Skip to content

links for 2009-09-23

September 23, 2009

2 Comments leave one →
  1. September 25, 2009 3:23 pm

    We were doing field-team training for H1N1 response earlier this week and this specific issue came up when discussing external messaging. The challenge being how to walk the very fine line of making it sound sufficiently dangerous to motivate people to prepare themselves to a reasonable degree (and what “reasonable” is for H1N1 is a whole different topic) without either over-hyping or causing panic. All of which makes me very happy that my work is primarily internal planning and not aimed at the general public.

    • October 14, 2009 9:07 pm


      I’m not really sure how to answer this. I’m continuously impressed by the work public info folks have been doing on H1N1. I’ve been wondering lately, though, what would be a poor job of communicating on H1N1. Would it be the equivalent of shouting “fire” in a crowded auditorium, or would it be dismissing people’s fears out of hand. Would it be sending different messages over time and potentially confusing people? Would it be not updating your messages over time? Until we find out what failure looks like, I’m not sure that our public information folks are succeeding.

      That said, I want nothing to do with planning to distribute this vaccine. All of the gears and interlocking parts make me dizzy. I still haven’t figured out how to give kids under ten two shots 21 to 28 days apart.

      Cheers, and thanks for stopping by!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s