VCDL removed from Facebook?

[Aguila Blanca]

for true emergencies or vital updates you should be able to go directly to the .org/.gov ect web page, not social media. if you can't you should re-access where you get vital/emergency information.

I think you missed the fact that many local governments seem to have decided that everyone has Facebook (we know that's not true, but they don't) so they don't maintain their web sites with current information. Their default, "go to" medium of communication when they want/need to disseminate information quickly is Facebook.

 

[44 AMP]

I think you missed the fact that many local governments seem to have decided that everyone has Facebook (we know that's not true, but they don't) so they don't maintain their web sites with current information. Their default, "go to" medium of communication when they want/need to disseminate information quickly is Facebook.

While I have no issues with govt (local or otherwise) using Facebook, I do not think that they should use it exclusive of their official channels of communication.

in other words, AFTER they have updated their website or what ever other system of communication they have, as spelled out in their emergency response procedures. Which they DO have, even if few know of them or follow them.

 

[ghbucky]

While I have no issues with govt (local or otherwise) using Facebook, I do not think that they should use it exclusive of their official channels of communication.

I agree. But, I also see why they rely on social media. Updating a website requires tooling and knowledge. For a small community, that can be a challenge. Facebook and Twitter have mastered the tech to allow pretty much anyone to make updates that can be disseminated to an interested audience.

In a fast moving situation things get dicey. I referenced trying to follow updates on a wildfire near a friend. To expand: I think it was the Glenwood Springs fire (2 years ago, started on 4th of July iirc). The fire moved fast, and the FD was pushing updates to their website, but they were relying on FB to provide detailed info. What was happening on FB was crazy. People were making claims that the fire was where it wasn't, and other people were denying that was the case so the end result was a fog of confusion for events that could have catastrophic results if people made the wrong decision based on this info.

My issue was that FB was protecting some info (I'm not sure if this was due to me continually refusing to login and FB deciding that I had viewed enough info without logging in, or the FD ignorance of how to make their updates public). So, if I did not have a FB account, I could not view detailed info.

I have a lot of beefs with twitter, but at least with their stuff the publisher has to enact specific privacy to stop the public from viewing what is tweeted.

In the course of revisiting this, I went back to the FD that was dealing with this and I note that they have since enacted an emergency notification system where you can subscribe to a service via your cell phone and you will directly receive emergency notifications from them. Of course, this is a very wealthy community and this solution is probably not viable everywhere.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I agree. But, I also see why they rely on social media. Updating a website requires tooling and knowledge. For a small community, that can be a challenge. Facebook and Twitter have mastered the tech to allow pretty much anyone to make updates that can be disseminated to an interested audience.

That's the problem. Web sites also require hosting, and I assume that even government entities have to pay for hosting unless they're big enough (and technological enough) to run their own server(s) and self-host. Even then, as you mentioned, updating a web site requires someone who speaks Internet and who knows how to upload something to the web.

Facebook? Twitter? Anyone can post something on Facebook, or Twitter. What do you want to say ... DONE. It's quick. It's easy. But the ubiquitous reliance on it as a means of communicating important information is based on the false assumption that everyone has Facebook.

 

[44 AMP]

Facebook? Twitter? Anyone can post something on Facebook, or Twitter.

Which leads to this...

What was happening on FB was crazy. People were making claims that the fire was where it wasn't, and other people were denying that was the case so the end result was a fog of confusion for events that could have catastrophic results if people made the wrong decision based on this info.

because anyone can post about anything....which means one has a hard time knowing what is official (and real) and what isn't.

An official web sit or service for your phone takes someone to operate it, but only that official someone does the input/updates.

I would think that in this day in the age of information that any official govt group (including small town fire depts) could be linked onto some larger govt paid/operated server (like the county or state)

Today, even a volunteer FD should be able to field some kind of system linking to some thing that would have a web site or phone app. Or so I think, I'm not very tech savy with everything today.

Back in the late 60s my family was involved with our local volunteer FD. They put a special phone in our house with a box called a "plectron unit" (or something like that) that had a lever on it. Several people in the FD had them in their homes. When someone called the firehouse emergency number the phones would all ring, someone would answer, take the report, and push the lever which connected them all together with radio, and linking with county emergency dispatch, and you gave the report to everyone. Pushing the lever the other way blew the firehouse siren so everyone who didn't have radio knew to get to the firehouse and man the equipment.

It wasn't Facebook, but it worked.