Publication - OKB5azEUNHSRyl0fzQNcRd0ZsYD2

The article is titled “False alerts — like the one sent during the Greater Los Angeles wildfires — can undermine trust and provoke anxiety.” It was originally published on January 14, 2025 and is authored by Jack L. Rozdilsky, Associate Professor of Disaster and Emergency Management, York University and Dom Baldasaro, Graduate Student, Disaster and Emergency Management, York University.

The wildfires in the Greater Los Angeles area are creating emergency situations that are shaping up to be a once-in-a-generation event. And in the midst of multiple active fires with evacuation orders for specific neighbourhoods, a general emergency alert to evacuate was sent out in error.
The false alert went out on January 9 to the cell phones of 10 million residents across Los Angeles County.
In complex systems, failure is a particular combination of needs, people and problems that may have never occurred before. False emergency alerts sent out in error should be viewed as complex system failures that can be expected and learned from.
At York University, a graduate research project in emergency management has been exploring the crisis communication aspects of another false emergency alert. A case study and analysis of a 2020 Canadian false emergency alert — sent out to millions of cell phones in the Greater Toronto Area — emphasized the critical need to treat false alerts as hazards in their own right.
A false alert in Los Angeles
In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, firefighters are struggling to contain the Palisades, Eaton and Hurst fires. Both the Sunset fire and the Kenneth fire have been 100 per cent contained.
When the Kenneth fire started on Jan. 9, an evacuation alert was supposed to have targeted residents in a specific zone of the western region of the San Fernando Valley known as the West Hills.
By mistake, the evacuation alert went out to cellphones across all of Los Angeles County. To make matters worse, repeated false alerts were reported to have been sent out 11 times.
Corrective actions in Los Angeles
As the fire disaster was ongoing, the L.A. County Office of Emergency Management sent out another emergency alert 22 minutes later, advising recipients to disregard the last evacuation warning. An immediate statement acknowledging that the error created additional anxiety, hardship and distress was also issued.
The message, stating “An evacuation warning has been issued in your area,” may have been interpreted as a mistake by some Angelenos living far from neighbourhoods that were burning. But with fires still raging citywide, for tens of thousands of residents living adjacent to active evacuation zones the alerts stoked confusion and panic.
One day after the error, another more detailed statement on the false alerts was issued by Los Angeles County. It acknowledged that a serious breach of public trust had occurred, and that immediate corrective actions were being taken.
Remembering Ontario’s false alert
At 7:23 a.m. on January 12, 2020, the Ontario provincial government sent out an emergency alert to millions of cell phone users around Toronto using the Canada Alert Ready System. The urgent message was an ambiguous emergency alert about an incident at the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station.
There was no nuclear power plant incident at all. The message was sent out in error. Ontario’s Solicitor General unreservedly apologized for the false alarm and the anxiety it caused. The nuclear power plant operator distanced itself from the error, explaining it was in no way involved in the issuing of the alert.
A study of the 2020 incident indicated that one significant problem was that it took 108 minutes for the provincial government agency that sent out the false alert to send out a second corrective message. This time gap allowed for millions of alarmed message recipients to anxiously ponder the implications of a nuclear incident.
In the five years since the false alert, investigations have been completed. An archived investigative report indicated the government issuer was at fault. A human error was made by an Emergency Management Ontario duty officer.
The need for fast action
The January 2025 false alert in Los Angeles was problematic as it was issued in the midst of an ongoing disaster where real evacuation alerts were occurring close by. The unsatisfactory situation was counteracted by issuing a corrective alert 22 minutes later. However, unresolved technical glitches in the system continued sending out repeated false alerts exacerbating the original problem.
The January 2020 false alert in Ontario was not related to any actual emergency. However, the unsatisfactory situation of operator error was worsened by flawed decision-making in waiting 108 minutes to send out a corrective message.
The ability to blast out intrusive messages that override millions of cell phone user’s personal devices with screeching tones and brief messages is a vast power. False alerts bring about credibility issues, reputational harms and alert fatigue.
Alert issuing agencies need to prepare for what may be the inescapable circumstances of false alerts being issued. When such mistakes or malfunctions do occur, they need to be corrected as soon as possible to maintain trust.

False alerts — like the one sent during the Greater Los Angeles wildfires — can undermine trust and provoke anxiety

January 15, 2025 • My Project Name

Read Article

About My Project Name

https://www.mygroup.com