MY PAPER IS ATTACHED AND My professor comments are “Enclosed is your peer-reviewed paper with their suggestions and their assessment of your paper per the rubric(ATTACHED).You should take this into consideration as you make revisions to your paper before final submission.My personal reading of the paper shows some pearls. I would like to see a bit more teaching of ow good crisis communication is composed and delivered as the metric against Christie performance.A few more references would be essential to prove to me you read and understood the assigned material for study”I know you can do this with excellence. IF YOU DIDNT FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS , I WILL IMMEDIATLY REFUND MY MONEY.
03_dm631.1.risk_and_crisis_communicationcomments.docx
03_dmm_631_peer_review_rubric_for_crisis_communication_analysis_paper.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Running head: RISK COMMUNICATION
1
Risk and Crisis Communication
Thomas Jefferson University – East Falls
Organizational Management & Communication in Disasters DMM 631
Dr. Burton
RISK COMMUNICATION
2
Risk and Crisis Communication
The first principle in risk and crisis communication is to ensure that there is no harm. In
most cases, announcing a risk or crisis to the members of the public may be accompanied by some
form of panic and fear. Additionally, the use of poor communication skills may elevate the levels
of anxiety and panic among the members of the public. In the past, during the announcement or
reporting of a terrorist attack by the media houses, cases of psychological trauma have been
reported (Lundgren & McMakin, 2018). Also, during such communications, one must endeavor
to instill confidence in the prevention of panicking. The provision of relevant information in
advance may prevent any harm during the actual events.
The other principle states that there should be proper communication with the members of
the public. Individuals with some experience in disaster management should be allowed to restore
calmness in people. The other important principle is to develop a plan in advance. Additionally, it
is essential to go through the program to acquire a better understanding. Consequently, one must
be prepared to answer various questions from the audience. Moreover, it is essential to formulate
a consistent, understandable, and accurate message. This allows a natural understanding of the
actual message. There should be a proper use of body language. This includes maintaining eye
contact with the members of the public. This is because one may use the wrong body language and
end up communicating the wrong message. Avoiding pitfalls is another essential principle. Some
of the common pitfalls include the use of jargon, humor, negative words, allegations, among
others. The aforementioned mistakes should be avoided to effectively communicate the intended
message (Ulmer, Sellnow & Seeger, 2017). Finally, there should be effective communication with
the media. This is achieved by turning media into an ally. Moreover, all the facts and statistics
RISK COMMUNICATION
3
necessary to the risk or crisis management should be presented to the press in written form.
Besides, it is essential to anticipate questions from the media, and one should be careful not to
speculate about anything. In order to avoid speculation, one should mention that more information
is required to make a precise conclusion.
Governor Chris Christie’ s report on Superstorm Sandy seems to follow some principles of
risk and crisis communication. However, his communication does not endeavor to restore
confidence among the members of the public. When he was about to end his communication, he
mentioned that the storm and the overall situation is perilous. He instilled a feeling of fear rather
than confidence. One of the principles that are followed in this communication is the assurance
that further information about the storm and the related destruction would be provided later on.
Additionally, he communicates to the public through the media, and this means that he turned
media into an ally. He urges everyone to remain calm and patient in order to facilitate proper
management of the risk. In general, the governor does not seem to follow all the principles
explained above.
In my opinion, proper communication during risk and crisis reporting is the key to
achieving effective management of the situation (Lundgren & McMakin, 2018).
Proper
communication ensures that hope and confidence are restored among the citizens. Consequently,
any reporting should be based on facts, statistics, and relevant information. In connection with this,
speculation should be avoided at all costs. Instead, unclear information should not be reported. The
communicator of the message should assure the media and the citizens of later briefing in order to
gather all the relevant information. Consequently, it is crucial to have a good plan on how to do
RISK COMMUNICATION
4
the actual communication. Lack of preparedness may lead to ineffective communication and a lack
of confidence.
References
Lundgren, R. E., & McMakin, A. H. (2018). Risk communication: A handbook for communicating
environmental, safety, and health risks. John Wiley & Sons.
Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2017). Effective crisis communication: Moving
from crisis to opportunity. Sage Publications.
Peer Review Rubric for Crisis Communication Analysis Paper
Reviewer Name:___ ____________
Paper File Name:___03 raw DM631.1.Risk and Crisis Communication_________________
Paper Title:___Risk and Crisis Communication
________________
Crisis Communication Event (Circle)
Superstorm Sandy-Chris Christie Katrina New Orleans-Ray Nagin Chicago Tylenol Event- J&J
Assignment: Identify and critique the relevant principles of risk and crisis communication
programs. Critically analyze the crisis communication program and messaging issued by one of
the following…
Rubric
N
ot
ad
eq
ua
te
Item
Did the introduction identify the WHAT (crisis event),
and address the communication program
Did the introduction identify the WHAT (crisis event),
