, Tanner, &Duhe, 2007; Tanner & Smith, 2007). Another potential limitation of these sites is post-ing of inaccurate or incomplete resources. Specifically with regard to public healthemergencies, Laituri andKodrich (2008) have discussed how online disaster mitigationinformation often ‘‘is not easily identified ahead of time, nor is it complete’’ (p. 3049).This study is the first to assess the content of public health emergency informationbeing disseminated by local television news websites. This information may be people’ssole resource in preparing for or responding to a disaster situation in their community.

This research also assessed the concept of MI, which, in terms of disaster man-agement, is information that provides cues to action on how to prepare and behavein response to a disaster. Although local television websites are places where viewersshould be able to find not only news stories but also additional mobilizing informa-tion (e.g., contact information relevant to a particular news story, hyperlinks thatlead to additional information, or explicit instructions for certain behaviors), Fried-man and Tanner (2007) found that local television news web content often is writtenat a level difficult for average readers to understand and provides little MI. Onlineinformation found before or during a public health emergency can affect crisispreparedness and response (Kittler, Hobbs, Volk, Kreps, & Bates, 2004); therefore,access to MI that consumers may comprehend and act upon is critical in the eventof a disaster. This study is the first to examine MI in the context of emergencypreparedness information on local television websites.

Disaster Preparedness

Disaster preparedness is defined as the extent to which individuals and organizationsare equipped and ready to respond to negative environmental threats, which includenatural and man-made disasters (Perry & Lindell, 2003). The public needs to haveaccess to disaster mitigation information and cues that will guide them to reactconstructively to the threat of an emergency (Zhang, Zhou, & Nunamaker, 2002).Such crisis communication, if executed in a timely manner, has the ability to lessenthe negative effects of a disaster (Laituri & Kodrich, 2008).

Crisis communication encompasses the packaging of ‘‘common language andfamiliarity with the means of preparing for and responding to these threatening

742 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

scenarios’’ (Johannigman, 2005, p. S22). During an emergency, warnings and threatsfrom emergency response centers are transformed into timely, credible, and accuratewarnings meant for the public (Samarajiva, 2005). These messages are communi-cated to the public through various mediated outlets, which include radio, television,and the Internet. Multiple organizations (including television news stations and theirwebsites) are responsible for communicating this information to inform the public ofthe crisis as well as to guide them on how to act or react to the crisis (Guion,Scammon, & Borders, 2007; Reynolds & Seeger, 2005). Wenger and Quarantelli(1989), however, found that most media outlets do not have plans, nor do theyprovide staff training, for covering major public health emergencies.

In the event of an emergency, one advantage of the Internet is the ability to postupdated information just as quickly if not more quickly than television and radio news(Troy, Carson, Vanderbeek, & Hutton, 2008). Another advantage is that it is a ‘‘per-sistent’’ form of communication. Specifically, the Internet is ‘‘visible, recordable, and=or transferable to other people over time’’ (Palen & Liu, 2007) since it is an asynchro-nous form of communication that can be accessed as long as the web can be accessed.It should be noted that the Internet is not robust and may not function appropriatelyin disaster zones (Laituri & Kodrich, 2008). Broadcast media, such as radio andlocal television, could be more resilient during a disaster event. The web, however,can serve as a relevant and important source for preparedness-related information.

Individuals’ responses to disaster communication result from their perceptions ofrisk formed prior to taking action. The strategies for disseminating the message itselfare significant factors in the formation of risk perceptions. Guion and colleagues(2007) found that emergency warnings and threats of disasters are not enough to pre-pare the public to respond to an emergency. Mileti and Peek (2000) recommend fivetopics for inclusion in emergency messages for the public: hazard, location, guidance,time, and source. Messages also need to be timely, clear, consistent, and detailedenough for the public to act upon if they are required to do so. Mobilizing informa-tion within emergency warning messages is the type of information that prepares andinforms people of the knowledge and resources needed to take action.

Mobilizing Information

Mobilizing information is discussed in the health communication literature as a typeof information that may cue an individual to action concerning a particular healthbehavior (Damond et al., 2003; Friedman & Hoffman-Goetz, 2003; Hoffman-Goetz,Shannon, & Clarke, 2003). Mobilization information can take many forms, whichinclude but are not limited to the following: evacuation information, help-line tele-phone numbers, checklists for preparedness supplies, websites with more informationconcerning the disaster, and instructions on what to do in the case of an emergency.Theoretically, the importance of MI is emphasized by the Health Belief Model(Rosentock, 1974) and in a framework of consumer health literacy (Friedman & Tan-ner, 2007) in which mass media coverage of health is considered a cue to action thatcan initiate individuals’ readiness to engage in preventive health behaviors. Havingaccess to accurate, reliable, and timely disaster-related MI (e.g., shelter location, eva-cuation map, disaster organization’s contact information) as cues to action or withinlocal media reports that serve as cues to action could increase people’s risk percep-tions and competence or self-efficacy they need to overcome the pending threatand take the appropriate protective actions.

