Florida State University

The Digital Race to Save Lives:

Preventing Florida Division of Emergency Management Mistakes

in Social Media Management

An Action Report Submitted to

The Faculty of the College of Social Sciences and Public Policy

In Candidacy for the Degree of

Master of Public Administration

Reubin O’D. Askew School

of

Public Administration and Policy

Jennifer Grisales

April 30, 2016

Tallahassee, Florida

2

From: Jennifer Grisales, Digital Engagement Coordinator

To: Julie Roberts, External Affairs Director

RE: The Digital Race to Save Lives: Preventing Florida Division of Emergency

Management Mistakes in Social Media Management

Date: April 29, 2016

Dear Ms. Roberts:

I am proud to present you with The Digital Race to Save Lives: Preventing Florida

Division of Emergency Management Mistakes in Social Media Management. This report

is the fruition of research from August 2015 to April 2016. Crisis communication has

evolved extensively and now includes social media. It is vital that this form of

communication is taken seriously during a cascading event. I am proposing a

standardized design for training that will enable officials to prevent mistakes that might

lead to loss of life.

After examining several policies and speaking to various subject matter experts, the

policy proposal is the most logical option to follow and will get the least push-back from

county officials and partners. It will be able to provide basic social media training to

everyone and will enable the social media personnel from all agencies to develop a

community from which they can continue to learn.

This proposal is recommended because it fared the best when measured against three

criteria: plan conformity, efficiency, and staff & volunteer knowledge. The option scored

high on conformity because having a standardized plan for social media would decrease

the vast differences between the agencies and reduce the unknown in social media

disaster operations. Efficiency would also greatly increase if personnel all had the same

basic level of training, because they would be able to function better in a disaster and

might also be able to assist a neighboring county. Staff and volunteer knowledge would

benefit the best from this policy proposal and it is also the least complicated one to

accomplish therefore potentially increasing the participation from everyone.

3

The proposal should be implemented as soon as possible due to the volatility of this field

of work. As I was writing, there was a focusing event in Ecuador and I was able to view

the exchanges in Spanish between citizens/ concerned family and the government. If this

is not implemented and a disaster occurs, many of Florida’s officials will not be prepared

and mistakes are a very likely possibility. It is critical that every county participate in this

training and takes heed of the importance of social media in emergency management.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Grisales

Digital Engagement Coordinator

Florida Division of Emergency Management

4

Table of Contents

Letter of Transmittal

List of Tables

Executive Summary

I. Problem Statement

II. Background & Literature Review

Background

Literature Review

III. Methodology & Evaluation Criteria

Methodology

Evaluative Criteria

IV. Management Policy Options

Policy Option 1: Standardized Training

Policy Option 2: Emergency Management Mobile Apps

Policy Option 3: Website for Florida’s Emergency Management Social Media

V. Conclusion

Ethics Statement

Implementation Plan

References

About the Author

5

List of Tables

1. Table 1: Summary of Policy Proposals Graded by Evaluative Criteria

6

Executive Summary

This report explores the potential policy options for standardizing social media

management. At this time, social media is being governed differently by nearly every

emergency management agency in Florida. This creates a chaotic environment and can

make it hard to get a unified message out if a catastrophic disaster were to occur. The

background and literature review sections shows the field of emergency management as

social media emerged and has steadily progressed. The themes of the literature review

are: methods that have worked in emergency management communication and continue

to be successful, the introduction of social media to emergency management, and the

failures and successes of this method of communication or agencies.

The methodology for this report includes evaluation of scholarly articles, existing

government policies or guidelines on social media administration, and semi-structured

interviews with emergency managers and social media subject-matter experts. The

evaluative criteria that the policies were measured against are plan conformity, efficiency,

and staff & volunteer knowledge. The policy options present three proposals that have the

potential of restructuring social media management, and making it a more efficient and

transparent method for delivering information during disasters. The proposals are (1),

standardized training (for social media personnel), (2) emergency management mobile

apps, and (3) the development of a website for Florida’s emergency management social

media.

The conclusion advocates for standardized training (policy 1), because it can

establish a set of standards for social media training and it will increase the ability for

personnel to work together and share ideas. This policy can be helpful in facilitating

7

successful and timely mutual aid agreements between agencies, as well as prevent

mistakes in social media management during disaster.

8

I. Problem Statement

Effective communication is one of the main tools that emergency management officials

have to use in order to be successful in their job. A severe event is only deemed as a disaster if

there has been a loss of life and significant devastation. In any field that is responsible for the

lives of others, this unfortunate situation is mainly caused by a breakdown in communication

(Houston, Hawthorne, Perreault, Park, Goldstein Hode, Halliwell, Turner McGowen, Davis,

Vaid, McElderry, and Griffith, 2015). If there is uncertainty and threat of danger, then there is a

higher demand for information (Houston et al., 2015). Mass media communication is constantly

improving and becoming more efficient and those aspects are increased with the use of social

media. Social media is a relatively new concept to emergency management agencies, and while

this new form of communication has advantages in the way that information is distributed and

collected from the public, there are unanswered questions.

These unknowns can lead to mistakes that might endanger lives since social media

continues to be used as a way for agencies to distribute vital disaster information to the public.

The main problem that agencies face is that there is not a comprehensive guide on how to use

social media in emergency management. Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA)

Senior Manager of Digital Engagement, Shayne Adamski, stated that FEMA did have some

general rules for social media, but not a comprehensive guide (personal communication,

November 30, 2015). The role of social media is expanding in public safety agencies at the local,

state, and federal level. It allows officials ways of quickly disseminating information that reach

larger audiences than any other communication methods. Social media also acts as a direct tool

of contact for citizens that may need answers in the event of an emergency. While social media

has been an innovative tool for public safety agencies, there can be several security risks and

9

policy problems if public officials and agencies do not use it properly. Some of these risks

include the dissemination of rumors (and the difficulty in controlling that through social media

forums), violations of privacy, potential for undermining authority of government agencies, and

promotion of terrorist acts (Alexander, 2014).

As social media management starts to command attention as a way to reach the public, it

is necessary to analyze how it will be used during a disaster to prevent previous mistakes and

maximize efficiency. Social media can be used by public service agencies as a listening function

and citizens can contact agencies directly with ease (Alexander, 2014). It can also be

systematically used as a tool to conduct emergency communications and issue warnings during a

disaster (Lindsay, 2011). However, it is vital to address and find ways to prevent previous and

potential problems as this form of communication can easily lead to confusion, disruption, and

thwarted response efforts if not used properly (Lindsay, 2011).

