Connected communications: Network structures of official communications in a technological disaster

Informal online communication channels are being utilized for official communications in disaster contexts. Channels such as networked microblogging enable public officials to broadcast messages as well as engage in direct communication exchange with individuals. Here we investigate online information exchange behaviors of a set of state and federal organizations during the Deepwater Horizon 2010 oil spill disaster. Using data from the popular microblogging service Twitter, we analyze the roles individual organizations play in the dissemination of information to the general public online, and the conversational microstructure of official posts. We discuss characteristics and features of following networks, centrality, and conversational dynamics that may affect information exchange in disaster. This research provides insight into the use of networked communications during an event of heightened public concern, describes implications of conversational features, and suggests directions for future research.

[1]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[2]  Lisl Zach,et al.  Twitter for city police department information sharing , 2010, ASIST.

[3]  A. Bruns,et al.  #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods , 2012 .

[4]  Jeannette Sutton,et al.  Social Media Monitoring and the Democratic National Convention: New Tasks and Emergent Processes , 2009 .

[5]  James H. Liu,et al.  Distance Matters: Physical Space and Social Impact , 1995 .

[6]  Rizal Setya Perdana.  What is Twitter , 2013 .

[7]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[8]  Fang Wu,et al.  Social Networks that Matter: Twitter Under the Microscope , 2008, First Monday.

[9]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[10]  Barbara Poblete,et al.  Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we RT? , 2010, SOMA '10.

[11]  Adam Crowe.  The Elephant in the JIC: The Fundamental Flaw of Emergency Public Information within the NIMS Framework , 2010 .

[12]  V T Covello,et al.  The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study , 1997, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[13]  Leysia Palen,et al.  Microblogging during two natural hazards events: what twitter may contribute to situational awareness , 2010, CHI.

[14]  Leo Katz,et al.  A new status index derived from sociometric analysis , 1953 .

[15]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[16]  Jeannette N. Sutton,et al.  Twittering Tennessee: Distributed networks and collaboration following a technological disaster , 2010, ISCRAM.

[17]  Balachander Krishnamurthy,et al.  A few chirps about twitter , 2008, WOSN '08.

[18]  Leysia Palen,et al.  Pass it on?: Retweeting in mass emergency , 2010, ISCRAM.

[19]  D. Krackhardt.  Graph theoretical dimensions of informal organizations , 1994 .

[20]  Susan C. Herring,et al.  Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[21]  Isabell M. Welpe,et al.  Predicting Elections with Twitter: What 140 Characters Reveal about Political Sentiment , 2010, ICWSM.

[22]  G. Eysenbach,et al.  Pandemics in the Age of Twitter: Content Analysis of Tweets during the 2009 H1N1 Outbreak , 2010, PloS one.

[23]  Leysia Palen,et al.  Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events , 2009 .

[24]  L. Freeman.  Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[25]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Measuring User Influence in Twitter: The Million Follower Fallacy , 2010, ICWSM.