Crisis at Petersburg High School

Petersburg TV.com

Different Perspectives Primary Source Accounts 11 people arrested, 5 injured Batons used on students Cause of the riot-Money thrown in the air 300 students involved in melee Gang initiation behind the event Media Accounts 5 people arrested or injured Batons not used Cause of the riot-Cell phones responsible for starting the fight Only a few students in fight

March 7, bomb threats phoned in. School resource officers and police officials called in to sweep the building. After sweeping auditorium and gym, students moved inside gym while rest of the building is swept, due to inclement weather. Multiple fights erupted. Law enforcement from other areas called in to help control chaos. People charged and some injuries occurred, none life threatening.

Primary Sources Assistant Principal: Mr. Medicus Riddick –Only administrator present at the time Resource Officer: Robert Brown –SRO assigned to the school 1 week before Petersburg Public Relations Director: Mr. Cliff Davis

Effectiveness of Public Relations Responses Petersburg High school had a crisis plan in place. Assistant Principal informed school officials, who in turn informed superintendent. The superintendent responded. Communication between SRO and school officials District and police responded to community’s concerns by calling a town hall meeting on Sunday, March 9 to dispel rumors. Police chief, superintendent, and principal were present. Monday, March 10th, a faculty meeting was held to address the internal stakeholders. Recommendations were made to the school board and a summary report will be released in the near future.

The Crisis plan (bomb threat) was followed; internal audits were done. External agencies, police, fire emergency services should have been involved in audits. Although the school system had a crisis plan in place, it didn’t set up a clear path of communication between the media and the division. Students were gathered in one location, semi-supervised for approximately 3 hours. This would complicate any crisis situation for any school. School officials gave erroneous information because it hadn’t gathered all the facts before speaking with the media (batons weren’t used).

Assessment continued Although the Alert Now system was used to inform parents know about the event; the system could have also been used to dispel rumors. Petersburg Schools handled the follow up post crisis communication much better that during the event. School officials didn’t promote the positive events concerning the school. Recommendations were made to the school board for consideration on how to change/improve the crisis plan. (Progress Index reports that one consideration is a change of cell phone use).

 Partnerships with the public: have police, fire and other officials participate in an audit of the crisis plan to determine effectiveness before a crisis.  Revise the crisis plan: make sure each agency knows who is in charge under what conditions: ex. Fire=fire department; “riot”=police  Set up a media area for the media to converge. Have Mr. Davis and designated spokespersons there to relay information and answer questions.  Responses from the public often rely on an underlying issue: The students’ welfare and achievement.The division should develop a storehouse of positive PR in this area. Heath R. ( 2006). Best Practices in Crisis Communication: Evolution of Practice through Research Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34,

Improvement continued  Listen for others concerns: stronger communication plan to promote the school within the community; paying more attention to public attitudes toward the school and expectations held by the public. Ex. The basketball team was going to state: that wasn’t mentioned in the media in the days following the event.  Public reaction often relies on an underlying issue: student welfare and achievement. School-community relations should be developed to foster this. Heath, 2006