and address the specific crisis messaging?
Did the introduction propose the content to be
covered in the paper?
Did the body of the paper define the situation
(background) by identifying the WHEN and WHERE?
Did the paper explore the WHO (Agency Having
Jurisdiction or Authority AND the target audience) in
appropriate detail?
Did the body specifically articulate the purpose,
mode(s), targets of the Crisis Communication
program
Did the paper specify clearly the messaging that was
used for specific audiences?
Did the paper cite all sources for the previous points
(descriptive: who, what, when, where)?
Did the paper ANALYZE the crisis communication
program (Why, How, What If, Why Not)
Bar
ely
ade
qua
te
Ad
eq
ua
te
G
oo
d
E
x
c
el
le
n
t
Su
per
b
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Did the paper ANALYZE the crisis communication
message (Why, How, What If, Why Not)
Did the paper provide personal insight to the above
analysis?
Did the paper cite authoritative / scientific /academic
sources to support their stated personal analysis?
Did the author propose or attempt an evaluation of
the content described (So What, What’s next)?
Suggested improvements?
Did the conclusion paragraph summarize the paper
clearly without additional new material being
presented?
Was the reference list scholarly appropriate (5-10
references from periodical academic sources)?
Clarity: Were there examples to support the major
proposed findings?
Clarity: Was there more than two sentences
explaining each key concept?
Clarity: Were all unique terms defined?
Accuracy: Were all assertions or statements of fact
referenced?
Accuracy: Could we test or verify all statements
made?
Precision: Were sufficient details provided to
thoroughly understand the situation or statement
described? Were they specific? Was the wording
exact?
Relevance: Does every statement directly relate to
the issue under study? Does every statement help us
to understand the interaction with the issue?
Depth: Did the author identify the factors making the
crisis communication program difficult? Did they
articulate the complexities of the issue?
Breadth: Did the author explore the issues from more
than two perspectives?
Logical: Did the paper make sense in an orderly,
organized way?
Logical: Did the introduction and the conclusion both
refer to the facts and opinions proposed in the body
of the paper
Logical: Was there a visible progression of facts in a
logical order, each notation building or amplifying the
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
prior statements to build a coherent whole? (Outline
evident)
Significance: Did the author identify the most
important aspect of the issue under scrutiny?
Significance: Were few or one central issues
identified and addressed?
Fairness: Was there bias in the work (personal vested
interest)?
Fairness: Was the paper culturally inclusive?
Fairness: Was the paper sympathetically representing
the viewpoints of other perspectives?
What was the Grammarly Premium “score”
Was there evidence of Plagiarism?
Was the APA format followed?
X
X
X
X
X
80
NO
YES
Other items to note:
Comment-Constructive Critique
REFLECT: Recall, ponder, and articulate:
Your comment to the peer:
In the first half of the paper, the author explained principles of risk communication, and this
part successfully explained how risk communication should be performed. The second half
assessed Chris Christie’s methods for communicating with the public about Superstorm Sandy.
The author argues that Christie followed some but not all the principles of risk communication.
The argument was successful because it was based on evidence and concrete examples were
provided.
Reviewer rubric: References specific parts of the project/discussion and relates insight to
course content
(Responds to the project/discussion in vague terms and does not expound upon what was referenced)
INQUIRE: Seek information and /or provide ideas through questioning:
Your comment to the peer:
This paper made me ask the following questions: The storm was dangerous, so how could the
Governor have instilled a feeling of confidence or anything other than fear? Was there much
speculation in the communications about this disaster?
Reviewer rubric: Asks thought-provoking questions that might lead to a new perception or
clarifying questions for a deeper understanding
(Asks passive questions that require a one-word answer or provoke no response at all)
SUGGEST: Introduce ideas for improvement of CURRENT iteration
Your comment to the peer:
This paper can be improved by adding an introduction that summarizes the main points of the paper and
sets the context. A conclusion paragraph summarizing the main points without adding new ideas would
also be helpful. Include three more citations to fulfill the rubric’s quota of 5-10 citations.
Reviewer rubric: Offers specific suggestions for improvement of current project/
discussion based on assignment criteria
(Offers vague or no suggestions for improvement of current project/discussion)
ELEVATE: Raise to a higher degree or purpose in FUTURE iterations
Your comment to the peer:
Clearer writing will be appropriate to implement in future projects. The use of the active voice
will be helpful, as well as less intricate sentences.
Reviewer rubric: Proposes specific ideas for how to expand the project/discussion beyond its
original scope
(Proposes no ideas for expansion beyond the defined assignment criteria)
Concluding Remarks
This paper was overall successful in making its point that the governor followed some of the
risk communication principles but failed to follow others. With a good conclusion and a good
introduction, this paper will turn out great.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Are you having trouble with the above assignment or one similar?

To date, 239 students have ordered this same assignment from us and received 100% original work. We can do the same for you!

We offers 100% original papers that are written from scratch.We also have a team of editors who check each paper for plagiarism before it is sent to you.

Click this “order now” button to see free Cost Breakdown!