FEBRUARY 28-29, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
|8:30 am||Welcome and Opening Comments|
|Robert Kraut, Chair, Committee on Public Response to Alerts and Warnings Using Social Media
Denis Gusty, Department of Homeland Security
|9:00||Fundamentals of Alerts, Warnings, and Social Media|
|Much is known about the public response to alerts delivered by sirens, radio, television, and weather radio. As social media play an increasingly important role in societal communication, it will become increasingly important to understand the implications of these new capabilities for disaster alerts and warnings.
What is known about how the public responds to alerts and warnings?
Dennis Mileti, University of Colorado, Boulder
What is known about the use of social media during a disaster?
Kristiana Almeida, American Red Cross
What are barriers to official use of social media during a disaster?
|Edward Hopkins, Maryland State Emergency Management Agency
What technologies are in development for alert dissemination and situational awareness via social media?
Emre Gunduzhan, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Timothy Sellnow, University of Kentucky, moderator
|10:30||Dynamics of Social Media|
|The social aspect of these tools makes them especially attractive because of the ability to leverage the trust people place in their connections. Information about an event that is provided by neighbors, colleagues, friends, or family is often viewed as more credible than a mass alert or a news report. Social media may also provide a useful complement to other tools by providing a way to rapidly disseminate time-sensitive information that may be important to an affected community but not rise to the level of an official alert or warning. How connections form, how information is disseminated, and why users volunteer their time and knowledge to solve problems have been examined by researchers in human-computer interaction, psychology, and computer science. The panel will explore what motivates people to participate in knowledge sharing, what drives self-organizing, and what mechanisms exist for self-correction of information.
Influence mechanisms in social media
Duncan Watts, Yahoo! Research
Incentivizing participation in time-critical situations
Manuel Cebrian, University of California, San Diego
How the Standby Task Force harnesses the power of the crowd
Melissa Elliott, Standby Task Force
Jon Kleinberg, Cornell University, moderator
|1:00 pm||Credibility, Authenticity, and Reputation
During disasters, citizens often post firsthand information and pictures and re-post information they have received from official or unofficial sources. Although both types of information are useful to both emergency officials and the public, such sharing raises questions about how to assess the credibility and authenticity of firsthand reports and redistributed information. For example, although the reach of an official message may be widened if it is redistributed (e.g., retweeted), the message may have been modified in ways not anticipated or desired by its originators. The panel will explore credibility, authenticity and reputation in the context of social media and disasters.
Information verification and rumor control
Paul Resnick, University of Michigan
Mechanisms for determining trustworthiness
Dan Roth, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Training the public to provide useful data during a disaster
David Stephenson, Stephenson Strategies, Medfield, Mass.
Leysia Palen, University of Colorado, Boulder, moderator
|The use of social media by emergency officials raises privacy concerns that were not present with traditional methods of sending alerts and warnings. Also privacy-sensitive, but of potential value to emergency managers, is official monitoring of social media to better detect or understand unfolding events. For example, the networked nature of social media may provide a substantial amount of information about a single individual: based on who one follows on Twitter one may be able to infer where she lives or works and what school her children attend. The panel will consider such questions as:
• What are the public’s perceptions and expectations of privacy, and how can they best be addressed? For
|example, the communications being monitored by government officials, while technically public, may have been sent with certain expectations of privacy such as not being intended to be read by government officials.
• What is the appropriate balance of interests between achieving effective situational awareness and privacy? For example, how should location-tagged information be handled?
• What are best practices in providing adequate notice to the public and ensuring that collected information is used appropriately? For example, how can or should users whose public information is being monitored be made aware of that? How frequently should notice be provided?
• Are there existing features of social media that could be used to help protect privacy? For example, would asking people to use designated mechanisms (e.g., hash tags in Twitter) to label information they intend to be read by government officials constitute an adequate opt-in approach?
Privacy decision making
Lorrie Cranor, Carnegie Mellon University
Social-psychological challenges of social media use in crises
Gloria Mark, University of California, Irvine
Implementation of the “See Something, Say Something” campaign—how privacy can be protected
Bryan Ware, Digital Sandbox
Today’s framework for privacy protection and its application to alerts and warnings using social media
Peter Swire, Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University (remotely)
Alessandro Acquisti, Carnegie Mellon University, moderator
|4:15||Breakout discussion on opportunities and challenges.|
|Wednesday, February 29, 2012|
|8:30 am||Report-backs from breakout sessions|
|9:30||Case Studies of Uses of Social Media in Disasters
Social media is already being used both formally and informally by emergency managers. Researchers have also begun to examine social media communication streams to learn how social media are used during a disaster. This panel will examine recent experience and research on social media use.
Currently used tools for monitoring social media for situational awareness
Brian Humphrey, Los Angeles Fire Department
Use of Twitter for earthquake detection and alerting
Paul Earle, USGS National Earthquake Information Center
The use of social media tools to disseminate information during a health crisis
Keri Lubell, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Leslie Luke, Office of Emergency Services, County of San Diego and Richard Muth, Maryland Emergency Management Agency, moderators
|10:30||Use of Social Media by Nongovernment Organizations
News organizations and technology firms have used social media during crises and disasters to provide information to and gather information from the public. This panel will explore lessons for government from this private-sector experience, partnerships between the public and private sectors, and how new technology may shape those partnerships.
Brad Panovich, News Channel 36, Charlotte, North Carolina
Robert Kraut, Carnegie Mellon University, moderator
|11:15||Looking Ahead: Opportunities and Challenges
What changes in preparation, management, and analysis will be needed to incorporate social media as an information tool?
Murray Turoff, New Jersey Institute of Technology (remotely)
Social media: Legal perspectives on first-responder responsibilities
Aram Dobalian VHA Emergency Management Evaluation Center
Spontaneous and organized digital volunteerism in the future of emergency management
Leysia Palen, University of Colorado, Boulder
Michele Wood, California State University, Fullerton, moderator
|12:30 pm||Wrap-up Panel and Plenary Discussion
Denis Gusty, DHS
Robert Kraut, Carnegie Mellon University
Leysia Palen, University of Colorado, Boulder