COM 09
2. Do Not Limit Yourself toOne Form or One Method
PRINCIPLES OF RISK COMMUNICATION PRINCIPLES OF RISK
COMMUNICATION
INTRODUCTION
The risk communication literature outlines principles for effectively
communicating risk. The audience must regard the communication
organization as honest and trustworthy and the fact that the audience must be
permitted to participate in the risk management choice.
Principles of process relate to the process of planning and conducting a risk
communication effort.
1. Know Your Communication Limits and Purpose
 You must know why you are communicating and any limitations
to
your ability to communicate risk.
• Regulatoryrequirements
• Organizationalrequirements.
• Audience requirements.
2. Whenever Possible, Pretest Your Message
 Audience analysis should be part of every effort to communicate
risk.
3. Communicate Early, Often, and Fully
 Risk communication should begin as soon as a risk has been
identified and continue as new information becomes available.
4. Remember That Perception Is Reality
 Makes decisions based heaviLy on the audience'sperception, not
just on the technical aspect.
PRINCIPLES OF PRESENTATION
Another set of principles addresses how to present the risk information in
ways that best communicate the risk to the intended audience.
1. Know Your Audience
 You cannot communicate unless you know to whom you are
communicating.
 Any audience for a risk communication message will be made up
of a variety of segments, each with different levels of knowledge
about the risk, of interest in the risk, and of being at risk. You
will need to find methods that best meet the needs of each
segment.
3. Be Objective , Not Subjective
 Quantify information whenever possible. For example, give
numbers that can be put in perspective, and concrete information.
4. Communicate Honestly , Clearly, and Compassionately
 Present information at your audience’s level of understanding.
5. Listen and Deal with Specific Concerns
 Besides dealing with the emotions behind concerns,listen to what
people are are saying about the risk itself. Do not discount
concerns that seem to be based on faulty scientific information or
are peripheral to the situation.
6. Convey the Same Information to All Segments of Your Audience
 To maintain trust, you have to give everybody the same
information
7. Deal with Uncertainty
 In communicating about risks, you can never present results as
definitive; no study is ever the final word. Instead, you must
discuss sources of uncertainty, such as how the data were
gathered, how they were analyzed, and how the results were
interpreted. The sources of uncertainty and how you
communicate about them vary among care, consensus, The
research on risk communication and crisis risk assessments.
PRINCIPLES FOR COMPARING RISKS PRINCIPLES
 Comparing risks in risk communication is both beneficial and
complex.
1. Use Analogies, but Do Not Trivialize
- Using analogies can make complex risks easier to
understand.

