2020
DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2020.1719176
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Earthquake Country: A Qualitative Analysis of Risk Communication via Facebook

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Messengers also can use social media to facilitate substantive improvements in risk-related knowledge (Rains et al, 2015). Social media has been successfully used by messengers, for example, to crowdsource knowledge about missing persons, obtain vital "on the ground" response and recovery information during crises, and support collective forms of coping (Demuth et al, 2018;Lambert, 2020). Furthermore, social media has helped shape a new digital information environment where "backchannel" peer-to-peer communication has become more visible, influential, and interactive, thus challenging the dominance of traditional risk communication messengers such as risk managers, journalists, and other professional information brokers (see Sutton & Veil, 2017, for a discussion; Sutton et al, 2014).…”
Section: Messengersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Messengers also can use social media to facilitate substantive improvements in risk-related knowledge (Rains et al, 2015). Social media has been successfully used by messengers, for example, to crowdsource knowledge about missing persons, obtain vital "on the ground" response and recovery information during crises, and support collective forms of coping (Demuth et al, 2018;Lambert, 2020). Furthermore, social media has helped shape a new digital information environment where "backchannel" peer-to-peer communication has become more visible, influential, and interactive, thus challenging the dominance of traditional risk communication messengers such as risk managers, journalists, and other professional information brokers (see Sutton & Veil, 2017, for a discussion; Sutton et al, 2014).…”
Section: Messengersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Social media have changed the ways people cope with COVID-19, enabling information flow among publics and from publics to authorities to support self-resilience building, seek mutual assurance, and forge collective action. Lambert (2020) summarized four key functions of social media during emergencies: providing/receiving information, warnings, and updates; seeking general support; expressing emotions, concerns, and needs; all of which can be achieved by telling or reading stories. Social media make peer-to-peer communication during the pandemic more salient than at other times.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Vemprala et al (2021) examined an outpouring of fear and sadness on Twitter in the wake of COVID-19. Lambert (2020) identified anger as an overwhelming emotion online related to individual behavior. The emotional outpourings often create a toxic chain of negative emotions that travels like wildfire online and trigger strong reaction.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jung and Moro (2014) found five func tionalities after the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake: citizen interpersonal communication; grouplevel communication for organizations, local communities, and local media; distribution channels for the mass media; information dissem ination and gathering; and direct communication between citizens, the media, and the government. Social networks have been used by nonprofit organizations and the media, for example after the 2010 Haiti earthquake (Muralidharan et al 2011), as well as to assess citizen mental health after the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake (Masedu et al, 2014), to disseminate information to deaf people after the 2016 Amatrice earthquake (Rotondi et al, 2018) or to continuously discuss earthquake hazard in Alaska (Lambert, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%