Disaster Communication on the Internet 743

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Hoffman (2006) examined MI in online and print newspapers in the context ofpolitical news and found that online newspapers did not have significantly more MIthan their print counterparts. Mobilizing information also has been examined in thestudy of chronic disease information in print media (Friedman & Hoffman-Goetz,2003; Hoffman-Goetz et al., 2003; MacDonald & Hoffman-Goetz, 2002) and on theInternet (Friedman, Hoffman-Goetz, & Arocha, 2006; Friedman & Kao, 2008).

Lemert identified three types of MI (Lemert, 1981): locational, informationabout the time, place, or both of a particular activity; identificational, names andcontact information relevant to the news story; and tactical, the explicit and implicitinstructions for certain behaviors. Hoffman expanded the definition of MI to includenew media resources (Hoffman, 2006). Hoffman defines interactive MI, or ‘‘MI onthe web,’’ as specific contact information (e.g., hyperlinks) that leads a consumer toadditional information on another website. Her research findings revealed that iden-tificational MI is more prevalent in online news stories than other forms of MI.

This study is the first to examine public health emergency content and MI onlocal television news websites. While previous studies have focused on a broaderutilization of MI, this research explored MI of particular relevance to emergencyand disaster preparedness. Therefore, the overall objectives of this study are: (1)to assess the content of public health emergency information on local TVnews websites, and (2) evaluate these news stories for the presence and type (e.g.,locational, identificational, tactical, or all of these) of MI.

Previous research suggests that journalists pay special attention to events that arenearby, geographically bounded, and of interest to their local audience (Kitzinger,1999; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996). In the case of disaster-related information, it couldbe assumed that regions of the country more susceptible to specific public healthemergencies (e.g., hurricanes in the Southeast or earthquakes on the West Coast)would have more news coverage and MI. Thus, an additional study aim was toexamine online public health emergency information by U.S. geographic region.

Methods

Sampling Procedure

Researchers constructed a sample frame of local television news websites, stratifiedby Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regions and television desig-nated market area (DMA; see Tanner, Friedman, Barr, & Koskan, 2008, for emer-gency website analysis by media market size). The process began by identifying 10regions of the United States as defined by FEMA. Each of the 10 regions, whichare grouped geographically, contain between four and eight states (http://www.fema.gov/about/contact/regions.shtm). Within each FEMA region, five large, fivemedium, and five small market television markets (based on Nielsen-defined DMAs:1–50, 51–100, and 101–210, respectively) were selected randomly to be included inthe analysis. Although the goal of the selection process was for 150 separate mediamarkets to be represented in the sample (e.g., 5 large marketsþ 5 mediummarketsþ 5 small markets� 10 regions¼ 150 total markets), some regions did nothave 5 such markets in each category (e.g., Region 1, New England, had 3 large,2 medium, and 3 small markets, for a total of 8 markets selected).

Once these markets were identified, individual television stations (NBC, ABC,CBS, and FOX affiliates) within each market were chosen using a recent National

744 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Association of Television Program Executives (NATPE) Guide to North AmericanMedia (NAPTE, 2004). Only network affiliates were included because these stationsare more likely to produce local news than are nonaffiliated stations. The finalsample frame consisted of 119 local television stations or, more specifically, 119 localTV news websites from which to collect data for the content analysis.

Regarding data collection from these sites, the researchers randomly selected aweekday in October 2007 on which to collect data on public health emergency con-tent. Riffe and colleagues (1998) have discussed the difficulty of sampling Internetcontent, and sampling stratification in content analyses of online news varies (Bucy,2004; Hoffman, 2006; Lim, 2006; Schwalbe, 2006). For this study, the authors took asimilar methodological approach to Web-based studies of broadcast televisionstations’ websites (Chan-Olmsted & Park, 2000; Friedman & Tanner, 2007; Tanneret al., 2008) and of health organization websites (Friedman, Hoffman-Goetz, &Arocha, 2004; Friedman et al., 2006).

For the purposes of this study, a ‘‘public health emergency’’ story is that whichcontains public health information on agents, diseases, and other threats as broadlydefined by the CDC. These emergencies are divided into six categories: bioterrorismemergencies, chemical emergencies, radiation emergencies, mass casualties, naturaldisasters and severe weather, and recent outbreaks and incidents (CDC, 2008).

In an effort to conduct a comprehensive search of public health emergency infor-mation, authors searched for ‘‘top’’ stories on the home page (defined as featurednews stories located at the very top of the home page) that focused on some aspectof a public health emergency. A maximum of three ‘‘top’’ stories, if available, thenwere selected for analysis. In order to find additional public health emergency infor-mation or stories located on other areas of a television station’s website, authorsused the internal ‘‘search’’ feature located on the site and typed in the words ‘‘emer-gency preparedness.’’ By using the internal search engine to locate stories, authorswere able to access a wide range of public health emergency content posted over sev-eral months. The first three stories that were listed in the search pertaining to publichealth emergencies were selected for analysis.