The purpose of this Action Report is to examine alternative solutions to mitigate or

prevent social media management mistakes in disasters by public organizations. This report

examines the navigation of social media of emergency management professionals by: (1)

reviewing agency successes and failures in social media communications and its literature, (2)

explaining the methodology and evaluative criteria that will be analyzed in the report, (3)

proposing three policy solutions, and (4) recommending the best policy solution of the three

proposed in the conclusion.

II. Background & Literature Review

Background

10

This section examines: the options and challenges emergency managers had in getting

information to the public during disasters before the internet, the discovery of social media

success in disasters and its implementation in policy, and the ways that social media is being

used daily by emergency management organizations.

First, it is important to comprehend the magnitude of the advancement of public

communication in emergency management. Before the Internet existed and modern forms of

technology were available, emergency managers relied solely on the news media to get

information to the public. The media were seen as a nuisance to some professionals due to their

ability to overwhelm a scene and were a challenge for local emergency managers (Scanlon,

Alldred, Farrell, & Prawzick, 1985). Today, emergency management professionals establish

designated zones for the media and make sure that a disaster scene (if possible) is secure and the

media are in an area in which they cannot interfere with operations (National Incident

Management Systems, 2003).

However, even though emergency managers had to interact more with the media directly

before the Internet, that interaction is still respected and maintained for important press

conferences, press releases, and interviews. Public Information Officers (PIOs) have learned to

use mass media to their advantage, and although it is stressful to handle media requests, it is

beneficial to maintain good relationships (Scanlon et al., 1985). News agencies have similarities

to social media that make it difficult for emergency managers to get the correct information to

the public. Some of the concerns that coincide with news agencies and social media are potential

for violation of privacy, dissemination of rumors, and undermining the authority of the

emergency management professionals (Alexander, 2014). Emergency managers must overcome

those challenges because the media can also help spread pre-disaster education to the public, as

11

well raise donations, and even provide information on the magnitude of a disaster for officials

(Scanlon et al., 1985). It was and still is important to know how to interact with the media to

make sure the right messaging goes to the public. News sources have been blamed for not only

chaos at a disaster site, but also placing such high demands on emergency managers that it might

affect their response, create bias, and affect the reputation of the public agency (Scanlon et al.,

1985).

Second, as technology advanced at rapid rates and forms of communication became more

innovative, social media became one of the primary ways of receiving news and information. It

was up to emergency management officials to see how this new communication tool could be

used. When communication was strictly confined to being disseminated by mass media, it was a

message that was created by one entity, distributed to the entire population, and there was little

or no chance for public participation or contribution (Houston et al., 2015). Social media

changed this because it could not restrict information exchange during a disaster, and because of

that, it was adaptable by not needing to rely on news, which made it empowering to citizens

(Houston et al., 2015). Since social media is a two-way form of synchronous information, it

allows for both government agencies and the public to create and consume information at the

same time. This has made social media popular in emergencies because information was

distributed faster than it had ever been before (Lachlan, Spence, Lin, Najarian, & Del Greco,

2015). Social media sites rose in popularity in the early 2000s and a study commissioned by the

American Red Cross in 2009 found that their media sites were the 4th most popular source to

access emergency information (Lindsay, 2011).

Third, the increased notoriety in social media urged emergency management officials to

develop new tools that would use smart phone technology. In 2011 the Federal Communications

12

Commission (FCC) and FEMA initiated a commercial mobile alert system (CMAS) that targeted

alerts to citizens whom requested to receive emergency notifications (Lindsay, 2011). In 2009,

the U.S. Army used Twitter as a source to obtain up to date information on the Fort Hood

shootings, as well as several other agencies at various every level of government following a

similar protocol (Lindsay, 2011). Through the use of social media, the public is now connected

directly to government agencies and emergency officials without a middleman.

Credibility or misinformation can sometimes be a problem on social media and

unfortunately this can be used as a tool to perform and/or encourage either criminal or terrorist

activity (Lindsay, 2011). There are also limitations by relying on this technology. Smart phones

have limited battery power and agencies cannot guarantee that every citizen has one and can

receive emergency notifications (Lindsay, 2011). Social media can also undermine the authority

of official agencies with the possibility of fake accounts, which can be perceived as representing

the real organizations (Alexander, 2014).

Despite all of these challenges, the use of social media by emergency management

agencies seems unlikely to decline. This is due to an entire generation that has grown up

receiving information in this manner. Older generations have also adopted this form of

communication as a fast and easy way to stay informed. Officials use social media for several

different emergency communication methods. Agencies monitor public communications and

sentiments, appeal for donations, and conduct research to educate the public on emergency

preparedness through social media (Alexander, 2014).

In summary, the methods emergency managers use to communicate with the public have

changed drastically in a few decades. Even though relationships with the traditional news media

must be maintained to reach the entire population, there is a sense of empowerment that social

13

media has brought to the public and to the emergency management agencies. Advanced digital

engagement has given these agencies a guaranteed way to make sure that the correct information

is delivered. This form of communication has also given agencies the chance to become closer to

their communities because they have an open line of communication. If social media is used

correctly, it could inspire trust and propel disaster preparedness education.

Literature Review

The pertinent literature addresses three themes: (1) methods that have worked in

emergency management communication and continue to be successful, (2) the introduction of

social media to emergency management, (3) and the failures and successes of this method of

communication for agencies.

First, the literature explores the methods that have worked in emergency management

disaster communication and those that are still used and continue to be successful. Several

authors outline the use of news media as both an adversary and an ally during disaster situations

(Scanlon et al., 1985). They agree that emergency managers must follow proper protocol with

the media because disasters are often the result of a breakdown in communication (Houston et al.,

2015). The Florida Division of Emergency Management External Affairs Communications plan

introduces the protocol that should be followed for communication and gives an outline of the

rules and regulations that should be followed in order to prevent mistakes. The scholarly articles

highlight the ways that emergency managers can use the media to their advantage. They state

that even though it can be difficult to work with a journalist, the alternative could be worse

(Scanlon et al., 1985). Access to the media helps emergency managers with public education,

disaster preparedness goals, and providing life-saving information to the public (FDEM External

14

Affairs Communications Plan, 2015). At every stage of a disaster, communication is important

and research has shown that extreme events will develop in predictable and systematic ways

(Lachlan et al., 2015). Social media can help the advancement of disaster media coverage

because it offers a two-way forum for survivors and organizations to communicate directly

(Houston et al., 2015).

