GS TS BS LÊ HOÀNG NINH
Truy n thông nguy cơ t t
ề
ố
Chuyển những kiến thức khoa học và kết quả đánh
giá nguy cơ thành các từ, cụm từ dễ hiểu
Giải thích rõ ràng biên dđộ không chắc chắn, các
thiếu hụt về kiến thức và việc triển khai các chương trình nghiên cứu
Nêu rõ vấn đề nào là tin cậy và sự tin tưởng Hiểu đúng các vấn đề nguy cơ công cộng đặc biệt
là xu thế , chiều hướng định tính
ề
ố
Truy n thông nguy cơ t t ( t t)
Biết các vấn đề chuyên biệt có thể nổi lên trong lãnh vực công cộng, cảm nhận của cộng đồng …
Phân tích các điều kiện cần để thông tin cho công
đồng và cơ hội tham gia cộng đồng
Những bước trong truy n ề thông nguy cơ t tố
Chấp nhận những tranh luận khác/ trái chiều Ask permission Apologize Clean up Share (benefits or control) Give credit where it is due
Truy n thông nguy cơ
ề
Nhu cầu cần có
the message (information) the source (origination point of message) The communicator the channel (path) receiver (termination point)
Tin / the Message
Who is the target audience? How can they be reached? What level of education do they have? What do you need to tell them?
Ngu n / the Source
ồ
All sources are not equal (by decreasing
trustworthiness): Family Doctor University researcher media Local government Federal government Industry
ề
Người truy n thông Communicator
Needs to have:
Empathy Trustworthiness (must be earned) Showing emotion Good speaker Eye contact Identify with audience
Channel or Medium
Very important to choose the correct one for
your target
Entire messages can be missed if wrong
medium is chosen Farmers and pesticide warnings on late night TV Complex written materials for Grade 6 education Written materials for evacuation notice due to fire Radio messages in English for French audience,
etc
ề
Ba luật trong truy n thông nguy cơ
tell people that you have determined they
need to know
tell them what they must know so that they
can understand and feel that they understand the info
add qualifiers to prepare them for what you
are not telling them (until more info becomes available)
EPA Risk Communication Guidelines
Accept and involve public as a legitimate partner Plan carefully and evaluate performance listen to your audience be honest, frank and open coordinate and collaborate with other credible
sources
meet the needs of the media speak clearly and with compassion
Powell’s Lessons in Risk Communication
(cid:0) A risk information vacuum is a primary factor in
the social amplification of risk ensure the vacuum either does not exist, or fill it
(cid:0) Regulators are responsible for effective risk
communication Health Canada has an established practice of not announcing the issuance of a regulatory decision
with useful risk messages
US FDA regularly makes brief statements in
conjunction with regulatory actions
Lessons (cont’d)
Industry is responsible for effective risk communication primarily workplace hazards population health hazards (foodborne, etc) general environmental hazards (pesticides, etc) workplace and general env. hazards (metals, etc) incremental risks produced as a byproduct of
(cid:0)
beneficial industrial products (pharmaceuticals, modern transportation, etc)
Lessons (cont’d)
If you are responsible, act early and often some upcoming risks in the next decade are
food safety endocrine disruptors greenhouse gases and global climate change biotechnology, especially agricultural applications health impacts of atmospheric pollutants
(cid:0) There is always more to a risk issue than what
science says what about emotion, moral issues, etc.
(cid:0)
Lessons (cont’d)
(cid:0) Always put the science in a policy context
whatever the risk controversy, the pubic will demand
substitute for good risk communication practice provide lots of information, how and why things are
action by the politicians ban the substance, control the exposure, etc (cid:0) Educating the public about science is no
(cid:0) Banish “no risk” messages
going to be done
Lessons (cont’d)
(cid:0) Risk messages should address directly the
“contest of opinion” in society acknowledge the divergent opinions explain the range of risk estimates legitimate the people who disagree with your risk
(cid:0) Communicating well has benefits for good risk
management
estimates
How to Communicate Risk to Public?