A total of six public health emergency stories per website potentially couldbe selected for analysis, although some websites had little, or no, relevant content.A total sample of 293 stories were coded and analyzed.

Coding Categories

Previous content analyses (Friedman & Hoffman-Goetz, 2003; Friedman et al.,2006; Hoffman-Goetz et al., 2003; Friedman & Tanner, 2007; Tanner et al.,2008) have examined online health news or general online health information. Thisresearch used coding categories from these studies to structure the list of codingvariables. Variables coded included media market size, story date, authorship(e.g., wire service, syndicated service, freelancer, staff reporter, or government=nonprofit) and web section (top story on home page vs. located through internalsearch engine).

The stories also were coded for region; however, for the purpose of data ana-lyses, the authors collapsed the 10 FEMA regions into five regions, grouped geo-graphically: Northeast (including states from Maine to New Jersey), Southeast(including states from Pennsylvania to Florida and west to the Mississippi River),Midwest (including the Great Lake and plains states, as well as the Rocky mountain

Disaster Communication on the Internet 745

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

region), Southwest (Texas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Arkansas), andWest Coast (Washington to California, including Alaska and Hawaii).

Regarding the specific news content of the stories, variables included newsstory type (breaking news [immediate release of important public health emer-gency], explanatory [informational or educational information concerning publichealth emergency], anecdotal [personal story related to a public health emergency],event-based [e.g., fundraiser for disaster victims or blood drive], promotional[story that includes a commercial element], emergency preparedness training [e.g.,school shooting drill for first responders]); disaster type (natural or man-made);type of emergency (chemical=biological, health pandemic, infrastructure failure,earthquake, fire=wildfire, flood, weather-related disasters (e.g., hurricane=tropicalstorm, tornado, winter storm, extreme cold=heat, etc.), terrorism or other human-caused violence, nuclear=radiation or multiple disasters; focus of the disaster infor-mation (preparedness, response, or recovery); and public health focus (healthaspects, environmental concerns, infrastructure, evacuation information, or socialsupport).

Regarding the analysis of MI within the stories, coding categories were adaptedfrom two previous studies of MI (Hoffman, 2006; Lemert, 1981). Mobilizing infor-mation was divided into three subtypes: locational, identificational, and tactical.Operationally defined, locational MI provides information about the time, place,or both of a particular activity (e.g., where to go to receive a free weather radio);identificational MI provides names and contact information relevant to the newsstory (e.g., a phone number for a shelter); and tactical MI is the explicit and implicitinstructions for certain behaviors (e.g., informing hurricane evacuees to update theirtetanus vaccination before returning to the disaster area).

Hoffman’s ‘‘interactive MI’’ also was analyzed. Interactive MI was defined asspecific contact information (e-mail address or hyperlink) that leads a consumerto additional information on another website. Additionally, pertinent station andgeneral website information was recorded.

The authors conducted the coding of story type and focus of information asfollows: if the majority (75%) of sentences, paragraphs, or both were about onetopic, the article was coded as that particular story type=focus; if an equal numberof sentences, paragraphs, or both were about multiple topics, the article was codedas having multiple story types, public health emergency foci, or both, depending onthe variable. This coding scheme has been used in previous analyses of news content(Friedman, et al., 2006; Friedman & Kao, 2008; Friedman & Tanner, 2007; Tanneret al., 2008).

Data Analysis

Market home pages, health pages, and health stories were coded independently bytwo researchers to ensure consistency. Data were analyzed using SPSS 16.0. Descrip-tive statistics and frequencies were generated and chi-square analyses conducted onall categorical-level data. Inter-rater reliability for coding was calculated for 10%(n¼ 29) of web stories. Two coders achieved Cohen’s kappa scores ranging fromgood to excellent agreement (Landis & Koch, 1977; Rounder, Slater, &Domenech-Rodriguez, 2003) when analyzing health story-related variables (e.g.,MI variables: k¼ .634, 95% CI¼ .371, .897; disaster type: k¼ .760, 95% CI¼ .590,.930). Any areas of disagreement were resolved through discussion.

746 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Results

General Findings

Overall, 114 (96%) of the local television websites contained emergency-related con-tent and were included in the analysis. Two-hundred-ninety-three stories were col-lected from the sites. Fewer than one quarter (24%, n¼ 70) were featured on thehome page as a ‘‘top’’ news story, with the majority (76%, n¼ 223) found elsewhereon the website and located by using the site’s internal search engine.

Half of all stories were local (49%, n¼ 143), followed by national (33%, n¼ 96),regional (12%, n¼ 36), and international (3%, n¼ 10) stories (location of eightstories, or 3%, was unknown). Of the stories that listed an author, a significant num-ber (41%, n¼ 83) were written by a wire service, followed by syndicated service (28%,n¼ 58), staff reporter (27%, n¼ 57), and government institution (3%, n¼ 7;t(df¼ 204)¼ 28.365, p< .005). As for type of news story, 43% (n¼ 125) were informa-tional or explanatory in nature, followed by breaking news (26%, n¼ 75),event-driven stories (e.g., fundraiser for disaster victims; 15%, n¼ 43), and storiesthat focused on first responder training (8%, n¼ 24). Few stories were anecdotal(3%, n¼ 10), promotional=commercial (2%, n¼ 7), or coded as ‘‘other’’ (3%, n¼ 9).

