In late August 2005, a weak Category 1 hurricane made landfall in Florida causing minimal damage and a slight annoyance to residents. The storm passed over the landmass of Florida and into the Gulf of Mexico, over doubling in size and strengthening greatly. In just one day this storm strengthened to a Category 5 strength hurricane, the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the Gulf of Mexico at the time. The morning of August 29th, the infamous Hurricane Katrina made landfall over New Orleans, Louisiana. As a result of the hurricane force winds and torrential downpour, the storm caused over $125 billion in damages and claimed thousands of lives. Fatal engineering flaws to levee systems around the city of New Orleans caused widespread flooding, with over 80% of the city overrun with stormwater. The iconic images of the tattered and mangled Superdome football stadium in the center of the city flooded with refugees were broadcast on every news network as hundreds of thousands of people were forced to exile from the city. FEMA relief after the storm was widely criticized due to mismanagement, lack of leadership, and delayed response. In the months and years following the storm, the technical risk communication among government officials and experts to citizens of New Orleans was intently researched. The research concluded that the communications were sufficient in some areas, but inconsistent or nonexistent in others.

When a natural disaster occurs, there is always variable time to respond and react. For years up to Hurricane Katrina, FEMA and other groups named the levees in New Orleans as one of the top three high risk areas for catastrophe in the entire country. The issue was known and not addressed effectively before the city’s luck ran out. For the storm itself, preemptive education and communication was widespread.  Accurate hurricane advisories and storm surge forecasts were issued at least 36 hours ahead of landfall. Emergency managers were briefed on the likely possibility of the levees failing and the city being overcome with water. The National Hurricane Center was one of the leaders with providing accurate, succinct and predictive scientific information for the storm with over 900 million website views between August 27th and August 29th. It was clear that the risk was easy detectable and understandable by all citizens. One large area of communication failure was with communications regarding mandatory evacuation for the endangered population. The evacuation language in the hours preceding landfall was vague and uncertain. The Mayor Ray Nagin first recommended evacuation, and later urged “voluntary” evacuation while at the same time telling residents to be sure to stock up on supplies like batteries, water, and other necessities. Many residents claimed that the news and government did not give any warning and when they were saying to leave it was too late. In this particular situation lack of spokesman credibility was important as well, with the population consisting of 66% African Americans in predominantly low-income areas with research shown reduced confidence in government authorities.  It is very important with technical messaging to know your audience and use a media that will be most successful in conveying the message to them.

In summary, the technical risk communication associated with Hurricane Katrina was successful in some ways but failed in others. Widespread reach and accurate scientific data were positive, but vague and uncertain instructions from various spokespeople did not allow citizens to confront the risks appropriately. Content may have been correct across general messaging, but rhetoric failed to convey the importance of evacuation and incoming danger to the at-risk population.

Resources

  1. Cole, Terry W., and Kelli L. Fellows. “Risk Communication Failure: A Case Study of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina.” Southern Communication Journal, vol. 73, no. 3, 2008, pp. 211–228., doi:10.1080/10417940802219702.

 

Case Studies