Second, the literature focuses on the introduction of social media to disaster response and

the world of emergency management. It discusses all social media is different from traditional

ways news organizations and emergency managers spoke to the public because now the public

can reply in real-time and that has its advantages and disadvantages (Lindsay, 2011). Due to

social media, emergency managers do not have to use media organizations to get a message out;

they can directly scan and send out information to the public at any stage of a disaster (Lindsay,

2011). Emergency management agencies at every level of government have active social media

accounts in which they try to spread disaster prevention and awareness (FDEM Social Media

Plan, 2014). The Florida Division of Emergency Management’s External Affairs section is in

charge of several social media accounts such as Twitter, Facebook, Wordpress, Instagram, Vine,

and Pinterest (FDEM Social Media Plan, 2014). Clear policies have not been established for the

use of social media. At this time emergency management agencies across the country do not

have one comprehensive standard for social media that is interoperable (Alexander, 2014). The

Florida Division of Emergency Management has established some rules as a foundation on how

to use social media as an emergency management organization and while some organizations

follow the same guidelines, everyone is learning on the job and can be vulnerable to mistakes

(Koon, 2014).

15

Third, the failures and successes of social media communication for emergency

management organizations are constantly being reviewed. More organizations are using social

media, as one of their major tools to reach the public. It has been vital for disasters that are

characterized by high levels of information and low levels of information availability (Porto de

Albuquerque, Herfort, Brenning, and Zipf, 2015). Authors that have contributed to the study of

social media use and its potential negative effects note its function mainly serves people under

55 and has some correlation with economic status and education (Alexander, 2014). Other forms

of traditional media have to be used along with social media, however social media must be used

because a large portion of the population receives their news from it (Center for Disaster Risk

Policy AAR, 2014).

Social media allows a more efficient way to exchange information during a disaster and

has helped both emergency managers and the public during emergencies (Alexander, 2014).

Failures in emergency management have also stemmed from its rapid ability to disseminate

information. There have been instances where more control from an emergency management or

law enforcement agency was needed during an event, and social media has either added to the

chaos or increased misinformation (FDEM AAR, 2014). The literature adds new ways to

safeguard and prevent mistakes from occurring in social media use by agencies; one of them is

embracing the technology to its fullest and providing emergency management employees with

training and exercises using social media (FDEM AAR, 2014). Another contribution was the

geographical approach of monitoring and studying social media use from the public (Porto de

Albuquerque et al., 2015). Georeferencing social media use is being studied to verify the validity

and the potential to improve situational awareness in disaster situations (Porto de Albuquerque et

al., 2015).

16

In summary, the literature details the three themes that have implications for encouraging

the growth in knowledge and usage of social media disaster communication. The themes present

a foundation for the evolution of including social media in public information for disaster

management. However, the literature does not provide a cohesive message and a set list of

guidelines for the use of social media in emergency management. The literature that included

several authors and had peer reviewed studies did not include the experience and knowledge of

emergency management professionals. This report will build upon that literature by

incorporating the social media experiences of emergency management professionals at the local,

state, and federal government as well as the private sector. The goal of this report is to develop a

comprehensive guide on social media use in disasters from academic research and professional

experience.

III. Methodology & Evaluation Criteria

Methodology

Information for this report was collected using the following methods:

A literature review between the years 1980 and 2015, was conducted using these

databases: Academic Search Complete, JSTOR, and Lexis Nexis Academic. Existing

government policies and guidelines on social media and external affairs were also used.

Semi-structured interviews with external stakeholders (n=14) with Florida Division of

Emergency Management employees Julie Roberts, Beverly Byerts, Chris Eliadas,

Anonymous FDEM employee, Richard Butgereit, Bridgette Hallum, Andrew Sussman,

and Jessica Geib. Center for Disaster Risk Policy’s David Merrick, Walton County

Emergency Management’s Jeffrey Goldberg, Sarasota County Emergency Management’s

Edward McCrane, Mary Ann Adams from OnStar, Gubernatorial Fellow Rachel Smith,

and Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Senior Manager of Digital

Engagement, Shayne Adamski.

The literature will include articles that will incorporate: years 1980 through 2015 were

chosen as the foundation for the search because they were almost equal time apart in the after

17

and before the year 2000. The year 2000 was chosen as a middle point in the research because it

was the last year before the events of September 11th, 2001 changed national policies, including

the eventual restructuring of FEMA under the Department of Homeland Security. Also all of the

articles gathered from 1980 through 2000 still have relevant practices that are being used,

because a lot of the leadership was employed during the 1980s and 1990s and were trained under

those methods. Government policies collected for this paper illustrated the level of knowledge

and administration agencies currently had in social media management.

Interviews with professionals will increase the validity of the research by enriching its

content with practical experience. It will also allow for the research to explore the real challenges

that are faced in social media usage because the interviewees are from diverse professional

backgrounds. Valuable knowledge will be gained from external stakeholders from the private

sector and local emergency management agencies. Due to time constraints and logistical

challenges the sample size of the people interviewed is smaller than it should be, however, the

issues that were discussed apply to emergency management social media as a whole and this

sample size is an adequate starting point that will generate constructive discussion and thought.

Evaluative Criteria

Three criteria will be used to evaluate policy options: plan conformity, efficiency, and

staff and volunteer knowledge.

The plan conformity is comparisons of draft policy plans and rules for social media

management at different emergency management agencies. Plan conformity indicators

are the existence of a policy, the platforms used, administration of social media sites, and

the security and privacy measures in management of social media. The data sources for

this criterion are interviews and social media policies from FDEM, Sarasota County, and

Walton County.

18

The efficiency of an agency’s social media is how fast they can deliver a message to the

public and how the staff manages the sites. Indicators of efficiency are the non-social

media channels used to distribute information, the audience of the sites, and the number

of paid staff. The data sources are interviews, emergency management external affairs

policies, and after action reports from social media exercises.

Staff and volunteer knowledge is defined by the amount of training and experience social

media administrators have. The indicators for this criterion are social media training

courses that staff and volunteers have or are required to have, staff experience using

social media in emergency management, and how or if the agency uses volunteers. The

data sources are interviews with FDEM, Walton County, Sarasota County, and Center for

Disaster Risk Policy.

The criteria in this paper are limited in scope and only include a small portion of the

responsibilities of external affairs in emergency management. The data gathered is not

necessarily representative of the actions of all emergency management agencies and how they

manage social media. However, the interviewees were strategically chosen to represent key

personnel in local, state, and private agencies. Due to time constraints it was not possible to get

feedback from every county government in Florida and there was difficulty in gathering an equal

amount of feedback from all of the parties that were interviewed. Despite these limitations, this

is useful because it is a mixture of both academic and professional research and experience into

how social media management can be improved. In the interests of full disclosure, the author of

this report is in charge of social media for the Florida Division of Emergency Management; her

official job title is “Digital Engagement Coordinator.”