2. Use Ranges
- You can express a risk using a range of numbers. This
method of risk comparison is especially good for hostile
audiences in that your audience can determine for
themselves where the risk falls on a hazard scale, and you do
not have to decide “significance” for them, a practice that
can lead to increased hostility.
3. Compare with Standards
- You could compare the results of your risk assessment with
such a standard. If your results are higher than the standard,
you are showing your audience that they should be
concerned. If your results are lower than the standard, you
are showing your audience that they probably have no reason
for concern.
4. Compare with Other Estimates of the Same Risk
- A number of assessments performed ex. Government
researcher University researcher,and Independent Researcher
hired by the concerned citizen group may all study a
particular risk. - Another way of comparing is based the
comparison of different traits of segments of you audiences.
 Use age groups (risk to infant vs. risk to senior citizens.)
 Geographic regions( riskon the East Coast vs. Risk on the West
Coast)
 Lifestyle ( risk to the avid sportsman vs. risk to the farmer vs.
risk to the city dweller)
5. Compare Traits
- Another way to compare risks is to base the comparison on
different traits of segment.
6. Do Not Compare Risks with Different Levels of Associated
Outrage
- Comparing risks that evoke different levels of anger and
frustration can be tricky.
EXPLAIN REDUCTION IN MAGNITUDE
- The formal and informal considerations of risk invariably include financial
expenditure to manage risk.
Summary
Transparent, sympathetic, and clear message are necessary for effectively
communicating risk. Emphasizing the significance of personal accountability
and proactive approaches in effectively managing risk.
ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS
• It is now a standard practice for newly hired employees to be
required to read the organization’s code of ethics and to sign
a formal statement promising to abide by it.
• Organizational ethical issues relate to how that code handles
such things as the legitimacy of representation, designation
of a primary audience, release of information, and attitude
toward compliance with regulations.
Legitimacy of Representation
The legitimacy of representation is foundational in disaster and risk
communication. It addresses the question of who is authorized to speak for
an organization or communicate with an audience regarding risks.
• Organizational Protocols: Organizations typically establish
guidelines on who can represent them externally. This could
be restricted to designated public affairs personnel or extend
to knowledgeable staff with appropriate training in public
speaking and media relations.
• Information Screening: Before dissemination, information
often undergoes organizational review. This can range from
basic checks for grammar and clarity to comprehensive
evaluations involving legal, managerial, peer, and
communication specialists.
The selection of communicators plays a pivotal role in effective risk
communication.
 • Expert Communicators: Individuals well-versed in the
specific risk being communicated can enhance credibility
and understanding.
• Risk Managers: Those directly accountable for managing the
risk can provide insights grounded in practical experience.
• Communications Specialists: Skilled professionals in
technical communication, public relations, or public
information are adept at conveying complex information
effectively.
• Celebrities: Familiar personalities trusted by the audience
can lend credibility to risk communication efforts.
Designation of Primary Audience
ATTITUDE TOWARD COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS
When compliance is viewed as an onerous duty at best or a way to
subvert democracy at the very worst, risk communication, and all other
efforts, can only suffer
Communicator’s Serenity Prayer: “Grant us the serenity to
compromise with the publics we cannot change, the courage to persuade the
publics we can change (when it is socially responsible to do so), and the
wisdom to know the difference.” —David Dozier et al. (1995, p. 14)
For example, the staff for one government contractor refers to their
response to Freedom of Information Act requests as “malicious compliance.”
The choice for those who are communicating risk is how to comply
with regulations in such a way as to assist the risk communication effort.

• Designation, either formally or informally, of the "primary

audience".
• Primary Audience - is the segment of the audience with the
highest priority in the risk communication effort.
• In many situations, the first aspect, which segment of the
audience is most at risk, would be the primary consideration.
• However in some organization, the third aspect becomes the
most, and sometimes the only, aspect of importance.
• The dilemma for those who are communicating risk is how
to meet the needs of all audiences.
• According to Carolyn Boiarsky, a communication consultant
for industry and government, suggests holding a meeting of
those who are communicating risk, to understand the context
of the risk communication effort and to align internal
approaches. (Boiarsky 1991)

RELEASING INFORMATION
Audiences generally want as much information as they can get as early in the
process as possible
One is that early risk information—information gathered shortly after
the risk has been identified—has not been subjected to the kind of peer
review necessary to ensure the validity of the scientific results.
Much risk information is either classified in some way (so that
releasing it before a certain time would be detrimental to national security) or
proprietary (early release would damage the organization’s financial or
competitive standing).

ETHICAL ISSUES IN RISK COMMUNICATION
ETHICAL ISSUES
WHY ETHICS CAN BE A DIFFICULT
SUBJECT?
1.EACH OF US HAS OUR OWN ETHICAL CODE
2. THE MORALITY OF A PERSON IS SHAPE BY
THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES AND BELIEFS
3. ETHICS IS A PHILOSOPHICAL STUDY WITH ITS
OWN LANGUAGE AND CONCEPTS.
SOCIAL ETHICS
SOCIAL ETHICS COMPRISE THE CODE OF
CONDUCT BY WHICH SOCIETY JUDGES OUR
BEHAVIOR
THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIETY ON THE
COMMUNICATION OF RISK CAN ITSELF BE AN
ETHICAL ISSUE
The Sociopolitical Environment's Influence
JOSEPH BECK
• society has changed over the years, especially in the
way in which it views risks and how risk decisions are
made.
• social scientist and former congressional and
presidential advisor, attributes these changes in public
involvement to changes in gover-
nance ideologies.
• Until the 1950s, he says, the United States insisted on
strong national
governance, or federalism.
• As this group moved through the educational system
and into the larger society, they made sure that this view
of government by the people was upheld. A good
example, according to Beck, is the way this group
mounted an effort that resulted in the American
abandonment of the Vietnam War.
JAMES CREIGHTON
the consulting firm responsible for many of the
Bonneville Power Administration’ successes in the area
of risk communication and public involvement, has also
observed changes in society in the areas of public
involvement and risk communication.
His focus was on how the public decided to accept any
particular decision, such as how a risk will be managed.
MORE RECENTLY, GRANGER MORGAN AND HIS
ASSOCIATES FROM CARNEGIE-MELLON
UNIVERSITY LAID OUT HISTORICAL STAGES
THROUGH WHICH ORGANIZATIONS HAVE
VIEWED THEIR CHARTER TO ASSESS, organization’s credibility. Provides organization with
COMMUNICATE, AND MANAGE RISKS: broader information net

