Pitfalls in communication
Emergency warning is great in theory; unfortunately, implementation and how people respond to the alert vary
Published: 02:06 PM,Jun 07,2023 | EDITED : 06:06 PM,Jun 07,2023
Getting the attention of people who are at risk to enable them to take appropriate actions is the primary aim of emergency warnings. Individuals receive a message on their mobile phones about the actual threat and some advice on how to deal with the situation. This is great in theory; unfortunately, implementation and how people respond to the alert vary.
Since I had not heard of the phone warning testing, when my phone started making a funny noise, I wondered what was wrong with it. Hours later, I realised there was an emergency mobile phone test in Muscat. Surprise took several subscribers to the two major Internet providers.
I consider myself to be reasonably well informed. Maybe not so much after this. Following the testing performed in the middle of May, the English language local media published various articles. A few days earlier, there had been a message on social media about a link on YouTube to register for the alert. It seemed like a prank. The assumption was based on two reasons: first, I was unaware of mobile alert testing, and second, the message, which needed to be translated into English, was unclear.
Apparently, before the trial, some media interviews informed the population on how to activate the early warning alerts. Given that these were awareness initiatives, how is it possible that residents were surprised by the trial message? Some were clueless about it, local newspapers reported.
According to one article, the early-warning system is supposed to be a multilingual text message and is intended to inform citizens about extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes, tsunamis, heavy rains, strong winds, poor horizontal vision, or industrial disasters such as fires or gas leaks. Far-reaching, especially if the receiver gets a message in a foreign language. More importantly, mobile phone networks should remain functional during and after major natural disasters.
After the trial, news articles indicated that people who did not receive the alert were instructed to register at a certain link. Another article suggested that subscribers confirm receipt of the notification by clicking on the link in the message. How could people know it was not a hoax?
How can the community be properly informed if public communication is limited in scope? Consider this: what guarantees are there that the alert system has not been hacked and is not being used for malicious purposes? With the rise in cybercrime, adolescents and adults are being educated to be cautious of the information they receive on their mobile phones. Warning alerts can be sent accidentally. In 2018, residents in Hawaii were falsely warned of an incoming ballistic missile attack!
In any emergency, effective public communication can lessen the negative impacts of a disaster and save lives. However, the style of a text message – when clear - is mostly designed for an adult audience, which would be sophisticated or unfamiliar for young adults, adolescents, or children. Would alarms be sent to seniors who still use old models of phones without Internet service? What about public transportation drivers? Would they be checking their devices when the alarm rang? Will the conventional driving restrictions, such as not looking at or interacting with phones while driving, apply to warning notifications?
It is difficult to predict how individuals will react to alerts. People will begin to ignore communications if they receive them frequently, are poorly written, or are ambiguous. People can become numb to messages that are sent about situations that are not relevant to the recipient or that are not perceived as serious enough. Studies point to three factors that influence compliance with alerts: understanding, believing and personalising.
While warning alerts are still in the testing phase and many questions need to be answered, people are already browsing in settings for how to disable the notifications.
Since I had not heard of the phone warning testing, when my phone started making a funny noise, I wondered what was wrong with it. Hours later, I realised there was an emergency mobile phone test in Muscat. Surprise took several subscribers to the two major Internet providers.
I consider myself to be reasonably well informed. Maybe not so much after this. Following the testing performed in the middle of May, the English language local media published various articles. A few days earlier, there had been a message on social media about a link on YouTube to register for the alert. It seemed like a prank. The assumption was based on two reasons: first, I was unaware of mobile alert testing, and second, the message, which needed to be translated into English, was unclear.
Apparently, before the trial, some media interviews informed the population on how to activate the early warning alerts. Given that these were awareness initiatives, how is it possible that residents were surprised by the trial message? Some were clueless about it, local newspapers reported.
According to one article, the early-warning system is supposed to be a multilingual text message and is intended to inform citizens about extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes, tsunamis, heavy rains, strong winds, poor horizontal vision, or industrial disasters such as fires or gas leaks. Far-reaching, especially if the receiver gets a message in a foreign language. More importantly, mobile phone networks should remain functional during and after major natural disasters.
After the trial, news articles indicated that people who did not receive the alert were instructed to register at a certain link. Another article suggested that subscribers confirm receipt of the notification by clicking on the link in the message. How could people know it was not a hoax?
How can the community be properly informed if public communication is limited in scope? Consider this: what guarantees are there that the alert system has not been hacked and is not being used for malicious purposes? With the rise in cybercrime, adolescents and adults are being educated to be cautious of the information they receive on their mobile phones. Warning alerts can be sent accidentally. In 2018, residents in Hawaii were falsely warned of an incoming ballistic missile attack!
In any emergency, effective public communication can lessen the negative impacts of a disaster and save lives. However, the style of a text message – when clear - is mostly designed for an adult audience, which would be sophisticated or unfamiliar for young adults, adolescents, or children. Would alarms be sent to seniors who still use old models of phones without Internet service? What about public transportation drivers? Would they be checking their devices when the alarm rang? Will the conventional driving restrictions, such as not looking at or interacting with phones while driving, apply to warning notifications?
It is difficult to predict how individuals will react to alerts. People will begin to ignore communications if they receive them frequently, are poorly written, or are ambiguous. People can become numb to messages that are sent about situations that are not relevant to the recipient or that are not perceived as serious enough. Studies point to three factors that influence compliance with alerts: understanding, believing and personalising.
While warning alerts are still in the testing phase and many questions need to be answered, people are already browsing in settings for how to disable the notifications.