IV. Management Policy Options

Section IV describes the three policy options being proposed to help with the governance of

social media by emergency management agencies. Options are designed for the Florida Division

of Emergency Management. The first is standardized social media training. This will mitigate

mistakes and make social media a more credible form of disaster communication. The second

19

policy option is an emergency management mobile app. There is no current standard on an

emergency management app, and agencies are creating apps with very different content. The

third option is the creation of a website that will aggregate all social media channels within the

state. It will be able to provide emergency managers with virtual training and contact information

for all social media personnel.

The data received from the literature, government documents, and interviews was analyzed

using three different criteria, each with its own indicators. Each of these options is analyzed

using criteria previously mentioned: plan conformity, efficiency, and staff and volunteer

knowledge. The indicators for plan conformity are (a) the existence of a policy, (b) the platforms

used, (c) general governance and oversight, (d) and security and privacy. Indicators of efficiency

are (a) the non-social media channels used to distribute information, (b) the audience of the sites,

and (c) the number of paid staff. The indicators for staff and volunteer knowledge are (a) social

media training courses that staff and volunteers have or are required to have, (b) staff experience

using social media in emergency management, and (c) how the agency uses volunteers.

Policy Option 1: Standardized Training

Most agencies (including FDEM) do not have a standardized set of social media training

guidelines for personnel. Very few agencies (including FDEM) have an official social media

policy, some have guidelines, and some guidelines are unwritten. This option proposes a

standardized method for the training of Public Information Officers (PIOs) in social media. It

will enable a comprehensive standard of knowledge to arise in this developing field and will

prevent mistakes in future disasters.

Criterion One: Plan Conformity. First, the Florida Division of Emergency Management does

not have an official policy plan for social media; instead it has a draft of guidelines (B. Byerts,

20

personal communication, April 11, 2016). Directors from Walton County and Sarasota County

revealed that they have a very different process from each other and from FDEM. Jeff Goldberg

from Walton County stated that he does not have a social media policy and uses Facebook and

Twitter as platforms for messaging (personal communication, March 31, 2016). Edward

McCrane from Sarasota County has a 16-page social media policy and uses Facebook, Twitter,

and Youtube for his messaging (personal communication, April 13, 2016). The Division of

Emergency Management has an external affairs communications plan; the social media plan

draft (guideline) and a January 21, 2014 memo from Director Bryan Koon on social media

management (B. Byerts, personal communication, April 11, 2016).

Second, platforms used for messaging according to the plan draft (Florida Division of

Emergency Management, 2014) are:

- Twitter with four separate accounts, one for disaster events (@FLSERT), one for

regular operations (@FLGetAPlan), one for private sector information

(@FDEMPrivateSect), and one for the FDEM Director (@BKoonFDEM).

- Facebook with four separate accounts, disaster events (Florida SERT), regular

operations (Florida Division of Emergency Management), kids disaster preparedness

messaging (Kids Get a Plan), and private sector coordination (Florida Emergency

Management- Office of Private Sector Coordination).

- Wordpress is used for blogging and can be utilized in both operational and disaster

scenarios for more narrated messaging.

- Instagram with two different accounts, the Division (FLGetAPlan), and for kids’

messaging (KidsGetAPlan).

In addition to these differences on policies and platforms, governance, the third component

of conformity, is also different between these three agencies alone, highlighting how vastly

complicated it would be if all 67 counties and the Division of Emergency Management were

analyzed together. The external affairs section governs the FDEM sites, with the exception of

disaster activations, where the Executive Office of the Governor takes control of messaging

21

(anonymous, personal communication, April 11, 2016). In Walton County governance and

oversight of the social media pages (regular operations and disaster activation) belongs to the

Director of Emergency Management (J. Goldberg, personal communication, March 31, 2016).

In Sarasota County the manager of each department is responsible for their department’s site

and the County Communications Department has oversight of all department pages (E.

McCrane, personal communication, April 13, 2016), The differences in policies, platforms, and

governance illustrate the discord that exists with the strict bureaucratic nature of government

and the fast-paced, non-linear world of social media (Alexander, 2014).

Last, security and privacy concerns have emerged with the use of social media by agencies,

focusing on the possibility of government intruding upon private citizen data or collecting and

storing information (Lindsay, 2011). The Division of Emergency Management does not archive

data from social media sites, and it also does not delete previous content unless it is deemed

offensive (B. Byerts, personal communication, April 11, 2016). Walton County does not have a

written policy as previously mentioned, but they do download and archive data every six

months (J. Goldberg, personal communication, March 31, 2016). All of Sarasota County’s posts

must be archived “due to the Florida sunshine laws about government transparency and public

records,” Mr. McCrane states that this action costs additional funds for the software that is

required to do this (personal communication, April 13, 2016).

The differences in archiving are attributed to different philosophical stances that can even

be in disagreement within the same agency. FDEM does not officially archive content because it

is already “archived” and is public record in the social media platform; it will also not require

funds that way (B. Byerts, personal communication, April 13, 2016). Two other coworkers, one

who chose to remain anonymous and the other, who works in external affairs during disasters,

22

range from disagreement to “gray area” when it comes to archiving data (J. Geib, personal

communication, April 11, 2016). They both believe that information should be archived to

ensure the agency against liability and that an official policy would be beneficial before a

disaster occurs (anonymous, personal communication, April 11, 2016).

FDEM does not have official policies because guidelines can be easier to update and

policies have to be maintained, promulgated to the agency (and state), and strictly followed (B.

Byerts, personal communication, April 11, 2016). The dispute seems to come from personal

experiences as the anonymous FDEM employee witnessed a county in Miami get sued for and

lose for manipulating data that was not archived (personal communication, April 11, 2016).

This person suggests the use of a third-party vendor to download and archive data so that the

employees themselves cannot modify the information (Anonymous, personal communication,

April 11, 2016). The external affairs director for FDEM stated that with social media it is

essential to identify the risk, find ways to reduce the risk, and insure the risk (J. Roberts,

personal communication, March 23, 2016).

The differences shown between agencies and their methods of plan implementation expose

gaps between the employees’ philosophies. Coordination was referenced as a major obstacle in

messaging (B. Byerts, personal communication, April 11, 2016). Byerts, the deputy director for

FDEM’s external affairs section, noted that she has faced challenges with consistent and unified

messaging (personal communication, April 11, 2016).

