they will be kept informed of any significant developments in government policies and activities. Principles for effective PFAS communication and engagement These Guidelines have been developed to assist governments to engage with communities on a complex subject where evidence and understanding is still evolving. Good communication aims to provide factual and accurate information in a timely manner, and can minimise the risk of confusion, anxiety and mistrust of the messenger. In the absence of straightforward, consistent, and understandable messages from governments in Australia or other credible sources, concerned community members will turn to alternative sources such as internet, social and traditional media for information. Applying the following six key principles of good communication can greatly assist the government in ensuring factual information that effectively reaches and resonates with communities: Proactive is better than reactive Know your purpose Know your audience Communicate clearly, honestly and consistently Never underestimate the value of face-to-face communication Learn from experience The following explain each of these principles in detail. Adhering to them can be the difference between an assured community or one that is resistant to engagement. PRINCIPLE #1 – PROACTIVE IS BETTER THAN REACTIVE Wherever possible, be the first and most credible provider of factual information. In the public discourse about PFAS, we have seen numerous examples where, in the absence of upfront, clear and factual information from credible spokespeople, the media has at times reported incorrect, misleading information, drawing erroneous connections and misquoting scientific literature. Being proactive in preparing and releasing clear and factual information, as soon as any significant new development occurs, is preferable for a number of reasons: it demonstrates government openness and transparency, engenders trust; it avoids the perception that government is trying to conceal issues from the public, or shirk responsibility; it provides the with facts (preferably in the form of quotes from credible spokespeople) and a balanced narrative they can publish; and factual information may, in some cases, debunk myths and extinguish interest in the story before it gains momentum and causes unnecessary concern. PRINCIPLE #2 – KNOW YOUR PURPOSE
Community town hall meeting / presentation Provides the opportunity to deliver information to a large audience simultaneously. Ensures everyone gets the same information and messages. Allows the community to ask questions. Ensures broad and common issues can be clarified on the spot. Most useful when the information to be delivered is not contentious or highly emotive in nature. Physical distance between presenters and attendees makes it difficult for presenters to show they are listening and demonstrate empathy. Creates the opportunity for a ‘media spectacle’ and/or promotion of other agendas. Can set up confrontation between speakers ‘panel’ and audience. Limits the number of and type of questions that can be answered. Audience members may not be comfortable asking questions in front of the whole group. Community session (held in a venue where representatives from all relevant Commonwealth and state/territory agencies, and local government representatives (where required) can be seated at tables that community members can approach for discussion) Provides a forum for targeted, personalised communication with community members. Creates direct contact with the community and helps to build relationships that assist with future face-to-face engagement. Provides an opportunity for communities to ask personalised questions in a environment. Controls the situation more effectively. Allows for one-on-one attention from experts. Most useful when the information to be delivered is technical or raises questions and concerns from the community that are best addressed in detail, and in a more personalised context. Can be resource intensive. Not all community members will engage with this format. Ongoing legacy issues can fuel negative community sentiment