Government's mixed Y2K messages could spawn panic

By William Ulrich 05/17/99 The U.S. government claims that the worst year 2000 scenario we face is panic. But that may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Inconsistent Y2K messages from the White House could increase perceptions of an escalating cover-up and, in turn, drive people to panic. If the government wants to avoid such an outcome, it should acknowledge that it doesn't know what to expect so we can prepare for a range of possible problems.

In an April 22 speech to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, a major regional organization, the president's year 2000 czar, John Koskinen, said that "a growing problem confronting every country is the risk of overreaction by the public."

He added, "We expect that our basic infrastructure will hold, that our electric power grids will function, that our telecommunications systems will work effectively and that our banking systems will not have major difficulties."

It sounds like everything is fine. So why worry about panic?

But wait a minute. In the same speech, Koskinen said, "We've told our local governments and state governments that they need to be prepared to handle emergencies on their own, since the federal government can't be everywhere dealing with every problem in light of the large number of problems that we are likely to have."

Those comments regarding a "large number of problems" are Koskinen's strongest to date. Is this a change of position or lack of one? Why share those concerns with a foreign audience but not with Americans? Maybe he doesn't want to panic us.

Ultimately, Koskinen doesn't know what will happen in the early months of 2000. Working phones and electricity don't rule out failures in production, transportation, imports and exports, local government, water or small business. If serious problems do emerge and people are unprepared, then maybe we'll panic.

According to an official training manual for Red Cross Disaster Action Teams, more than 300 studies show that three elements must occur concurrently for people to panic. Panic occurs when 1) individuals are in immediate and certain danger; 2) there are few or no escape routes; and 3) there's a lack of communication about what's happening.

The first two can be ruled out if there are no serious year 2000 problems. If there are problems and people are told to prepare in advance, then element three is diffused, and mass panic will be avoided.

If the government wants to avoid panic when problems occur, it should extend its preparation campaign to communities and individuals.

Although corporations are building contingency plans, few individuals and communities are following suit. If the problem is acute, many will be unprepared.

That lack of preparation -- and having a government that misleads us along the way -- will escalate panic and elongate the recovery cycle.

(From Year 2000 Press Clippings)

-- Jon Jonson (narnia4@usa.net), May 17, 1999

Answers

I fixed the typo in the title of this thread. For the moment, God is out of the picture ... or at least out of the title.

-- Ed Yourdon (ed@yourdon.com), May 17, 1999.

Response to A god article on the govt. and PANIC

God is writing articles again?

-- Sorry (couldnt@resist.that), May 17, 1999.

Response to A god article on the govt. and PANIC

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/Mar1.html

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/Mar3.html

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/Mar5.html

-- (~@%.^), May 17, 1999.

Good thing God is at least still the picture someplace ... 8<)

.. thank you, Ed, for removing a distraction - the Polly's are too easily distracted by the ladybug on the railroad track they can't see the train coming...

From above "...According to an official training manual for Red Cross Disaster Action Teams, more than 300 studies show that three elements must occur concurrently for people to panic. Panic occurs when 1) individuals are in immediate and certain danger; 2) there are few or no escape routes; and 3) there's a lack of communication about what's happening. "

These three things are exactly what is present in every Year 2000 scenario =

One = Immediate danger - a valid argument, one can argue, and the Polly's do this fervently, that ther eis no danger - and then they stop the comments without being able to show "why" there will no problem. But they use as sources only the self-proclaiming self-justifying conclusions from those who have a vested interest in manitining the status quo and in maintaining this administration and the Democratic Party in power.

Developing self-reliance and individual judgement does neither - so they hide the facts and conclusions that are evident if the "process" - not the politcal conclusions - are traced from system to system. The computers don't care what any politician SAYS, nor what the public "says" in its polls - they only care what a programmer DOES.

The Clinton administration is doing what has served it before - solving a political problem by manipulating the news and then following the polls that are tracking the news that is released

Gues what? A water system doesn't care what the public "thinks."