Criterion Two: Efficiency. Social media is not the only form of contact that an agency should

use to publicize information; some offices are not heavily involved in social media because they

are hesitant to create a dialogue with the public (C. Eliadis, personal communication, April 11,

2016). Instead, using non-social media channels the Division issues press releases, conducts

23

media interviews, press conferences, and phone/radio interviews to get information out (B.

Byerts, personal communication, April 11, 2016). It also controls the Florida Emergency

Information Line (FEIL), which is managed by trained liaisons from multiple agencies during

activations (FDEM Statewide Hurricane “Jones” After Action Report and Improvement Plan,

2014). Walton County employs media releases and mass notification systems in addition to

social media to get messaging out (J. Goldberg, personal communication, March 31, 2016).

Finally, Sarasota County utilizes methods like e-mail newsletters and local government TV, in

addition to the traditional ones previously mentioned (E. McCrane, April 13, 2016).

The logic behind the push for social media is that it is efficient in delivering messaging;

yet administrators need to consider part of their audience: people that do not use social media.

Whether they are from a different age or economic demographic, they still have to be

considered (J. Roberts, personal communication, March 23, 2016). A system comparable to the

FEIL is essential and should maintain a set of commonly asked questions that can be used in

conjunction with social media (FDEM Statewide Hurricane “Jones” After Action Report and

Improvement Plan, 2014). Increasing and maintaining followers can be difficult if there are too

many platforms, because it is not guaranteed the information will reach the same demographic

every time (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11, 2016). Adjusting key messaging to

different generations is also essential, and personnel should integrate messaging across different

platforms to reach their entire audience (J. Roberts, personal communication, March 23, 2016).

The number of paid personnel, the third efficiency component, involved in the agency’s

social media accounts also shapes how efficient the sites are, especially during a disaster. The

Division has one full-time employee responsible for social media messaging and any of the

external affairs team members can fill in as necessary (B. Byerts, personal communication,

24

April 11, 2016). The county directors primarily run Walton and Sarasota County’s sites and

there are no paid staff assigned to social media.

Criterion Three: Staff & Volunteer Knowledge. Regarding training, FDEM’s digital

engagement coordinator did not receive formal training upon entering the position, and neither

did the previous coordinator for the Division, Chris Eliadis (personal communication, April 11,

2016). The digital engagement coordinator has experience, the second efficiency factor, in

social media by participating in exercises, and being involved in the Florida State University

Virtual Operations Support Team (FSU VOST), in addition to other projects and academic

endeavors (anonymous, personal communication, February 20, 2016). The Division also has a

contract with FSU VOST and utilizes their services to monitor and analyze social media when it

is needed (D. Merrick, personal communication, April 12, 2016).

Walton County’s Jeff Goldberg, has former experience in social media, and messaging is

done primarily by him, he does not utilize volunteers (personal communication, March 31,

2016), the second efficiency element. Goldberg’s experience was obtained in another agency

and he used it during special events, to monitor activities, and gather intelligence/information

(personal communication, March 31, 2016). Mr. McCrane related that social media has been

tested during various exercises and was used for Tropical Storm Erika in 2015 as well as the

Siesta Key Tornado in 2016 (personal communication, April 13, 2016). Third, the County does

not use volunteers, for social media, the only other people that post on the government social

media sites are the managers of each department and the County Communications Department

has oversight of all pages (E. McCrane, personal communication, April 13, 2016).

Some agencies might refuse to use volunteers due to privacy concerns (anonymous,

personal communication, April 11, 2016). However, sharing the process in which volunteers are

25

chosen may help the agency standardize their hiring qualifications or will give them the option

to expand into using volunteers. David Merrick, the Director of The Center for Disaster Risk

Policy, is in charge of FSU VOST and chooses his volunteers from a pool of his students

(personal communication, April 12, 2016). The students become aware of the opportunity to

join FSU VOST via an email to everyone enrolled in courses; after that information sessions are

set up and the majority of the training is done online. This system of recruitment and training is

beneficial for volunteers because it teaches them exactly what they should do and what is

expected of them. This format can also be extended into the foundations of a standardized

program for all social media personnel across the state. It can make the process of training a lot

more manageable by taking out the problem of travel and schedule coordination.

Standardized training offered to everyone at FDEM and in the entire state is beneficial

because it can reduce confusion (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11, 2016). There can

also be a format introduced into social media management that resembles the FEIL. The Florida

Emergency Information Line holds training once a year for all agency liaisons; it might be

constructive to do this for social media administrators from all counties once a year before

hurricane season (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11, 2016). “It is important to

communicate messaging internally and externally” this training might be able to align the

message the state will have on social media during a disaster (J. Roberts, personal

communication, March 23, 2016).

In summary, this proposal is meant to provide a foundation for training guidelines in

social media management at both the state and county level. The gaps and contradictory forms

of management might increase the chaos and lead to mistakes in messaging during a disaster.

This proposal looks at the plan conformity, the efficiency, and the staff and volunteer

26

knowledge in all agencies. While this policy is for FDEM, it needs to be able to be extended to

the county level because of FDEM’s responsibilities and the level of interconnectedness that

exists in Florida emergency management.

Policy Option 2: Emergency Management Mobile Apps

Mobile apps have become an attractive way for people to get the information they need,

and some emergency management and weather organizations have started to capitalize on this

by developing platforms to reach more citizens. Mary Ann Adams from OnStar spoke about the

potential of expanding their car technology. She planned on doing this by implementing an app

that will allow people to control their vehicle from their cellphones including automatic severe

weather alerts (personal communication, January 20, 2016). Most agencies do not have a

mobile app to disseminate their messaging and reach the public. Florida has a mix of highly

populated counties and rural counties, and they have very different budgets. Some counties have

exceptional apps that rival those of private sector companies like OnStar, while others rely on

more traditional methods like radio or television. There is no current standard as to what goes

into each agency’s mobile app. The Division’s current “FLGetAPlan” app has some issues with

content and maintenance. This policy will look into the standardization of emergency

management apps in Florida, based on their content and practicality; it will also explore the

logistics of cost and implementation.

Criterion One: Plan Conformity. The Division has a mobile application called “Get a Plan”; it

can be downloaded on Android or IOS and it also links up to the “Kids Get a Plan” website.

There are some links available on it like Highway Patrol, FL Evacuates, and 511. The app

directs people to the website FLGetAPlan.com and allows them the ability to make their plan

27

via their mobile device (with internet availability). Sarasota and Walton County do not have

apps and did not elaborate as to why that was; this shows the nonexistence of a policy on

emergency management apps. Duval County has an app available on IOS that is called “JAX

READY.” Duval is one of the biggest counties by both economic and population standards and

their app is very advanced and more interactive than FDEM’s “Get a Plan.”