all we have to do is:
get the numbers right tell them the numbers explain what we mean by the numbers show them that they have accepted similar risks in
the past
by Baruch Fischoff
show them that it is a good idea for them treat them nicely make them partners All of the above
Avoid areas of confusion
Zero risk Probability Significant Too careful estimates Negative vs. positive findings Population vs. individual risk Relative vs. absolute Association vs. causation
Communication Problems
occur when the message;
is not what the audience wants to hear is poorly presented is improper comes from the wrong source is sent via the wrong channel
10 Deadly Sins of Presenting
Appearing unprepared. Handling questions improperly. Apologizing for yourself or the organization. Not knowing knowable information. Unprofessional use of audiovisual aids. Seeming to be off schedule. Not involving participants. Not establishing rapport. Appearing disorganized. Providing the wrong content.
Identifying Strategies
1 look for use of confusing terms in your message
2 step back and review wording
either remove them or explain them
listen to other non-scientific discussions to see use
of words and their meaning
adopt the popular usage of the word and its
meaning
ID Strategies (cont’d)
3 Pre-test your message
use friend or family member (non-scientific) ask them to identify words of concern or confusion 4 Discuss your message with your “mock” audience
may find out that your explanation is not good
enough
may determine where your communication went
wrong
Dealing with the Mixed Message
1 substitute less confusing words 2 if the word is still needed, clearly define it in the
text
3 give examples of intended meaning and some
misuses of the term right in the text of the message
4 use analogies, definitions, comparisons to help
explain the term
5 be consistent in the use of the term
Designing your Risk Communication
Choose your forum Choose your message Choose your source Know your audience!
Focus group
How People Learn
60
50
40
%
30
20
oral visual written
10
0
16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+
Age groups
How do people learn?
Figure 1-1. Easiest Format to Learn From -
Preferences by Age Group, From EPA, 2004, Evaluation of Mercury Risk Communication Messages.
Exercise: choose your medium
Break into groups
Choose your medium based on who the intended audience is (reading from EPA Graph on how people best integrate knowledge)
How would you choose to tell:
50+ women the risks of hormone replacement
therapy?
Teenagers the risks of texting and driving? A small community of the acceptability of a new
incinerator?
Know your audience
The likelihood of achieving a successful risk communication program increases with your knowledge of those with whom you are communicating.
Early in the process, know who your publics
are, what their concerns are, how they perceive risk, and whom they trust.
Characteristics of your Publics
Are they potential supporters or potential adversaries?
Concerns Attitudes Levels of interest Levels of involvement Histories Levels of knowledge Opinions Reasons for interest Types of involvement
Interacting with the Community(Chess et al. 1988)
Citizen involvement is important because
people are entitled to make decisions about issues
that directly affect their lives;
input from the community can help the agency
make better decisions;
involvement in the process leads to greater
understanding of - and more appropriate reaction to - a particular risk;
those who are affected by a problem bring different
variables to the problem-solving equation; and
cooperation increases credibility.
Creating the Message
What are the three most important things you
would like your audience to know?
What are the three most important things
your audience would like to know?
What are the three most important things your audience is most likely to get wrong unless they are emphasized? (Vincent Covello)
Sound bite research:
Assumption: national news, controversial
topic 7 to 9 seconds (21-27 words, 30 words max.)
3 messages 9 second knowledge/trust
window (Vincent Covello)
Risk Information Vacuum
work of risk communication is to fill the gap between public knowledge and scientific assessment of risk gap will always exist how to fill it is the question
over a long period of time, scientists make no special
effort to communicate the results being obtained regularly and effectively to the public
instead, partial scientific info dribbles out here and
there, being interpreted in apparently conflicting ways and increases the public’s fear
risk information vacuum arises when
Vacuum (cont’d)
failure to implement good risk communication
practices gives rise to a risk information vacuum
this failure can have grave and expensive
consequences for those regarded as being responsible for protecting the public’s interest society abhors a vacuum, so it is filled from other
sources
Vacuum (cont’d)
events reported in the media will become the basis for
the public framing of these risks
an interest group takes up the challenge and fills the vacuum with its own information and perspectives the intuitively based fears and concerns of individuals
grow & spread until they become a substantial consensus in the arena of pubic opinion
vacuum is filled by soothing sentiments of politicians
“there is no risk of danger from ......”