Two = they can't escape - yep, it is coming, and "they" can't escape to the sheltering arms of MicroSoft, the government, or their momma's. The government can't help all who may need it - see the recent warning to the heads of the military telling them that the military and national defense MUST come before local civilian help. (What a concept! National Defense from this administration...)

Maybe the "cannot escape" reason is why many try so hard, and with such religious zeal and fervor to "prove" it won't be so bad - they have nothing else to rely on except a hope (and prayer) that nothing will happen , and cannot mentally allow themselves to assume there will be any significant problems.

Three: Communication - reliable information from this administratio is immediately believed to be a lie (with good reason!) by 1/3 of Americans. Another 1/2 distrust the president - believing he has lied in the past, and will lie again.

So that means that the administration can communicate with less than 1/3 of its citizens - and be believed. Unfortunately, these ar eth evoters who most rely on the government (big labor, teacher unions, government workers themselves, the needy, the old, etc. who cannot manage without the government. They also have a 100% reliance on governmetn handouts and salaries - and are helpless without the big government they adore.

So what will these do (other than panic) if/when problems occur? They have no escape, no alternative, no trust in they are being told anymore, and no choice but to panic - they have been only nuts and right-wing wackos "prepare".

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 17, 1999.

Mr. Cook. There is nothing wrong with beliving that the Lord well see us through. I belive that God can do anything, he woke you up this morning did'nt he. If you can remember all throughout the bible God had his people to prepare. God knows the begining and the end of this situation. We will all take account for what we have done in this life. Reserve me, O God: for in thee do I put my trust. What will you do when your can goods run out. What name do you call on when trouble time come your way? I but you won't think prayer is no big deal then.

-- Lyn Truss (StormieLyn@webtv.com), May 17, 1999.

Mr. Cook. There is nothing wrong with beliving that the Lord will see us through. I belive that God can do anything, he woke you up this morning did'nt he! If you can remember all throughout the bible God had his people to prepare. God knows the begining and the end of this situation. We will all take account for what we have done in this life. Reserve me, O God: for in thee do I put my trust. What will you do when your can goods run out. What name will you call on when trouble times come your way? I but you won't think prayer is no big deal then.

-- Lyn Truss (StormieLyn@webtv.com), May 17, 1999.

Slow down there Lyn - I'm already convinced about the very real potential troubles forthcoming - but believe any God that can create an armadillo, opossum, and the platypus must have a sense of humor.

So I've agreed to help Him while I'm here - I'm kinda the Martha type anyway, always cleaning up after the Scout meeting or the band trip or the Church meetings - and let Him take care of the rest when I'm not.

More clear?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 17, 1999.

Lyn,

Congratulations on your faith. I'm sure it gives you great comfort.

I think you may wish to re-read the paragraph in Robert's post with which you took umbrage. Perhaps you misunderstood his usage of a couple of phrases.

Your e-mail address is well-suited to you. ;-)

Best Wishes,

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), May 17, 1999.

Look again at the three links above:

You've got several choices (after reading them:)

1) they are legit expessions of senior brass discussing our future, and how little they regard freedom and easily they expect to manipulate the press; if so very frightening but accurate; too seldom in there is heard a "discouraging" word though reminding the others that we are a nation not responsible for the rest of the planet. Instead, the world is ours to rule and "save" - while making CINC (Clinton-in-Chief) appear the savior of all.

2) they are well-written fakes, intended to fuel fires of dissension and inflame those who are "near-irritation" anyway - that is, they are intended to distract, disrupt, and inflame passions to

a) identify those who could begin disruptions later,

b) allow early id and tracking of information flows (there were cookies issued as each was opened)

c) by inflaming people early, passions will cool in the majority by the time actual freedoms are pulled later

d) early efforts at division and isolation - as noted in the threads themselves as recommendations

3) actual fakes (very-well done) as a gag or hoax.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 17, 1999.

A "lurker" speaks. Regarding the 3 links above--sounded legit to me. Follow the links in the articles to the US Naval War College and the names of the participants (many will be familiar). Thanks. I get a lot from these postings.

-- Big Don (talk2don@globalpac.com), May 17, 1999.

See this site for possible context of Naval War College references:

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2kproj.htm

link

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), May 17, 1999.

