icegov2012 proceedings

is better than those government agencies that will never accept
their faults.”
The level of damage was also addressed. Four messages published
information about the number of injured and their situations in the
hospital. In a message posted at 17:43 on September 27, the
official microblog claimed that according to the information from
the hospital, 212 people were injured. It was also claimed that
most of the victims were slightly injured. The wording “slightly
injured” could be seen as fact information as well as a diminishing
strategy. However, the audience showed suspicion of the data. For
instance, one comment was: “How do you define the phrase
‘slightly injured’?” Moreover, there were more than one comment
indicating doubt about the number of injured persons. For instance,
one microblogger claimed that the number of injured reported by
Japanese TV (at 22:00 on September 27) was 271. However, the
official microblog failed to respond to these different voices.
Bolstering is also suggested by crisis communication theories [2,
5]. This aims at increasing positive feelings towards the
organization in order to reduce the offensiveness of the crisis [2].
The official microblog tried to show concern for the passengers
and the efforts they were making to mitigate the negative impact
of the collision. For instance, the official microblog reposted a
message (9:01 on September 28) with a picture of volunteers
helping passengers. The official microblog commented: “We
appreciate the citizen’s support. Watching the passengers living
the station, we feel very sorry. Now we will do our best to check
the route and return to normal option as soon as possible. Please
trust us.” This message showed concern for passengers who were
affected by the collision. It also showed people were helping each
other. This message received 210 comments. There were 17
comments indicating that what the public needs is the
investigation into the responsibility for the collision and the
reason of the accident, 10 comments concerning the future safety
of the Metro, 13 messages blaming the Metro for trying to turn the
bad event into a good one, and 8 comments blaming the Metro for
talking rather than doing. However, there were still 26 comments
supporting this post. One comment was: “The government does
not usually speak in such a tone. The Metro’s public
communication is praiseworthy. In my opinion, this crisis
communication is acceptable and even touching. ” Interestingly
enough, some of the microbloggers expressed their love of the
city and the volunteers other than the Metro. One comment was
“This is the spirit of Shanghai City (to help each other).” It seems
that the official microblog successfully related the accident to the
whole city.
4.3.2 Meet the public’s needs
The general public’s needs in the crisis event stage are the need
for the organization to make decisions and reduce the negative
emotions caused by uncertainties.
The official microblog posted 18 messages with alternative bus
transfer information. Pictures and tables were appropriately used
here in order to bypass the limitations of the length of the text
message. Moreover, the official microblog attempted to report the
current situation of the crisis, including how many people were
injured and the status of the train involved in the collision. Such
information contributed to reducing uncertainty about the crisis.
The reactions of the public were varied. Some were appreciative,
saying, “The reaction of the Metro is quick and efficient.”
However, there were still microbloggers showing their concerns
255
for the issues of who or what was responsible for the crisis. Other
citizens were worried about safety issues.
4.3.3 The social values
The messages posted during the crisis should meet the
requirements of social values. Some core values identified by
scholars are honesty, responsibility, openness, and humanism.
Many of the messages posted by the official microblog were with
pictures from the scene of the accident, which increased the
reliability of the Metro Company. What is more, the official
microblog also cited posts from other microbloggers. However,
the Metro failed to respond to the fact information that was
different from the information posted by the official microblog,
which hurt the trustworthiness of both the messages and the Metro.
Moreover, there was no clear statement regarding the
responsibility for the collision. We can see from the comments
that people were angry about the vague descriptions of the
responsible parties. However, the official microblog did express
the willingness to release information. Messages tagged “the latest
information” were used to release information about the crisis
situation.
For humanism, in their apology the Metro Company showed their
regrets. They used the words “we regret the loss and the hurt
experienced by the citizens and the passengers”. Besides, in one
message it was shown that volunteers, police, and bus drivers
were there to help passengers enthusiastically. In a message
saying, “Watching the passengers leaving the State, we feel so
sorry…”, the Metro showed concern to those who were involved
in the accident. However, the official microblog did not
particularly show sympathy for the injured.
4.3.4 The future view
The future view should stress the positive side, the future,
rebuilding, and correcting mistakes. The official microblog did
meet this requirement. In more than one message, the Metro use
the words “We will”. For instance, in the apology messages, “We
will learn from the accident…” and “We will work hard…” were
used. In some messages, the official microblog cited pictures of
people helping each other to remind the public of the positive side
of the accident. Although the messages received support, such as
“cheer up!” and “touching,” there were people who wished the
Metro would act instead of only speaking.
4.4 Post-crisis Stage
In the post-crisis stage the tasks are preparing for the next crisis,
namely learning from the crisis as well as evaluating the crisis
response strategy; checking the public’s impression; and checking
that the crisis is truly over.
First, the organization showed its intention to learn from the crisis,
at least in its apology. Moreover, the comments made by the
public during the time of the crisis can be a good resource for the
organization to evaluate its crisis communication strategies.
Secondly, there was evidence indicating that the official
microblog did try to follow the public’s comments and monitor
the public’s impression. The official microblog replied to one
citizen’s comment, “We appreciate all of the comments; even
some of the comments are criticisms”.
Finally, strategies such as apology, bolstering, and compensation
can all be used in the post-crisis stage due to the lack of full