Information About Disasters

Statistical significance was found regarding the type of disaster covered in the stories(t(df¼ 292)¼ 46.90, p< .005). Specifically, a majority (52%, n¼ 151) were on naturaldisasters; only 31% (n¼ 88) were on man-made disasters. Fewer than 20% (n¼ 54)of the stories included information on both natural and man-made disasters. Eachstory was also categorized by the specific type of emergency discussed, as definedby FEMA (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2008). Although many stories(n¼ 70) gave general emergency information for multiple disasters, the two most fre-quently discussed stand-alone topics were hurricane=tropical storms (n¼ 38) andhealth pandemics such as Avian influenza (n¼ 36). Other topics discussed includedterrorism (n¼ 19), infrastructure failure (n¼ 19), fire (n¼ 16), chemical=biologicalagents (n¼ 12), and earthquakes (n¼ 9). Few public health emergency storiesfocused on topics such as flooding (n¼ 5), nuclear=radiation emergencies (n¼ 4),tornado=tsunami (n¼ 2), or winter storms (n¼ 2).

The specific focus of the stories also was coded. A significant number of stories(52%, n¼ 151) focused on individual or community health outcomes or consequences(t(df¼ 292)¼ 26.203, p< .005), followed by infrastructure (e.g., structural damage orfailure; 23%, n¼ 66), and social support (12%, n¼ 37). Fewer stories focused onenvironmental issues (7%, n¼ 22) and evacuation information (6%, n¼ 17).

Mobilizing Information

Mobilizing information was present in fewer than half of the stories. Of the 293web stories examined, only 44% (n¼ 127) provided MI (locational, identificational,tactical, or interactive). It is important to note that stories could contain more thanone type of MI; therefore, the total number of stories containing MI (n¼ 127) is lessthan the total number of times that locational, tactical, and identificational MI wereidentified (n¼ 148). Concerning the type of MI provided, identificational MI was

Disaster Communication on the Internet 747

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

significantly more likely to be present (40%, n¼ 59), followed by tactical (36%,n¼ 53) and locational (24%, n¼ 36; t(df¼ 147)¼ 33.434, p< .005). Of the stories con-taining MI, fewer than one quarter of those MI (24%, n¼ 69) were interactive, mean-ing a web link or e-mail address was provided for website visitors. When any type ofMI was present, it was significantly more likely to be placed beside the web story(37%, n¼ 48), and within the conclusion (32%, n¼ 42), or body (26%, n¼ 34;t(df¼ 129)¼ 49.262, p< .005). Few stories had MI located in the introduction of thestory (3%, n¼ 5 and 1%, n¼ 1, respectively).

Regarding the focus of the article, those concerning health consequences (63.0%,n¼ 80) were significantly more likely to contain MI (v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 16:166, p< 0.005).Some stories with information on infrastructure (12.6%, n¼ 16) and social supportnetworks (11.8%, n¼ 15) also had MI. Articles dealing with health consequencesof a disaster (63.8%, n¼ 44) included significantly more interactive links comparedwith stories on other topics (v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 9:868, p< 0.05). Articles focusing on infra-structure concerns (14.5%, n¼ 10) and social support networks (14.5%, n¼ 10) wereequally likely to contain interactive links.

When examining MI by authorship and source of information, we found thatstories written by a wire service (32.5%, n¼ 37) or a syndicated news service(38.6%, n¼ 32) were more likely to include MI (v2ðdf¼3Þ ¼ 15:192, p< 0.005). Articlesby government or nonprofits were least likely (7.2%, n¼ 6) to contain MI. About22% of articles (n¼ 18) authored by staff reporters contained MI. There was no sig-nificant relationship between type of MI (locational, identificational, tactical) andauthorship. There was a marginally significant relationship (p¼ 0.055), however,between the presence of interactive MI and author, with more interactive MI in stor-ies by wire and syndicated services.

Online public health emergency information also was examined by geographicregion (e.g., Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, West Coast). Although pub-lic health emergency stories in all regions were equally likely to be ‘‘top’’ news storiesand contain content on man-made or natural disasters, significance was found forseveral variables, including type of emergency discussed, type of news story, and arti-cle focus when examined by region. As shown in Table 1, the Midwest had the mostpublic health emergency stories, followed by the Southeast and West Coast. Regard-ing the type of emergency covered, hurricanes=tropical storms were significantlymore likely to be discussed in the Southwest (37%) than the Midwest (5%), storieson health pandemic were more prevalent in the Midwest (20%) than the Northeastor West Coast (both 5%), and infrastructure failure stories were more likely to bediscussed on the West Coast (18%) than the Southwest (0%).