First, there is no written policy in existence for emergency management mobile

applications because there are issues with the agency being able to develop and support one to

begin with. Secondly, some smaller counties would rather use platforms for communicating

with the public that have worked in the past and will last more than the battery life of a device

(anonymous, personal communication, April 11, 2016). Jeff Goldberg from Walton County

communicated that while his county does not have an app, there are only positives to having one

(personal communication, March 31, 2016). A smartphone application could be best utilized in

the first stage of the Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Model (CERC). The first stage

is the pre-crisis stage and is characterized by risk messages, warnings, and preparations

(Lachlan et al., 2015). It has been suggested that mobile apps could send out automatic

notifications and alert citizens depending on their location if there was emergency information

(C. Eliadis, personal communication, April 11, 2016).

Third, the general governance and oversight of a mobile application has been strenuous

according to Richard Butgereit, the FDEM Geographic Information System (GIS)

Administrator/ Head of the Information Management Section (personal communication, April

11, 2016). Butgereit developed the “Get a Plan” app for the Division and was the first to admit

that it needs work. He vocalized the difficulty in maintaining and developing the app due to

time constraints and bureaucratic difficulties in project management. Security and privacy, the

28

last components of plan conformity, have also been a concern with some apps because the

individual must enable their location in order for the application to know what information

might apply to them (anonymous, April 11, 2016). Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)

can be used to compose a picture of what is happening in a specific place ((Porto de

Albuquerque et al., 2015). At the same time, there has been apprehension from people that

might not want their location shared, like for example victims of domestic abuse (D. Merrick,

personal communication, March 24, 2016).

Criterion Two: Efficiency. First, there is an obstacle in using non-social media channels to

distribute disaster messaging, while there are older generations that still use weather radios and

subscribe to severe weather alerts on their phones, there is a generation who has not dealt with a

major disaster in their lives. Secondly, there tends to be a challenge in the number of followers

an emergency management app can garner, especially when a disaster has not occurred to show

people that an app like this could be beneficial (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11,

2016). There is an advertising and marketing problem with an emergency management app

because there is very little relevance to the individual; if the app is going to be successful, the

marketing of the app has to be exceptional (anonymous, personal communication, April 11,

2016). An app that creates social cohesion might increase the number of followers because

people have felt more optimistic and supported in a disaster when social media has been

involved (Alexander, 2014).

Richard Butgereit uncovered the realities of supporting an app, he noted that time was a

major obstacle in finishing or doing the projects (personal communication, April 11, 2016).

There are four separate projects that he has to write the code for, and he wants to completely

renovate the Division’s website; however he has to maneuver around push back from employees,

29

and it can be hard to collaborate under everyone’s busy schedules. Third, the amount of paid

staff that could develop apps in the counties might be even more limited than that at FDEM.

Butgereit mentions that it would be very difficult for every county to get an app, and there

would be no way to equalize the quality of each because every county has a different budget.

Criterion Three: Staff & Volunteer Knowledge. A mobile app could be used in different

ways that would require the involvement of staff and potentially volunteers. They would

analyze data like storm damage or collect surveys, so that officials can have a clearer grasp of

what can be improved before or after a disaster. The app could be used to upload photos so that

officials could see the damage on a home and it could help them verify the damage report (C.

Eliadis, personal communication, April 11, 2016). First, emergency managers would still need

to have formalized training to calculate damage (B. Hallum, personal communication, April 18,

2016). The number of people that use the app could also be used to launch the appeals for

donations to the families that were affected by a disaster (Alexander, 2014).

An app that could be used by officials to measure damage could be useful, but the person

using it still had to have experience, the second component of efficiency, or previous disaster

activations where they used the original system to be knowledgeable enough not to make a

mistake (B. Hallum, personal communication, April 18, 2016). Finally, the process for choosing

volunteers for this app for official use would not be used because the people in charge of

conducting damage assessments have to be trained and either a county, state, or federal official.

There could be a portion of this app that allows citizens to talk to each other, and that could be

monitored by volunteers to ensure appropriate content. The volunteers would have to be trained

as well, but they could come from the general public after a marketing campaign was already

established for the app.

30

To summarize, this proposal is meant to show an innovative way for the public to obtain

important information and for management personnel to use in the event of a disaster. The

technological advancements in the past 11 years have not been tested in a disaster big enough to

be considered a focusing event, one that is vast enough to change policies. A smartphone

application may seem unobtainable due to all of the obstacles encountered in the development

of an app. However, if there is not a push to innovate before a disaster happens, officials will

not be able to stay abreast of constantly changing forms of communication and technology.

Policy Option 3: Website for Florida’s Emergency Management Social Media

Most agency Social media administrators do not know their counterpart at other agencies

at the local, state, or federal level. There is no database where all of the links for the social

media sites to agencies are stored for verification or usage. No standard for social media sites

for agencies exists; some have their own page, while others use the site that belongs to the Fire

or Police Department. This policy proposes a website or portal that allows different

organizations to see the information that is shared by other officials in one place.

The website relies on spontaneous contribution to make it work and the more it is used

the more popular it will become, and in turn encourage more participation (Alexander, 2014).

Officials will be able to communicate with each other through a simple format similar to

Google chat. There can also be an option to include training on the site for all social media

administrators with the possibility of also sharing blogs with lessons learned and actions done to

improve the digital field.

Criterion One: Plan Conformity. First, this proposal is an innovative idea that does not exist

and has not been tested in the field of social media. In conversations with Chris Eliadis, the

31

External Affairs Special Projects Coordinator at FDEM and Andrew Sussman, the Hurricane

Program/Catastrophic Planning Coordinator at FDEM, they both agreed that this concept was a

good idea and Sussman wanted to start working on it right away (personal communication,

April 17, 2016). Emergent network effects would arise from this website because officials

would be able to share and find information easily. Emergent network effects is when large

numbers of users find a particular platform or service useful and give it value by using it

together (Houston et al., 2015). Jessica Geib, the internship coordinator and member of ESF 14

(External Affairs during disaster activations), thinks that it is important to keep in contact with

the local agencies and build strong networks; this website would aid in that effort (personal

communication, April 11, 2016).

At this time there is one person in the entire state, Richard Butgereit, that has a collection

of most of the social media links for Florida’s counties (personal communication, April 11,

2016). Butgereit utilizes SharePoint to ask each county for contact information including their

social media links; this information is then automatically populated into a person’s emergency

plan according to what county they chose on FLGetAPlan.com. He agrees it would be an

interesting concept to share the information for all of the counties when it was proposed it to him.

