By John Ullyot, Senior Vice President for Media Relations and Issues Management, Public Affairs, Hill and Knowlton, Washington D.C.

In today's world, digital and wireless communications have changed how to plan communications in times of crisis. The natural disasters that struck Burma and China earlier this year are instructive and offer some communications lessons.

In Burma, where a military regime tightly controls information, the rest of the world struggled to learn the extent of the impact of the cyclone. In contrast, the devastating earthquake that struck China earlier in May, where the broad access to wireless and digital communications—including cell phone cameras and streaming video—meant that vast amounts of information flowed across China and around the world.

These events offer a cautionary tale for those who are involved in communications planning.The fact of the matter is that because of such technology, we need to be prepared for an overabundance of information; information that moves faster than any government agency, first responder or traditional news organization can move.If such technology and information is managed properly, the result can save lives.If not, the outcome can be confusion, chaos and panic.

In today's world such technology cannot be controlled, short of shutting down or disabling networks. Therefore, we need to test our plans and systems to ensure that they are designed for such a scenario, to break through the clutter and noise. In short, accurate and timely information can prove as vital as shelter, medical care and food supplies in times of disaster.And, the importance of making sure that spokespersons are properly trained to deliver clear messages in the face of a crisis cannot be understated.

In preparation for testimony earlier this year on communications planning for a nuclear terrorist attack in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security, Hill & Knowlton commissioned a nationwide survey to provide a benchmark of current awareness of issues relating to the scenario of an attack on a major American city. The three key results were:

• Almost half of all Americans believe they are not equipped today with sufficient information about what they should do in the event of an attack;
• The closer people are to an actual attack, the more likely they are to look to, and rely on, information from local emergency management authorities, as opposed to federal authorities and leaders; and
• Of all the types of information provided in the aftermath of an attack, people place a premium on messages that are, in order: (a) accurate, giving the full facts, no matter how negative, followed by (b) information that is timely.Comparatively few are interested in more abstract, general information such as how the nation will respond to the attack.

The research results and the observations from the natural disasters in China and Burma offer some important lessons for the government's communications planning. To save lives, the government should focus on core areas including the role of interagency coordination, pre-event message development, stakeholder identification, spokesperson identification and preparation, involving media and digital organizations, public-private partnerships, education and awareness efforts, the criticality of period immediately after an event, and training and lessons learned.This holds true for other entities, including corporations, who must be prepared to act when disaster strikes.

It is important that the government's communications plans recognize the need to have a means of providing sufficient content and spokespersons to ensure a stream of accurate and contextual information; to have in place a wholly aligned coordination and communication among federal, state and local authorities; and to provide adequate information to deal with a scenario such as a terrorist nuclear attack.

In addition to the U.S. government's accomplishments in terms of preparing our nation for such an event, it needs to ensure that the communications planning recognizes the powerful technological and societal forces that have fundamentally changed the manner in which the public receives and shares information, and by identifying those remaining barriers to effective communications.

John Ullyot is Senior Vice President for Media Relations and Issues Management and leads the Public Affairs practice in H&K's Washington, DC office. This article is an excerpt of the testimony that John delivered before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security on May 15, 2008. The full written testimony can be found at http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/051508Ullyot.pdf.