As seen in Table 2, there was a significant relationship between inclusion of MIand U.S. region (v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 9:681, p< .05). Both the West Coast (26%, n¼ 33) andMidwest (25%, n¼ 32) were more likely than other U.S. regions to post articles con-taining MI. Mobilizing information type also differed significantly by U.S. region.The Midwest region (36.1%, n¼ 13) was more likely than any other region to includelocational MI (v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 10:357, p< 0.05).

Both the Southeast and Southwest (23%, n¼ 12) were most likely to provide tac-tical MI (e.g., specific directions for what to do in case of a disaster); the West Coastcontained the least amount of this information (17%, n¼ 9; v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 10:566,p< 0.05). There was no significant relationship between region and inclusion of iden-tificational MI. There was, however, a significant relationship between region andpresence of interactive MI (v2ðdf¼4Þ ¼ 17:101, p< 0.005). The West Coast was most

748 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Table

1.Typeofem

ergency

topicscovered,categorizedbygeographic

region�

Typeofem

ergency

Northeast

(n¼43)

Southeast

(n¼62)

Midwest

(n¼85)

Southwest

(n¼41)

WestCoast

(n¼62)

Chem

ical=biological(n

¼12)

7.0%

(3)

1.6%

(1)

8.2%

(7)

0(0)

1.6%

(1)

Healthpandem

ic(n

¼36)

4.7%

(2)

12.9%

(8)

20.0%

(17)

14.6%

(6)

4.8%

(3)

Infrastructure

failure

(n¼19)

2.3%

(1)

1.6%

(1)

7.1%

(6)

0(0)

17.7%

(11)

Earthquake(n

¼9)

0(0)

1.6%

(1)

2.4%

(2)

0(0)

9.7%

(6)

Fire=wildfire=extrem

eheat(n

¼18)

7.0%

(3)

4.8%

(3)

8.2%

(7)

0(0)

8.1%

(5)

Flood(n

¼5)

2.3%

(1)

0(0)

1.2%

(1)

7.3%

(3)

0(0)

Hurricane=tropicalstorm

(n¼40)

14.0%

(6)

12.9%

(8)

4.7%

(4)

36.6%

(15)

11.3%

(7)

Terrorism

=violence

(n¼19)

4.7%

(2)

9.7%

(6)

5.9%

(5)

9.8%

(4)

3.2%

(2)

Nuclear=radiation(n

¼4)

4.7%

(2)

3.2%

(2)

0(0)

0(0)

6.5%

(4)

Multiple

disasters(n

¼70)

23.3%

(10)

30.6%

(19)

20.0%

(17)

24.4%

(10)

22.6%

(14)

Other

(n¼61)

30.2%

(13)

21.0%

(13)

22.4%

(19)

7.3%

(3)

21.0%

(13)

� %¼Number

ofstories

onparticularem

ergency

inregion=totalnumber

ofstories

inregion.

��v2 ðd

f¼4Þ¼

99:799,p<.0001.

749

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Table

2.Typeofmobilizinginform

ationbygeographic

region�

TypeofMI

NE

SE

MW

SW

WC

Significance

Overall(n

¼127)

11.8%

(15)

18.1%

(23)

25.2%

(32)

18.9%

(24)

26.0%

(33)

v2 ðdf¼

4Þ¼

9:681,p¼.046

Locational(n

¼36)

16.7%

(6)

11.1%

(4)

36.1%

(13)

25.0%

(9)

11.1%

(4)

v2 ðdf¼

4Þ¼

10:357,p¼.035

Identificational(n

¼58)

10.3%

(6)

17.2%

(10)

34.5%

(20)

24.1%

(14)

13.8%

(8)

NS(p

¼.068)

Tactical(n

¼52)

19.2%

(10)

23.1%

(12)

17.3%

(9)

23.1%

(12)

17.3%

(9)

v2 ðdf¼

4Þ¼

10:566,p¼.032

Interactive(n

¼69)

8.7%

(6)

18.8%

(13)

17.4%

(12)

20.3%

(14)

34.8%

(24)

v2 ðdf¼

4Þ¼

17:101,p¼0.022

%¼Number

ofstories

inregionwithMItype=totalnumber

stories

withMItype.

750

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

likely to contain interactive links (35%, n¼ 24); the Northeast was least likely to haveinteractive MI (9%, n¼ 6).

Discussion

Mobilizing information was present in less than half of the online news stories (44%),indicating that much of the disaster-related information provided by local televisionnews organizations did not provide the necessary cues to facilitate behavioral changeas pertaining to emergencies. When MI was provided, identificational MI was signif-icantly more likely to be present than either locational or tactical MI. Although iden-tificational MI (e.g., telephone number for evacuation assistance) is crucial during apublic health crisis, it is important to note that, in the case of identificational MI, it isstill up to the individual to be proactive and to make contact with the relevant indi-vidual or disaster agency. Instead of simply providing contact information, the pre-sentation of tactical MI, or specific instructions about how to perform an action aswell as information as to why that action is important (e.g., listing specific water con-servation measures for homeowners during a water shortage and explaining whywater conservation is important), could perhaps initiate an individual’s readinessto take part in some form of emergency preparedness and improve their self-efficacyfor engaging in the recommended protective actions. Furthermore, inclusion of loca-tional MI (e.g., details about evacuation routes or public shelters) also will be impor-tant as people prepare for an unavoidable disaster.