the vacuum gets filled:
Examples of Vacuums
dioxins
mad cow disease
outrageous media headlines scientific research no communications on the issue until too late Greenpeace filled the vacuum
panic ensued when government did not provide
details on the suspicions around the spread of BSE
vacuum was filled by media and individual
suspicions that become consensus
Examples of Vacuums
silicone breast implants
manufacturers did not disclose their information in a
potential risks
timely manner failed to encourage a frank and open discussion of
vacuum was created by the lack of this discussion panic and fear of autoimmune diseases filled the
vacuum lawsuits began and are still costing billions of dollars no scientific information to support the claims
Examples (cont’d)
genetically altered/engineered crops
people upset because the technology is unfamiliar government doesn’t want to talk about the issues
with the public
vacuum will be filled, and it may be damaging to the
industry
Why Aren’t the Experts Trusted?
expert group may have financial interest in
proving the risk is small remediation technology spokesperson wanting to
use the technology
local mayor wanting to get re-elected company spokesperson not wanting plant shut
historical examples exist of where experts were
wrong and handful of dissenters and activists were right
down
Why aren’t the experts trusted? (cont’d)
scientists tell us that risk assessment is a rough
science and subject to error need to better explain how risk assessment is done need to better explain the use of safety factors some environmental risks are gradual, delayed,
geometrical (made worse by other risks) better act now
even though no evidence yet exists
What will good risk communication do?
over time good risk communication practices will:
uncertainty associated with them
nurture a facility for interpreting risk numbers including the meaning of risk estimates and the
help people to put the whole assortment of risks
affecting them into a broad framework relative risk, comparative risk
build institutional structures for arriving at a
consensus on risk management options, and for allocating risk reduction resources effectively
What is Risk?
risk= hazard + outrage
experts need to realize
public cares too little about hazard expert cares too little about outrage
Peter Sandman
outrage is as real as hazard outrage is as measurable as hazard outrage is as manageable as hazard outrage is as much a part of risk as hazard outrage is as much a part of your job as hazard
Other Facts on Risk
people overestimate hazard and are outraged
misunderstand hazard and get outraged? get outraged and misunderstand hazard?
who is right?
which comes first?
usually experts are right about hazard usually public is right about outrage
How to Solve Risk Dilemma?
solution
experts must
take public outrage seriously keep outrage separate from hazard respect people’s outrage
Risk Communication: Myths and Actions (Chess et al. 1988) Belief in some common myths often
interferes with development of an effective risk communication program. Consider the myths and actions you can take. Myth: We don't have enough time and resources
to have a risk communication program. Action: Train all your staff to communicate more effectively. Plan projects to include time to involve the public.
Myths 2
Myth: Telling the public about a risk is more likely to unduly alarm people than keeping quiet. Action: Decrease potential for alarm by giving people a chance to express their concerns. Myth: Communication is less important than education. If people knew the true risks, they would accept them.
Action: Pay as much attention to your process for dealing with people as you do to explaining the data.
Myths 3
Myth: We shouldn't go to the public until we
have solutions to environmental health problems. Action: Release and discuss information about
risk management options and involve communities in strategies in which they have a stake.
Myths 4
Myth: These issues are too difficult for the
public to understand. Action: Separate public disagreement with your policies from misunderstanding of the highly technical issues.
Myth: Technical decisions should be left in
the hands of technical people. Action: Provide the public with information.
Listen to community concerns. Involve staff with diverse backgrounds in developing policy.
Myths 5
Myth: Risk communication is not my job. Action: As a public servant, you have a
responsibility to the public. Learn to integrate communication into your job and help others do the same.
Myth: If we give them an inch, they'll take a
mile. Action: If you listen to people when they are
asking for inches, they are less likely to demand miles. Avoid the battleground. Involve people early and often.
