Which communication channels should be prioritized to make populations aware of local volcanic risks? In the internet age, is it still necessary to privilege the classic channels (radio, television, posters), or are the new communication channels (websites, social media) sufficient? Using an interview-based survey of a population in Peru (n = 76) who have been the object of several volcanic risk communication campaigns using posters, websites, social media and traditional media, we compare the recall (memorization) and perception of these previous campaigns. Two main empirical results emerge from the interviews: 1) Web- sites are proving to be particularly effective communication channels in this context, in stark contrast to the low impact of the printed press; 2) We find that the the same communication campaigns are perceived differently by residents depending on the neighborhood in which they live. This second empirical result advocates for a much more territory-based and localized strategy, where the district by district socio-cultural and geological environment form the foundations for communication strategies.