News media have the opportunity to provide audiences with specific ‘‘how-to’’and ‘‘where-to’’ information in a disaster situation. When this information is pro-vided in an online setting, media practitioners have a unique chance to use the inter-active nature of the Internet to direct users to detailed behavioral information.Unfortunately, few sites posted stories with interactive MI. In fact, less thanone-quarter (24%) of the stories provided an e-mail address or hyperlink that couldlead a consumer to additional information on another web page, a finding that con-curs with previous research suggesting that interactivity and personalization are notreadily observed on local television or disaster relief websites (Chan-Olmsted & Park,2000; Paul, 2001). Perhaps online news staffers are reluctant to provide this type ofinformation because they are afraid it will drive people away from their site.Emergency warnings and threats of disasters, however, are not enough to preparethe public to respond to an emergency (Guion et al., 2007). Therefore, this lack ofinteractive MI is a missed opportunity to instruct the public on what action to takeduring a crisis.

Stories from wire and syndicated services contained a higher proportion of inter-active MI. News organizations generally use wire and syndicated service content inan effort to provide more depth and breadth to their news coverage, in effect, provid-ing national or regional or both news stories that a local television station lacks theresources to cover. As these news pieces are geared toward a national audience, thearticles themselves may not contain as much specific local information regardingpublic health emergencies in the region where the television station is located.Because interactive learning and targeting information to specific population groupsand geographic regions may influence people to act on the information presented(Atkinson & Gold, 2002; Kreuter, Strecher, & Glassman, 1999; Lipp, 2002;Roubidoux, 2005), local disaster coverage is critical for preparedness, response,and recovery for individuals and communities.

Disaster Communication on the Internet 751

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Story content andMI also differed by U.S. region. More public health emergencystories were posted on television news websites located in the Midwest, followed bythe Southwest and West Coast. The topics covered most frequently in these regionswere hurricanes=tropical storms (Southwest), infrastructure failure (West Coast),and health pandemics (Midwest). Because data collection was conducted during hur-ricane season, it is not surprising that stations located in this area of the country(Southwest and Southeast) were more likely to focus on hurricane-related news. Thisfinding also could be explained by the agenda-setting theory (McCombs & Shaw,1972). Local disaster risks and local disaster history set the media’s agenda for eachof the regions studied. For example, recent natural disasters such as HurricanesKatrina and Rita set the agenda for current media reporting of disasters in theSouthwest and Southeast. Kirkpatrick and Bryan (2007) stated that lack of effectiveand timely crisis communication on behalf of the government as well as the mediapartly was to blame for the tragedies that ensued during Hurricane Katrina. Localtelevision news sites in these regions now seem focused on ensuring inclusion ofpublic health emergency resources for their audience. Thus, the media’s agenda-setting function may be a useful tool for the communication of critical MI.

Regarding MI, websites in the Midwest and West Coast more often included MIcompared with sites in other markets. Mobilizing information (MI), however, wasprovided in only one-quarter of stories in these regions. While significant differenceswere found in type of MI by region, overall, presence of MI was extremely low acrossall regions of the country.

This study has limitations. First, website content is not static; therefore,sampling online resources can be difficult. The intent, however, was not to generalizethese results across news or other websites. Second, due to time and resourceconstraints, researchers collected data from 119 markets on only one day. Althoughcurrent research on sampling of online news shows that two constructed weeks ofcontent are needed to accurately represent online news (Hester & Dougall, 2007),since internal search engines also were used to locate public health emergency storieson each website, the authors feel confident that data collected represent a wide rangeof public health emergency content posted over several months. Finally, the authorsrecognize that the web is not robust and may not function in disaster zones. Further-more, Internet information during a disaster may be inaccurate or incomplete(Laituri & Kodrich, 2008). With the increasing prevalence of mobile devices thatcan access the Internet in the absence of electricity (Rodriguez, Diaz, & Donner,2005), however, it is important to examine the content of local television and otherdisaster-related websites to ensure that people with access to the Internet arereceiving appropriate disaster resources.