All we have to do is get the numbers right. Do not involve the public
All we have to do is tell our audience the numbers. Organization will not have to change the way it
All we have to do is explain what we mean by the does business. No chance of loss of control.
numbers.
All we have to do is show our audience that they have Disadvantages
accepted similar risks in the past. Involve the public
All we have to do is show our audience that it is a good Risk managers may resist because of fear of loss
deal for them. of control. Lack of organizational commitment can
All we have to do is treat our audience nicely. result in loss of credibility. Requires more time at the
All we have to do is make our audience our partners beginning of the process.
(Morgan et al. 2002)
Do not involve the public
The choice for those who are communicating risk is Risk analysis, decision, and communication can be
whether or not to involved interested participants in the held up in court indefinitely, delaying project schedules
full cycle assessment, management and communication and increasing budgets. Organization’s credibility
of risk and to what extent. decreases. Loss of potential information critical to
understanding risk.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
INVOLVING THE PUBLIC IN RISK ASSESSMENT, THE USE OF RISK IDIOMS
MANAGEMENT, AND COMMUNICATION. 1. Play with Fire
2. Take a Gamble
Advantages 3. Take a Calculated Risk
4. In Safe Hand
Involve the public 5. The Coast is Clear
Because public participates in risk decision,
decision is likely to last. Project schedules and budgets ETHICAL QUESTIONS OF POWER AND FAIRNESS
less likely to be affected later by lawsuits. Can increase
Who decided that the risk was significant?
Was the judgement based on scientific principles alone
or were the audience’s values considered?
ETHICAL QUESTIONS OF POWER AND FAIRNESS
Who decided what part of information was to be
disseminated if not the entire set of assessment
calculations?
Who decided who would receive the information?
Fairness of the risk
whether the risk is spread equitably over all ethnic
and social groups.
Poor risk communication accompanied by
unresponsive risk management, may cause those at risk
to perceive a lack of equity.
Those who are communicating risk need to
be aware of the potential issue because of its possible
effect on risk communication efforts.
If the audience’s perception is that the risk is being
shared inequitably,
the level of anger and hostility will rise, making
any risk communication effort (care, consensus, or
crisis) extremely difficult.
Angry people do not listen.
Give the audience a role in how the risk is
being assessed and/or managed.
Consequences of Multiple Meanings
Ethical issues within the society is,
Who is to blame if the message is misunderstood?
Who is to blame when a worker misunderstands a
safety procedure and is injured? Is it the fault of the
worker for not reading properly, the organization
for failing to properly train the worker, the
manufacturer of the equipment involved, or the
communicator who wrote a message that could be
misunderstood?
In any given situation, any message can be
misunderstood. No matter how much we analyze
our audience, there will always be someone within
it who misinterprets the risk message.
The choice for those who are communicating risk
is how much information about the audience to
collect.
Principle of technical communication
“Audience, Purpose, and Use”
Know your audience, know your reasons to
communicate with them, know their plans with the
information.
Gathering information on the Audience:
-Baseline
-Midline
Comprehensive
In choosing the appropriate tier, consider your
resources (time, money, and staff), the purpose of
your risk communication effort (care, consensus, or
crisis), and your specific objectives. Also consider
pretesting your messages to identify and correct as
many potential misunderstandings as possible
before wide dissemination.