Secondly, the platforms used by the counties would have to be standardized to make this

effective; the best option would be for everyone to use Twitter; the more likely option is the use

of Facebook. One of the main goals for FDEM’s external affairs unit during regular operations is

preparedness (Florida Division of Emergency Management, 2015). The merging of all social

media sites in one place will enable the possibility of a unified message that can be broadcast to

the whole state, improving preparedness messaging as well.

32

Third, the general governance of the site would fall under the responsibility of the Florida

Division of Emergency Management. The oversight of the individual social media sites that

account for the site as a whole would be under the control of each county. Fourth, it is beneficial

to keep the social media sites under local control because each county can better monitor the

security and privacy of each site. The state is too removed from the counties’ sites and cannot

possibly monitor or archive all of the information.

The Florida Department of Health has a similar aggregated website for all public

information officers, but the way that things are done on social media is that they have to

approve the messaging that each county wants to post (J. Geib, personal communication, April

11, 2016). This would be impossible to do for FDEM, and has the potential to create animosity

between the counties and the state level of emergency management. Richard Butgereit

mentioned that he liked the website idea, but he would not know how to do it in terms of getting

county participation (personal communication, April 11, 2016). He stated that there could be a

potential to go through national agencies, SharePoint, or tell the counties that grant money from

the state might get cut if they do not participate.

Criterion Two: Efficiency. As an emergency manager it is necessary to have the proper contact

information established between social media counterparts from different agencies before the

disaster occurs (anonymous, personal communication, April 11, 2016). It is important to have a

strong network of contacts that can replace the public information officers and immediately

know how to operate in the new agency (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11, 2016). The

public information officers that use this website would not only be responsible for social media,

they would also be able to use other channels, the first component of efficiency, for distribution

of information to the public and therefore be an asset to be able to reach out to via an instant

33

method like Google Chat. In her interview Jessica Geib remembered a recent training that she

went to and how the story of one public information officer (PIO) really resonated with her.

She met the PIO from Ferguson, Missouri where the violent riots took place in 2014 after

the shooting of Michael Brown (an African-American) by Darren Wilson (a white police

officer). Ferguson, as Geib described in her narrative, is a small town and the PIO because of

the low amount of followers, did not have backup and was not prepared for this big of an event

and one that would receive national media coverage. The PIO from Ferguson told her that he

worked 20-hour shifts and was probably doing an inadequate job because of how overwhelmed

he was. He could not get help because he did not have a pre-established set of PIO contact or a

network from which to rely on (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11, 2016).

According to Rachel Smith a Gubernatorial Fellow at FDEM, who is currently doing

research on the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), there are several steps

required to get an authorization and it can take several days (personal communication, April 14,

2016). Third, this is the process that the PIO from Ferguson most likely had to go through to

request help, and even then the process for getting a person to come help is voluntary, and some

states assist more than others. Another negative to seeking out EMAC assistance in a case like

this is that it would take a couple of days after the person came to help for them to get

acquainted with how the agency works because they do not receive the same training. The

social media website could remedy that because it would provide a basic format for training to

everyone in the state.

Criterion Three: Staff & Volunteer Knowledge. The amount of staff knowledge that could

be exchanged through this interface would be extraordinary; officials would be able to connect

directly with someone in a different city, virtually meeting them, and obtaining all of their

34

lessons learned without leaving their office. First, training and conferences are the times where

officials and professionals are able to network and make these kinds of lasting impressions; this

method eliminates the need for travel and the cost that comes with conferences and distant

training. It can make the introduction for several people and second, bridge the gap between the

experienced and the novice.

Last, even though the Division has a contract with FSUVOST that uses volunteers to help

with social media monitoring, this website can help because other PIOs can help with

messaging, something that FSUVOST cannot do (J. Geib, personal communication, April 11,

2016). According to FDEM Director Bryan Koon, social media is the responsibility of all

employees (Koon, 2014). This means that even if there is push back from certain individuals,

this method of communication is everyone’s responsibility and this option could develop a more

inclusive program of managing it statewide. Julie Roberts, the External Affairs Director for

FDEM noted that there is a new approach of community-based level of emergency response that

combines community resources and emergency personnel (personal communication, March 23,

2016). This new structure brings new opportunities for people involved in emergency

management in all facets. The community-based level of response could exist in the virtual

world. What is the biggest community in the world right now? Facebook technically has the

biggest community of people in one Internet platform; the same concept could be applied to this

website.

In short, this proposal depicts a website that can help emergency management

professionals develop networks with their colleagues in order to train, learn from collective

mistakes, and develop relationships. By putting all of the social media information in one site

and enabling access to individuals it will increase social media knowledge for emergency

35

managers as a whole because it will aggregate the important things that need to be discussed

and it will continuously evolve as people use it and learn from it. While this option will be

difficult to implement due to cost and time concerns, it is something that can be invaluable to

social media professionals.

V. Conclusion

The report presented three policy proposals that would be advantageous in the

standardization of social media in emergency management: (1) standardized training, (2)

emergency management mobile apps, and (3) website for Florida’s emergency management

social media. Each policy was evaluated based on the following criteria: plan conformity,

efficiency, and staff & volunteer knowledge. Table 1 summarizes the results of the policy

proposals when graded against the evaluative criteria.

Ranking Scale: 1 to 5 with 1 being very negative and 5 being very positive

The options all attempted to standardize the methods in which social media was used as a

form of communication in emergency management. However, the use of social media in

agencies is very chaotic and there had to be a policy that would not only work, but would also

be realistic in being accepted by the majority. Policy 1 was chosen because the standardization

0 2 4 6

Plan Conformity

Efficiency

Staff & VolunteerKnowledge

Table 1: Summary of Policy Proposals Graded by Evaluative Criteria

Website for Florida's EMSM

EM Mobile Apps

Standardized Trainings

36

of training is needed before anything else can be discussed. It can establish and set the standard

of training for social media personnel at agencies need and increase the knowledge of all

officials as a whole in social media. Generations react differently to this form of communication,

and this policy option will thwart push back. People that do not want to participate will be

included in the process with familiar training styles to what they have experienced before,

thereby reducing the “fear of the unknown.” Standardized training will also increase the ability

of personnel to interact and work well together. This can be useful in facilitating mutual aid

agreements and can prevent social media management mistakes during disasters.

Attempting to standardize social media management in all agencies will be difficult

because the relationships between the local, state, and federal agencies are very delicate. It will

be difficult to get buy-in and participation from everyone. There are 67 counties, and multiple

state agencies other than FDEM that are involved in emergency management and they may also

have branches in the counties, like the Florida Department of Health. This means that it will

take an extraordinary marketing campaign, a focusing event, and/or a financial incentive to

guarantee participation.