Future disaster communication research is needed to examine if and how Inter-net resources, in particular, local television new websites, influence the public to pre-pare for and act during a disaster situation. In the wake of any disaster, it isimportant that media messages provide citizens with clear and consistent informa-tion that mobilizes them to make decisions about their actions. Findings from arecent analysis of 50 public health emergency organizations’ websites found thatinformation was written at a difficult reading level (Friedman, Tanwar, & Richter,2008). While the current study involved an in-depth content analysis, research isneeded to assess the readability of emergency content on television news websitesand individuals’ comprehension and opinions of story content and informationsources. Furthermore, future research should be directed to the use of the Internet

752 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

by individuals with limited access to computer technology. These individuals oftenare underserved by the health care system and experience the greatest health-relateddisparities (Viswanath & Kreuter, 2007). Attention needs to be paid to the digitaldivide and people’s attitudes, knowledge, and use of technology in the case of adisaster. Future research also should examine how online MI varies from othercommunication channels, such as television and print media.

Although we found that news about public health emergencies is present onmany local television websites, it can be difficult to locate (e.g., not on the homepage) and often lacks MI, which can cue an individual to take action in the eventof a crisis. This absence of critical motivating information could perhaps beexplained by Wenger and Quarantelli’s (1989) research showing that most mediaoutlets do not have plans, nor do they provide staff training, for covering majorpublic health emergencies. Disaster=emergency communication training for localtelevision news reporters and health information officers, stressing the role andimportance of MI, especially tactical and locational information, will be requiredto improve disaster risk and preparedness communication and postemergencyoutcomes of individuals, communities, and society. While disasters do not occurin a predictable manner, improving disaster communication will help to ensure thatpeople receive critical information from emergency managers, government officials,and the mass media that will mobilize them toward safety.

References

Atkinson, N., & Gold, R. (2002). The promise and challenge of eHealth interventions.American Journal of Health Behavior, 26, 494–503.

Bucy, E. (2004). Second generation Net news: Interactivity and information accessibility in theonline environment. International Journal of Media Management, 6(1&2), 102–113.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2006). Advancing the nation’s health: Aguide to public health research needs, 2006–2015. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). Emergency preparedness and response.Retrieved February 26, 2008, from http://www.bt.cdc.gov

Chan-Olmsted, S. M., & Park, J. S. (2000). From on-air to online world: Examining the con-tent and structures of broadcast TV stations’ websites. Journalism and Mass Communica-tion Quarterly, 77(2), 321–339.

Damond, M., Winters, A., Jack, L., Cropper, D., Londono, M., & Stoddard, R. (2003).Mobilizing communities: Local applications of the Diabetes Today National TrainingCenter Project. Journal of Public Health Management Practice, November, S15–S18.

Friedman, D. B., & Hoffman-Goetz, L. (2003). Cancer coverage in North Americanpublications targeting seniors. Journal of Cancer Education, 18, 43–47.

Friedman, D. B., Hoffman-Goetz, L., & Arocha, J. F. (2004). Readability of cancerinformation on the Internet. Journal of Cancer Education, 19(2), 117–122.

Friedman, D. B., Hoffman-Goetz, L., & Arocha, J. F. (2006). Health literacy and the WorldWide Web: Comparing the readability of leading incident cancers on the Internet.Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine, 31(2), 67–87.

Friedman, D. B., & Kao, E. K. (2008). A comprehensive assessment of the difficulty leveland cultural sensitivity of online cancer prevention resources for older minority men.Preventing Chronic Disease, 5(1), Epub.

Friedman, D. B., & Tanner, A. (2007). Reading difficulty level of medical resources ontelevision websites: Recommendations for a social practices approach to consumer healthliteracy. Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet, 11(4), 43–60.

Disaster Communication on the Internet 753

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Friedman, D. B., Tanwar, M., & Richter, J. V. E. (2008). An evaluation of online disaster andemergency preparedness resources. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 23(5), 438–446.

Guion, D. T., Scammon, D. L., & Borders, A. L. (2007). Weathering the storm: A social mar-keting perspective on disaster preparedness and response with lessons from HurricaneKatrina. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 26(1), 20–32.

Hester, J. B., & Dougall, E. (2007). The efficiency of constructed week sampling for contentanalysis of online news. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 811–824.

Hoffman-Goetz, L., Shannon, C., & Clarke, J. N. (2003). Chronic disease coverage inCanadian Aboriginal newspapers. Journal of Health Communication, 8(5), 475–488.

Hoffman, L. H. (2006). Is Internet content different after all? A content analysis of mobilizinginformation in online and print newspapers. Journalism and Mass CommunicationQuarterly, 83(1), 58–76.

Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2008). Research priorities in emergency preparedness andresponse for public health systems: A letter report. Washington, DC: The NationalAcademies Press.

Johannigman, J. A. (2005). Disaster preparedness: It’s all about me. Critical Care Medicine,33(1 Suppl.), S22–S28.

Kirkpatrick, D. V., & Bryan, M. (2007). Hurricane emergency planning by home healthproviders serving the poor. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 18(2),299–314.

Kittler, A. F., Hobbs, J., Volk, L. A., Kreps, G. L., & Bates, D. W. (2004). The Internet as avehicle to communicate health information during a public health emergency: A surveyanalysis involving the anthrax scare of 2001. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(1),e8.

