Stupe said:
For the record, I'm not arguing just to be correct.
I have been in EOC planning meetings for disasters and there are separate terms for a lot of reasons.
People need to be crystal clear on what the terms mean, how they should react, and not use them if they don't know what they are saying.
One of the biggest issues we had with Katrina, Rita, and Ike were people in the Greater Houston area not listening to the designations of their areas and clogging the freeways up. That caused a lot of direct emergencies (heat) and indirect emergencies (MVA's, cardiac, diabetic, respiratory, etc... ) because emergency apparatus couldn't reach people.
For Ike, people not leaving the island and then getting told "no" when they called 911 because it was locked down resulted in numerous deaths and missing persons who never even had their bodies recovered.
People deciding on their own what those designations mean to them have been deadly.
I think we are essentially agreeing. my point here is that people DON'T KNOW the difference so they are often used interchangeably by the layman. Leading to confusion and panic,
THUS, it is INCUMBENT on the LEADERSHIP to clearly explain what the terms mean. That didn't go so well in this instance IMO.
The average Joe, generally speaking, doesn't know the difference. Regardless of whether it is crystal clear in the EOC to all of the EM people, if John and Jenny don;t get it. It is of little use.