Discussion: View Thread

Brian,

Thanks for the comprehensive and informative response.

Indeed ASCE does a wonderful job with the Report Card, and from out here beyond the beltway, each year I think I see more "day to day" news reporting of the Report Card. Similarly, we've got a well oiled machine educating local, state, and federal legislators.

You clarified for me ASCE's role in a situation such as Oroville: "we do not do proactive media outreach around infrastructure events such as those at Oroville".

Hmm. I propose ASCE embrace proactive media outreach.

Agreed we shouldn't fear-monger, go for the click-bait headline, etc. But, there are still too many every day news sources which don't know to call ASCE. During the first few days, the quantity of smiling-made-up-face-on-the-site reporters who just misstated terms was scary – and the public was misled by their reporting. Further, discerning viewers worried about their news sources being skewed to cya (for quotes from the administration) to fear mongering for other purposes (from environmental groups with other purposes) - because all of those groups have their "resources" readily at hand, feeding the news folks but only explaining enough to further their own agenda.

This suggestion proposes ASCE move to a more pro-active role in ensuring local news knows to call ASCE and having the knowledgeable resources readily available to explain terminology.

Using Oroville as an example, the first day, an ASCE published graphic showing the dam area correctly labeling each of the dam components would have helped prevent “the dam is going to fail” reports when the reporter intended to say “the emergency spillway may fail”. The reporters (I hope) weren’t intentionally misreporting, but they meant the emergency spillway had eroded such that the emergency spillway might be in jeopardy. If we had made a graphic with terminology available – maybe at least a few of the more responsible reporters would have chatted with our representative to understand the components and which were in play and why – and the public would have understood the potential danger of a 30’ wall failure and why that danger exists.

Therefore, I propose we carefully consider embracing and offering media outreach. A touchy challenge, it would require more ASCE staff and we’ll be informing the public at the same time some of our members are neck deep in the problem. We certainly don’t want to draw conclusions. But … we can help the public properly understand what is happening. And with that understanding we all will benefit.

Offered as food for thought.

Cheers all,

Brian,

Thanks for the comprehensive and informative response.

Indeed ASCE does a wonderful job with the Report Card, and from out here beyond the beltway, each year I think I see more "day to day" news reporting of the Report Card. Similarly, we've got a well oiled machine educating local, state, and federal legislators.

You clarified for me ASCE's role in a situation such as Oroville: "we do not do proactive media outreach around infrastructure events such as those at Oroville".

Hmm. I propose ASCE embrace proactive media outreach.

Agreed we shouldn't fear-monger, go for the click-bait headline, etc. But, there are still too many every day news sources which don't know to call ASCE. During the first few days, the quantity of smiling-made-up-face-on-the-site reporters who just misstated terms was scary – and the public was misled by their reporting. Further, discerning viewers worried about their news sources being skewed to cya (for quotes from the administration) to fear mongering for other purposes (from environmental groups with other purposes) - because all of those groups have their "resources" readily at hand, feeding the news folks but only explaining enough to further their own agenda.

This suggestion proposes ASCE move to a more pro-active role in ensuring local news knows to call ASCE and having the knowledgeable resources readily available to explain terminology.

Using Oroville as an example, the first day, an ASCE published graphic showing the dam area correctly labeling each of the dam components would have helped prevent “the dam is going to fail” reports when the reporter intended to say “the emergency spillway may fail”. The reporters (I hope) weren’t intentionally misreporting, but they meant the emergency spillway had eroded such that the emergency spillway might be in jeopardy. If we had made a graphic with terminology available – maybe at least a few of the more responsible reporters would have chatted with our representative to understand the components and which were in play and why – and the public would have understood the potential danger of a 30’ wall failure and why that danger exists.

Therefore, I propose we carefully consider embracing and offering media outreach. A touchy challenge, it would require more ASCE staff and we’ll be informing the public at the same time some of our members are neck deep in the problem. We certainly don’t want to draw conclusions. But … we can help the public properly understand what is happening. And with that understanding we all will benefit.

Offered as food for thought.

Cheers all,

Brian,

Thanks for the comprehensive and informative response.

Indeed ASCE does a wonderful job with the Report Card, and from out here beyond the beltway, each year I think I see more "day to day" news reporting of the Report Card. Similarly, we've got a well oiled machine educating local, state, and federal legislators.

You clarified for me ASCE's role in a situation such as Oroville: "we do not do proactive media outreach around infrastructure events such as those at Oroville".

Hmm. I propose ASCE embrace proactive media outreach.

Agreed we shouldn't fear-monger, go for the click-bait headline, etc. But, there are still too many every day news sources which don't know to call ASCE. During the first few days, the quantity of smiling-made-up-face-on-the-site reporters who just misstated terms was scary – and the public was misled by their reporting. Further, discerning viewers worried about their news sources being skewed to cya (for quotes from the administration) to fear mongering for other purposes (from environmental groups with other purposes) - because all of those groups have their "resources" readily at hand, feeding the news folks but only explaining enough to further their own agenda.

This suggestion proposes ASCE move to a more pro-active role in ensuring local news knows to call ASCE and having the knowledgeable resources readily available to explain terminology.

Using Oroville as an example, the first day, an ASCE published graphic showing the dam area correctly labeling each of the dam components would have helped prevent “the dam is going to fail” reports when the reporter intended to say “the emergency spillway may fail”. The reporters (I hope) weren’t intentionally misreporting, but they meant the emergency spillway had eroded such that the emergency spillway might be in jeopardy. If we had made a graphic with terminology available – maybe at least a few of the more responsible reporters would have chatted with our representative to understand the components and which were in play and why – and the public would have understood the potential danger of a 30’ wall failure and why that danger exists.

Therefore, I propose we carefully consider embracing and offering media outreach. A touchy challenge, it would require more ASCE staff and we’ll be informing the public at the same time some of our members are neck deep in the problem. We certainly don’t want to draw conclusions. But … we can help the public properly understand what is happening. And with that understanding we all will benefit.

Offered as food for thought.

Cheers all,