Kitzinger, J. (1999). Researching risk and the media. Health, Risk and Society, 1, 55–69.Kreuter, M. W., Strecher, V. J., & Glassman, B. (1999). One size does not fit all: The case for

tailoring print materials. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 276–283.Laituri, M., & Kodrich, K. (2008). On line disaster response community: People as sensors of

high magnitude disasters using Internet GIS. Sensors, 8, 3037–3055.Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical

data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.Lemert, J. B. (1981). Does mass communication change public opinion after all?: A new approach

to effects analysis. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Lim, J. (2006). A cross-legged analysis of agenda setting among online news media. Journalism

and Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(Summer), 298–312.Lipp, E. R. (2002). Web resources for patients with prostate cancer: A starting point. Seminars

in Urologic Oncology, 20(1), 32–38.MacDonald, M. M., & Hoffman-Goetz, L. (2002). A retrospective study of the accuracy of

cancer information in Ontario daily newspapers. Canadian Journal of Public Health,93(2), 142–145.

McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of the mass media. PublicOpinion Quarterly, 36, 176–185.

Mileti, D. S., & Peek, L. (2000). The social psychology of public response to warnings of anuclear power plant accident. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 75(2–3), 181–194.

National Association of Television Program Executives (NATPE). (2004). National Associa-tion of Television Program Executives guide to North American media. Los Angeles,CA: Author.

Palen, L., & Liu, S. B. (2007). Citizen communications in crisis: Anticipating a future ofICT-supported public participation. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Humanfactors in computing systems, 727–736.

Papper, B. (2005). Web savvy survey: Station websites are growing, but are the website staffs.Communicator, May, 36–38.

Papper, R. (2007). Net worth. RTNDA Communicator, May.

754 A. Tanner et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Paul, M. J. (2001). Interactive disaster communication on the Internet: A content analysis ofsixty-four disaster relief home pages. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly,78(4), 739–753.

Perry, R. W., & Lindell, M. K. (2003). Preparedness for emergency response: Guidelines forthe emergency planning process. Disasters, 27(4), 336–350.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2006). Biennial news consumption survey[Electronic Version]. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=282

Reynolds, B., & Seeger, M. W. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as anintegrative model. Journal of Health Communication, 10(1), 43–55.

Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (1998). Analyzing media messages (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Rodriguez, H., Diaz, W., & Donner, W. (2005). Pre- and post-DCAS behavior and response.Amherst: University of Massachusetts.

Rosentock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins and the health belief model. In M. H. Becker (Ed.),The health belief model and personal health behavior (pp. 1–8). Thorofare, NJ: Charles B.Slack.

Roubidoux, M. A. (2005). Breast cancer detective: A computer game to teach breast cancerscreening to Native American patients. Journal of Cancer Education, 20(1 Suppl.), 87–91.

Rounder, D., Slater, M., & Domenech-Rodriguez, M. (2003). Adolescent evaluation ofgender role and sexual imagery in television advertisements. Journal of Broadcastingand Electronic Media, 47(3), 435–454.

Samarajiva, R. (2005). Mobilizing information and communications technologies for effectivedisaster warning: Lessons from the 2004 tsunami. New Media & Society, 7(6), 731–747.

Schwalbe, C. (2006). Remembering our shared past: Visually framing the Iraq war on U.S.news websites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, article 14.

Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on massmedia content. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Smith, L. K., Tanner, A., & Duhe, S. F. (2007). Convergence concerns in local television:Conflicting views from the Newsroom. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media,51(4), 555–574.

The State of News Media: An annual report on American journalism. (2006). RetrievedDecember 1, 2007 from http://www.journalism.org

Tanner, A., Friedman, D., Barr, D., & Koskan, A. (2008). Preparing for disaster: An exam-ination of public health emergency information on local TV websites. Electronic News,2(4), 218–234.

Tanner, A., & Smith, L. (2007). Training tomorrow’s journalists: In the trenches with mediaconvergence. Electronic News, 1(3), 211–225.

Troy, D. A., Carson, A., Vanderbeek, J., & Hutton, A. (2008). Enhancing community-baseddisaster preparedness with information technology. Disasters, 32(1), 149–165.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMAdisaster information. Retrieved March 30, 2008 from http://www.fema.gov/hazard/index.shtm

Vanderford, M. L. (2007). Emergency communication challenges in response to HurricaneKatrina: Lessons from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Journal ofApplied Communication Research, 35(1), 9–25.

Viswanath, K., & Kreuter, M. W. (2007). Health disparities, communication inequalities, andeHealth. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(5 Suppl.), S131–133.

Wenger, D. E., & Quarantelli, E. L. (1989). Local mass media operations, problems andproducts in disasters. Report series No. 19. Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center.

Zhang, D., Zhou, L., & Nunamaker, J. (2002). A knowledge management framework for thesupport of decision making in humanitarian assistance=disaster relief. Knowledge andInformation Systems, 4(3), 370–385.

Disaster Communication on the Internet 755

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uth

Flor

ida]

at 1

1:18

25

Nov

embe

r 20

14