10 february, 2004

22
1 Crisis communications: Lessons from „the learning curve” How Could We Have Done It Better? Communication of an Incident by Ágota Hanti Deputy Spokesperson of Paks NPP, Hungary 10 February, 2004

Upload: loren

Post on 11-Jan-2016

21 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Crisis communications: Lessons from „the learning curve” How Could We Have Done It Better? Communication of an Incident by Á gota Hanti Deputy Spokesperson of Paks NPP, Hungary. 10 February, 2004. Antecedents. On 10 April, 2003 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 10 February, 2004

1

Crisis communications: Lessons from „the learning curve”

How Could We Have Done It Better?

Communication of an Incident

by Ágota HantiDeputy Spokesperson of Paks NPP, Hungary

10 February, 2004

Page 2: 10 February, 2004

2

Antecedents

On 10 April, 2003

Serious incident in a cleaning pool in a pit in

the reactor hall of Unit 2 at Paks Nuclear

Power Plant.

The incident resulted in a hardly detectable,

low discharge, but without exceeding the

limit value.

And it resulted many other

things…

Page 3: 10 February, 2004

3

The series of events The communication of

events

Communication of an incident

10/04/2003:

•around 10 pm: radioactive gas

discharge from the cleaning

system.

•The works were stopped.

•Classed 2 on INES scale

(approved by HAEA).

11/04/2003:

• around 10 am: Countrywide

press release on the incident

(brief facts).

•Collective SMS to the regional

mayors (72)

•14.30: Another press release

on the classification on INES

scale.

The incident is hot news.

Page 4: 10 February, 2004

4

The series of events The communication of

events16/04/2003:

•Removal of the cover of the

tank, new infromations on the

fuel assemblies (30 pieces,

suffered severe damage).

•The incident reclassified into

class 3 due to the latest facts.

•Global 2000: background

radiation measurements

17/04/2003:

• Press release on the

reclassifying.

•Intensive media reaction,

continuous asking for

interviews.

18/04/2003:

•Greenpeace demand accurate

data in the media.

Communication of an incident

Page 5: 10 February, 2004

5

The series of events The communication of

events22/04/2003:

•Press conference in the

reactor hall in the precence of

journalists.

23/04/2003:

•Attack of the government for

the inadequate communication.

19/04/2003:

•The economic loss of the

company is approx. €200 000

per day.

23/04/2003:

•The emergency plan of the

national electric grid control

organistation to sustain the

safe energy supply.

Communication of an incident

Page 6: 10 February, 2004

6

Press conference in the reactor

hall

Communication of an incident

Page 7: 10 February, 2004

7

Press

conference

Communication of an incident

Page 8: 10 February, 2004

8

The series of events The communication of

events01/05/2003:

•Greenpeace and Austrian

social democrats want

international investigation.

30/04/2003:

•The chief director of Paks and

the director general of the

HAEA in front of the

Environmental Committee of

the Parliament.

01/05/2003:

•Visit of the minister of

economics at the plant.

Communication of an incident

Page 9: 10 February, 2004

9

The ministers of economics and environment with the chief director

Communication of an incident

Page 10: 10 February, 2004

10

The series of events The communication of

events06/05/2003:

•Appearance of the event in a

daily paper (the plant did not

informed anybody before the

first article).

07/05/2003:

•The prime minister request

urgent information.

•The higher radioactivity

ascribed to the fault of the

measurement.

03/05/2003:

•Gas production in the

damaged tank due to breach of

rules.

07/05/2003:

•Higher radioctivity in the

background at one of the

detectors.

Communication of an incident

Page 11: 10 February, 2004

11

The series of events The communication of

events10/05/2003:

•A full page paid informative

material published in the top

papers (incident in details).

11/05/2003:

•The company’s own report.

12/05/2003:

•Daily press conference (two

locations)

09/05/2003:

•Ministerial officer for more

effective co-operation.

Communication of an incident

Page 12: 10 February, 2004

12

The commission of the ministerial

officer

Communication of an incident

Page 13: 10 February, 2004

13

The series of events The communication of

events19/05/2003:

•An article in an austrian

tabloid about illegal operating.

•It came in light that the higher

radioactivity was not the fault

of the instrument (isotope

test).

13/05/2003:

•Greenpeace demonstration

against licence renewal.

14/05/2003:

•The Environmental Committee

of the Parliament in Paks.

19/05/2003:

•Higher radioctivity in the

background at one of the

detectors again.

Communication of an incident

Page 14: 10 February, 2004

14

The series of events The communication of

events28/05/2003:

•SMS rumour about the

explosion of a unit.

30/05/2003:

•Report of the HAEA, the

responsibility of the plant.

06/06/2003:

•First press release of the

owners.

21/05/2003:

•Personal changes, Recovery

Project.

22/05/2003:

•Request of the IAEA for

independent investigation.

Communication of an incident

Page 15: 10 February, 2004

15

The series of events The communication of

events10/06/2003:

•Public opinion pool, the

acceptance is the same, some

trust lost in the safe of the

plant.

12/06/2003:

•Greenpeace activists, need of

the police because of the

damages.

14/06/2003:

•The steps of the recovery

sketched for the press.

14/06/2003:

•First underwater videos, all

the fuel assemblies damaged.

19/06/2003:

•The IAEA starts its

investigation.

Communication of an incident

Page 16: 10 February, 2004

16

Public opinion poolPublic opinion poolDo you agree that there is a nuclear power plant

operating in Hungary?

6865

68 6763

7368

73

23

3025

2831

24 23 24

393

6579

5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1991.szept. -1995 (N=6944)

1996. márc.(N=1010)

1997. dec.(N=1382)

1998. nov.(N=1039)

1999. nov.(N=998)

2001. febr.(N=1051)

2002. május(N=1036)

2003. június(N=1017)

%

YesNo

No answer

Page 17: 10 February, 2004

17

The severity of the safety regulation at Paks NPP

4749

44 45 4543

242522

28 29 29 28 29

14 1517 16 15

1922

4 4 3 3 4 3

13

1 0 1 1 1 03

10 10 9 7 7 69

0

20

40

60

80

100

1990-1996(N=9953)

1997. dec.(N=1382)

1998. nov.(N=1039)

1999. nov.(N=998)

2001. febr.(N=1051)

2002. márc.(N=1008)

2003. június(N=1017)

%

very hardpretty hardadequatenot very hardnot hard at alldoes not know

Public opinion poolPublic opinion pool

Page 18: 10 February, 2004

18

The series of events The communication of

events25/06/2003:

•Report of the IAEA, the

responsibility of the company

and the authority also.

26/11/2003:

•Final, 50th press conference

(CAD model).

01/07/2003:

•Two offers for the recovery

work, the russian fuel assembly

manufacturer win.

11/09/2003:

•Parlamentary investigation

committee (adequcy of

communication also).

Two months later: no

agreement on the report.

Communication of an incident

Page 19: 10 February, 2004

19

Parlamentary investigation

committee

Communication of an incident

Page 20: 10 February, 2004

20

Final, 50th press

conference

Communication of an incident

Page 21: 10 February, 2004

21

SummationThe series of events The communication of

events

•Re-classification

•Gas production in the

tank

•Higher radioactivity at a

detector

•Keeping all the regulations

•SMS to the mayors

•Daily press conference (50

total)

•Each material on the Internet•Follow up communication

•Deffensive

•Not accurate, definite, proactive

enough

Page 22: 10 February, 2004

22

How Could We Have Done It Better?