Emergency Management Mobile Apps, policy 2, would not have worked because Florida

has counties that are highly urban with many people and resources and other counties that are

agricultural with little population and few resources. Time would also be a factor in preventing

this proposal. To develop this app would mean having to standardize all of the information for

all of the counties with FDEM content and their own content (if they all had the money to begin

with). Finding developers and government employees that could work on this proposal would

be a challenge; most are busy with multiple projects at the same time. Maintaining and updating

content for the existing basic FDEM app is lackluster at best, so extending that into 67 counties

37

might be a logistical nightmare at this time. Florida is not ready for a project now; there are

powerful counties with apps (better than FDEM’s) that might pushback if FDEM proposes

doing something to them. Florida’s emergency management culture can be territorial between

local, state, and federal agencies. This policy, while it may be beneficial in the future, may

cause important and delicate relationships to suffer. Finally, downloads from the population

might be low because the concept is not that interesting to the average citizen.

The Website for Florida’s Emergency Management Social Media, policy 3, would not

work, because there is no set or standardized format of social media management (training,

governance, and privacy rules) or even a designated social media person for many counties.

This option might be something that can be developed in the future. It would be an uphill battle

to get enough participation and support for this website. It is also likely that this policy will

become a reality only after a major disaster happens. Finally, the time it would take to develop,

the coding, and the funding necessary would be too much for the expected level of participation

from everyone. It can only be a success if all agree to use it. This policy should be saved for the

future and hopefully by then social media will be taken more seriously and everyone has a set

standard of training and understanding of how to use it.

This recommendation, policy 1, is also sound public policy because it meets three ethical

key standards: The greatest good for the greatest number (utilitarianism), what is good for one is

good for all (universal application of the policy, aka, duty ethics), and the decision-maker

becomes a better person in his/her community (virtue theory). Thus, the recommendation

represents the greatest good for the greatest number of people because standardizing social

media plans can help make information easier to access across the board for all generations and

will make sure that vulnerable populations are not missed. It also fulfills duty ethics because

38

even though the client was the state’s Division of Emergency Management, it can be used for

all of the county’s agencies and others that assist in disasters. Finally it addresses virtue ethics

because the knowledge and standard that will come from this training will help enlighten the

emergency manager that receives it to the virtue of knowledge.

The implementation plan for this the standardization of training in social media will

shadow a similar method used by Dave Merrick with FSU VOST (Merrick, 2015). People will

be informed of what the agency intends to do via a mass e-mail. FDEM’s plan to standardize

training of social media administrators, as well as why it is important will be included in the e-

mail. Conference calls with each of Florida’s regions will then be set up to discuss and obtain

feedback. The main concern here is for everyone to be a part of the conversation. The Florida

Division of Emergency Management is not teaching; the process of developing the standardized

training will be a group effort between counties and state government.

Virtual Skype informational meetings could follow and some people might be chosen to

form different committees and develop different parts of the training. One committee will be

responsible for collecting all of the existing written plans from the counties and analyzing their

similarities to be able to pull into the standardized guide. The establishment of a standardized

guideline will come next, and classes will have to be developed with the exercise and training

unit at the Florida Division of Emergency Management. By the time this is happening, the

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should have some interest in being involved

and might join the conversation as well. Training can be made available either in the classroom,

but most importantly through SERT TRAC (online emergency management training portal).

Richard Butgereit has already agreed to put the training on SERT TRAC; once it is completed

people can start signing up (personal communication, April 11, 2016). The most important thing

39

to make policy implementation a success is to maintain an open line of communication for

people to be able to receive training either in person or online and accept any feedback from

everyone.

40

References

Alexander, D. (2014). Social Media in Disaster Risk Reduction and Crisis Management.

Science & Engineering Ethics, 20(3), 717-733. doi:10.1007/s11948-013-9502-z

de Albuquerque, J. P., Herfort, B., Brenning, A., & Zipf, A. (2015). A geographic

approach for combining social media and authoritative data towards identifying useful

information for disaster management. International Journal Of Geographical

Information Science, 29(4), 667-689. doi:10.1080/13658816.2014.996567

Grisales, J. (2014). 2014 Statewide Hurricane Exercise ESF 14 After Action Report.

Tallahassee, FL: Center for Disaster Risk Policy.

Florida Division of Emergency Management. (2014). 2014 Statewide Hurricane “Jones”

After Action Report and Improvement Plan. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Division of

Emergency Management.

Florida Division of Emergency Management. (2015). External Affairs Communications

Plan. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Division of Emergency Management.

Florida Division of Emergency Management. (2014). Social Media Plan. Tallahassee,

FL: Florida Division of Emergency Management.

Houston, J. B., Hawthorne, J., Perreault, M. F., Park, E. H., Goldstein Hode, M.,

Halliwell, M. R., Turner McGowen, S.E., Davis, R., Vaid, S., McElderry, J.A., & Griffith,

S. A. (2015). Social media and disasters: a functional framework for social media use in

disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters, 39(1), 1-22. doi:10.1111/disa.12092

Koon, B.W. (2014). FDEM Social Media Policy Memo. State of Florida, Division of

Emergency Management. Tallahassee, FL: Office of the Governor State of Florida.

Lachlan, K. A., Spence, P. R., Lin, X., Najarian, K., & Del Greco, M. (2015). Social

media and crisis management: CERC, search strategies, and Twitter content. Computers

In Human Behavior, 54647-652. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.027

Lindsay, B. R. (2011). Social media and disasters: Current uses, future options, and

policy considerations. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41987.pdf

Merrick, D. (2015). FSU VOST Standard Operating Guide. Emergency Management and

Homeland Security Program, Center for Disaster Risk Policy. Tallahassee, FL: Florida

State University.

Scanlon, J., Alldred, S., Farrell, A., & Prawzick, A. (1985). Coping with the Media in

Disasters: Some Predictable Problems. Public Administration Review, 45, 123–133.

http://doi.org/10.2307/3135007Copy

41

About the Author

Jennifer Grisales (B.S., Political Science and Interdisciplinary Social Science, Florida

State University; MPA Candidate Florida State University). She started her career as a

research analyst for The Center for Disaster Risk Policy at Florida State University and

worked there for nearly three years. She has interned at the Florida Division of

Emergency Management’s State Watch Office, and the Radiological Emergency

Preparedness Unit. She is now in external affairs for FDEM and is the Digital

Engagement Coordinator. Ms. Grisales is interested in various aspects of emergency

management and homeland security; she is also involved in animal advocacy and

volunteers at the local animal shelters.