1. Analysing Twitter Activity
in Crisis Contexts
Axel Bruns and Jean Burges
Queensland University of Technology
Brisbane, Australia
@snurb_dot_info | @jeanburgess
http://mappingonlinepublics.net/
2. SOCIAL MEDIA DURING CRISES
• Various platforms:
– Facebook, Twitter – updates and information
– YouTube, Flickr, Twitpic – first-hand video and photos
– Google Maps, Ushahidi – map-based information mashups
Different tools for different purposes
• Various levels of maturity:
– Uses and use practices still developing
– Different demographic reach
• Technological differences:
– e.g. Facebook: built around personal networks; semi-private; discussion threads
– e.g. Twitter: open, flat network; public #hashtag conversations; update stream
3. THE 2011 QUEENSLAND FLOODS
• Chronology:
– December 2010 to January 2011: unprecedented rainfall
• Emergency declared for more than 50% of Queensland
• Wivenhoe dam reaches 180% capacity
– December 2010: Flooding in northern Queensland
– January 2011: Floods in southeast Queensland
• 10 January 2011: flash flooding in Toowoomba
• 10 January 2011: ‘inland tsunami’ in the Lockyer Valley
• 11 January 2011: flooding begins in Ipswich
• 12-16 January 2011: major flooding in Brisbane
11. THE QUEENSLAND FLOODS COMMUNITY
• Self-organisation:
– Rapid establishment of #qldfloods hashtag
– Ad hoc development of community structures
– Highlighting of leading accounts, vigilant against disruption
– Suspension of petty squabbles (e.g. state politics)
• Innovation and rapid prototyping:
– Adjunct hashtags (#Mythbuster, #bakedrelief)
– Sharing and gathering of online resources
– Additional tools (Google Maps, Ushahidi Maps)
– Emergency services rapidly adopting social media tools
(despite lack of established strategies)
‘Go where they are’ rather than ‘build it and they will come’
See CCI Report: #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter
in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods
(http://cci.edu.au/floodsreport.pdf)
12. 2010/11 CHRISTCHURCH EARTHQUAKES
• Series of earthquakes:
– 4 Sep. 2010 – M7.1
• Major structural damage, limited injuries
– 22 Feb. 2011 – M6.3
• Substantial devastation, major casualties
– 13 June 2011 – M6.3
• Major aftershock, further liquefaction
– 23 Dec. 2011 – M5.1-6.0
• Major aftershocks
• Significant use of social media – e.g. Twitter: #eqnz
19. TWITTER AND THE CHRISTCHURCH EARTHQUAKE
• Towards better strategies for social media in disasters:
– February 2011 earthquake building on lessons learnt in September
2010
• #eqnz and key Twitter accounts already established
• Several key accounts sharing the load and dividing responsibilities
– More sophisticated use of Twitter by residents and authorities
• Clear shift in attention after the immediate rescue phase:
– Marked differences in list of most @replied/retweeted accounts
– Some tracking of current problems / issues / fears may be possible
– Decline in overall tweet volume / diversification of #hashtags?
20. SOCIAL MEDIA AND CRISIS COMMUNICATION
• Twitter research:
– Develop better tools and metrics for evaluating social media communication
– In-depth analysis of communication patterns reveals how social media are used
– Real-time analytics: highlight key current issues, identify weak signals of crisis
– Monitor and improve effectiveness of social media communication strategies by
emergency services
• Social media uses:
– Inform, share, amplify, support, reassure, organise
– Need to track and work with user community: follow their conventions
(e.g. #eqnz hashtag)
– Two-way communication where feasible – more than broadcast messages
– Provide community with tools to self-organise for resilience