Myths 6
Myth: If we listen to the public, we will
devote scarce resources to issues that are not a great threat to public health. Action: Listen early to avoid controversy and the potential for disproportionate attention to lesser issues.
Myths 7
Myth: Activist groups are responsible for
stirring up unwarranted concerns. Action: Activists help to focus public anger. Many
environmental groups are reasonable and responsible. Work with groups rather than against them.
High Hazard, low outrage
Keep the risk message short. Make the risk message interesting. Stay on message. Test the risk messages. Plan and prepare for a long-term endeavour. Appeal to needs. Appeal to emotions, especially fear. http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand59a.pdf)
Cont’d
See fear arousal as a competition Don’t neglect other emotions. Identify and
give people task that they can do.
Give people a selection of tasks to choose
from.
Sequence recommended precautions. Think in stages. Focus resources on teachable moments.
Cont’d
Be alert for a short-term over-reaction. Be alert for signs of denial. Identify and address persuasion facilitators. Identify persuasion barriers and consider
addressing them.
Express empathy for apathy. Consider an alternative: pre-crisis
communication.
What is a Focus Group?
special kind of interview for the purpose of
collective information about a specific subject or area of concern useful for gathering information on risk perceptions used to assess needs, preferences and attitudes
formulate risk messages determine appropriate channel choose a communicator frame the risk information in an acceptable way
information can then be used to
Focus Group Design
facilitator spends 2-8 hours with eight to twelve
people job is to ensure all areas are explored usually has a helper to make group work better
free flowing discussion group usually made up of individuals who have
something in common age, activity, employed by same company, etc.
record activities on flow chart or tape
Why use a focus group?
allows participants to discuss a subject openly
and in great detail
research can be conducted quickly
organize, conduct and analyse research from several focus groups in as little as 2 weeks decisions can then be implemented almost
far less intimidating or frustrating than other forms
of research anxiety of the individuals is lessened in the group
immediately
context
Goals for Collecting Information
determine the interests, needs, attitudes of a
sample of community members about a particular risk issue objectives
determine attitudes and opinions already in
existence
determine knowledge level about this particular risk determine the resources necessary to better
communicate risk
obtain ideas on how to best communicate with this
community
Identifying Participants
look carefully at the community
demographics determine who may have most need for the risk
information
usually no more than 8 groups are necessary
who is more interested?
more important than numbers is how the groups are
chosen
How to Contact Participants?
telephone letters meeting with people meeting with leaders of already established
organizations
how to introduce yourself why is issue important who you are what is the objective of the focus group why is the individual valuable
Planning and Preparation
place
find a comfortable location, accessible to the
majority
make sure there are enough chairs and room for
everyone time and date
convenient to majority be there an hour before hand let everyone know how long it will be, and stick to it don’t go longer than 2 hours
Leading the Focus Group
guidelines
no right or wrong answers opinions are wanted we do not have to agree it is important for everyone to participate we will finish in two hours your names will be confidential all the information will be used in your community
Focus Group Skills
avoid a question and answer session let it be open set a cooperative tone be open and pleasant be prepared and organized establish and maintain an easy rapport be non-judgmental use probing techniques (to get further information)
facilitator
Closing the Focus Group
summarize the session briefly thank them for their ideas ask if they want to know the results ask them if they want to keep in touch give them your name and number for future contact let them know when the information will be released
to the community and when they will be able to give feedback
Nelson Fok
Case Studies
Choose one of the 4 cases: Who is your audience? What is your message?
What three things do you want to communicate? What words will you use? Who is your communicator? What/who is your source? What will be your method/forum?
Case 1
E coli has been found in water supply for a
small area of cottage country, rural Canada.
Case 2
Breast feeding rates are very low in your
health region. You have been tasked with trying to improve the rate to national levels.
Case 3
A local industry wants to build an incinerator
in your area. They have been a good corporate citizen in the past, and have good environmental history. Your department has approved the incinerator. The local people are upset and demanding answers. They are worried about cancer and emissions.
Case 4
A poor result from a food inspection has
