When All Links Are Not Created Equal: Applying Risk Communication to Online Discussions

Background:  Web 2.0 has engaged users in discussions in “comment” sections.  But, these online discussions can and do become nasty, personal, and inaccurate, especially for links to websites or studies that look credible but are flawed.  The challenge of ensuring the public is making health decisions on credible information is not new, but doing so in a comment field and not the clinic room is.  Attendees will learn to translate risk communication skills from face-to-face conversations to internet discussions.

Setting:  Internet comment fields on Facebook, blogs, newstories, etc.

Population:  Health & communication professionals

Project Description:  Like many organizations, ANA launched a Facebook ® page, and uses it to promote immunization news, research, and advocacy messages to “fans”.   Immunization postings tended to attract comments and controversy, with commenters posting links to flawed or unpublished research or news articles from unreliable sources.  Our approach to addressing these types of comments was to use risk communication skills to help defray the controversy, and to acknowledge that as professionals, nurses would be able to decipher good information from bad.  This approach did not argue with commenters head-on, but instead acknowledged that faulty information is rampant on the internet, and that nurses are good judges of evidence to make their decisions and counsel their patients.

Results/Lessons Learned:   This strategy proved effective.  By maintaining a professional tone and non-combative style, we were able to smooth over controversial postings.  In some cases, 80 percent of comments were supportive, while only 20 percent or fewer controversial.  It helped to steer the conversation toward the positive, maintained a civil tone, and even turned the opposing commenter to our side.  It demonstrated that using risk communication in online venues is as effective as in-person situations.