Could it be that the REAL public panic that is worried about by high government officials is the panic that the public will feel when they realize that they've been led down the primrose path? Perhaps they are worried about recall petitions (and removal from high office) and similar democratic actions by the people...

Certainly, I don't feel that a prepared populace is one to worry about, unless you are misleading them...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), May 17, 1999.

God's way of seeing me through may be to let me die so I can join Him.

Or perhaps to let me suffer because it's my own doing after all and suffering builds... er, character or something.

Lyn faith is great. It might provide you situations that would help you through anything. I am reminded of a story a preacher told me:

There's this guy whose boat capsizes and he is treading water. Another boat comes by and the fellow waves it away, shouting, "It's okay! God will save me!" Sometime later he's getting exhausted, and a coast guard helicopter hovers above. But he had faith, and summoning his strength he yelled to the fellow on the rope, "It's okay! God will save me!" A short time later, nearly out of energy, another boat comes by. "Don't worry about me," the man gasped, "God will save me."

He drowns. He goes to heaven. And the first thing he says is, "But I had FAITH! God, why didn't you SAVE me?!"

And God said,

"Well I sent you two boats and a helicopter."

[end little tale]

Which reminds me of another fairly famous saying,

"Trust in God. But row away from the rocks."

PJ in TX

-- PJ Gaenir (fire@firedocs.com), May 17, 1999.

A point I have made before ahs just come home to bite me in the tail. I DON'T think I'll be getting a lot of sleep tonight. twice a year, my bride and I take the responsibility of running the front end first aid (BLS only) for two events, both on Cleveland's lakefront. One is a fireworks display that packs about 600,000 (NOT a TYPO---SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND) people into Edgewater Park, a sot of natural amphitheater in front of which is the lake and another kind of point where the fireworks get fired from. The other is the Cleveland Grand Prix CART race, which gets about a quarter mil spread over 3 days. She and I have made our decision and have made peace with the decision on warning the people in the stands about an incoming severe storm. We are in agreement with the rest of the emergency services personnel that NOT ONE WORD about an incoming storm would be broadcast or anounced. The reason for this, is, based on the (oh, roughly 1983 or thereabouts) Stones (errr Grateful Dead) concert in Cincinnatti where opening the doors for the sale of a few last minute tickets killed 20 odd and injured hundreds; our colective best ectimate is that the stampede (to nowhere, as there is nowhere to go) would result in more than a thousand dead and 20,000 injured. The worst case we can come up with from a storm, based on the 1969 storm at Edgewater on the 4th, is 200-400 dead and 2000-4000 injured.

The reason I'm not gonna get much sleep is that it finally dawned on me that this might be the reason we have heard nothing. They might have done the casualty estimate and decided that there would be so many fewer without planning, because things are going down so hard, that they may be watching the storm on the screen and just NOT doing anything.

I think this would be based on an invalid casualty assessment, but I am not privy to the info they are.

Chuck, all of whose hairs are standing on end.

-- chuck, a Night Driver (rienzoo@en.com), May 17, 1999.

Robert, i have NO IDEA where you got the conclusion you got from the three session notes. I happen to have seen a LOT I would LOVE to have on the front page of Anytown,USA Paper. These folks are trying to get their arms around a very large problem, to which THEY are expecting to be looked at for the cure. These guys are actually SCARED!! And even better than that they are scared of THE SAME STUFF WE ARE!!! This looks kind of like a weekend meeting of about 50 of US would look if we were asked to address the US global posture on Y2K.

Chuck

They don't appear to have ANY BETTER INTEL than WE do!!!

-- chuck, a Night Driver (rienzoo@en.com), May 17, 1999.

Stuff on geocities site is all genuine, in that it represents Naval War College study looking to think ahead re Y2K global scenarios. I created site because at first Naval War College response so slow in setting up web pages that I decided to take matter in my own hands. Later, NWC said they liked them and wanted duplicate set on their pages (after usual bureaucratic delays).

-- Thomas Barnett (barnettt@nwc.navy.mil), May 20, 1999.

Thomas, Your views on transparency are appreciated.

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), May 20, 1999.