THE ISSUE OF STIGMA

Communities or individuals facing certain risks can

also face societal disapproval or stigmatizing
behavior.
Those at risk and organizations charged with
managing the risks are often quick to blame the
news media for such stigma.
Sensationalized stories in the public view can
increase stigma.
Those at risk must understand their situation if they
are to take appropriate action to eliminate or
minimize the potential impacts. Those charged with
managing the risk must understand the magnitude
of the risk and potential management mechanisms.

Manipulation of framing (in public health

information) is arguably unethical and probably
impractical.

—Peter Bennett and Sir Kenneth Calman

 They are responsible for communicating accurate and
timely information about risks, including their nature, severity, and
potential impacts. This involves translating technical information
into understandable language for the general public.

2. Risk Assessment
ETHICAL ISSUES RISK in COMMUNICATION
They assess the level of risk associated with a particular
(PERSONAL ETHICS)
situation or event and determine the appropriate communication
strategies based on this assessment.
USING PERSUASION
3. Audience Analysis
. . . [T]he power to change behavior carries the immense ethical
They analyze the characteristics and information needs of
responsibility to use this power wisely. —David B. McCallum (1995, p. 65)
different audience groups to tailor messages effectively. This
includes considering cultural, linguistic, and socio-economic
PERSUASION
factors that may influence how information is received.
Intention – To force an opinion on the audience.
4. Message Development
Persuasive Arguments - used to alarm the audience; motivate them to action
They craft clear, concise, and actionable messages that help people
for fear of loss of life or livelihood
understand the risks and know what actions to take to protect
Justification Usage - time is limited and risks are high.
themselves.
Risk Communicator + Communication Tools = to get people to do what is
5. Engagement and Feedback
best for them.
They engage with stakeholders, community leaders, and the media to
ensure coordinated and consistent messaging. They also gather
Important Question: But even in a crisis, does any organization have the right
feedback from the public to assess the effectiveness of
to tell others what is best?
communication efforts and make necessary adjustments
6. Crisis Communication
The choice for those who are communicating risk is whether persuasion is
In times of crisis or emergencies, risk communicators play a critical
justified in their situations. Situations in which persuasion has
role in providing real-time updates, addressing concerns, and
been justified by risk communicators are those that have one or more of the
mitigating misinformation or panic,
following characteristics:
7. Education and Training
They may conduct training sessions or workshops to educate
CHARACTERISTICS OF SITUATIONS IN WHICH PERSUASION HAS
stakeholders on risk communication principles, strategies, and best
BEEN JUSTIFIED:
practices.
• At least some component of the audience is in immediate danger of injury
Organizational Ethics or Personal Ethics?
or death.
Perhaps the most difficult ethical dilemma comes when personal
• Those at risk are not the same as those engaged in the behavior and have
ethics conflict with organizational ethics. The organization has asked
little control over those engaged in the behavior.
you to downplay, ignore, or, worse, cover up some risk information
• The audience consists of fewer than 10 people who all feel that they are
that, if released, could prevent the injury or death of a number of
social equals of the risk communicator.
people. Yet you have a certain loyalty to the organization that issues
• The audience has specifically asked to be persuaded (for example, by
your paycheck.
inviting a speaker in for a lively debate)
Amount of informationprovided to an audience concerning a
THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNICATOR
particularrisk:
1. Information Dissemination
1. How much information isthe right amount?
2. Which pieces will theaudience feel are necessary?

When faced with such dilemmas, the communicator really has three
choices:
1.follow organizational dictates.
2.step down from the work in question.
3.find someone who will recognize the problem and give it
the attention it deserves.

WHISTLE BLOWER
• Outside agencies may oversee your organization, and if necessary,
you can become a whistleblower by reporting your story to the
media, which may lead to negative consequences and potential career
loss.

SUMMARY
This discussion highlights ethical issues faced by risk
communication professionals, emphasizing the importance of being
aware and resolving these issues to effectively communicate risk.