The government's role in "avoiding widespread panic"

[bosk1]

This came up on the radio during my drive in this morning, and I thought it was interesting.  The context was, they were talking about the nuclear reactor situation in Japan, and the observation was made that part of the reason it is so difficult to determine how bad the situation is is because the Japanese government has not been forthcoming with accurate information, so there is a lot of unknown about the situation right now.  Then the comment was made that that is understandable because the government is obviously doing their best to avoid widespread panic.  And then the discussion went off on a bit of a tangent that I found really interesting.

One of the hosts made the point that, in his opinion, no matter how bad a situation is, people will find a mostly rational way of dealing with it if they are just given straight information.  Conversely, when the public feel like the government is hiding something, that's when real panic sets in and people take matters into their own hands more and made irrational decisions.  What do you all think about that?  Myself, I'm not sure.  There is an appeal to the argument, and I can say speaking for myself that I would rather have all the information so I can assess it myself and make rational choices based on the info.  But on the flipside, I think there is also a significant enough segment of the population that that might not be true for.  Anyway, like I said, I found this interesting.

[bosk1]

  How did this get here instead of P/R? 

[eric42434224]

Well, all the illegal drugs at their concerts is common knowledge, so it is the Govts responsibility to avoid them.

[Chino]

I would prefer to have all information given to me straight as well. I do think though that the moajority of Americans wouldn't be able to handle really bad news, especially when the media will make it seem even worse. If there was a situation in the states, like the one currently in Japan, I wouldn't be able to blame the government for keeping secrets. If the scenario in question may have terrible effects on a large scale, the government should keep that underwraps until they are 100% certain of the final outcome. The last thing they need is to scare the shit out of everyone and then be wrong. There are plenty of pros and cons for both sides.

[PlaysLikeMyung]

If how people handle the news of potential snow is any indication.... People tend to overreact and that can cause such a panic situation. So the government giving limited information is alright with me as far as I'm concerned

[Chino]

If how people handle the news of potential snow is any indication.... People tend to overreact and that can cause such a panic situation. So the government giving limited information is alright with me as far as I'm concerned

This is a very valid point, working in grocery stores for years I see this first hand. A 6-8 inch storm would slam the store the day before. This winter, when we were getting repotrs of 18-24 inches, people were going bat shit crazy and fighting one another for things like bread and beer. It's pretty unbelievable to watch. If there was ever confirmation of a mass radiation leak, something along the lines of say Chernobyl, I would end up going into a panic at the fact that American would now be panicking. 

[El Barto]

Two things.  First,  the masses react very poorly in a crisis situation.  You tell them that things might turn really ugly here in a few minutes and you'll have a very bad situation on your hands.  Now, there is a moral obligation to tell people when it's time to flee, but just suddenly dropping GTFO bomb on them isn't a good idea.  Second, the people who are a little sharper and much more apt to handle a crisis situation won't need to wait for The Man to tell them when it's time to skedaddle.  If you or I lived within 4 miles of a nuclear power plant, and there was reason to believe that something was amiss,  we wouldn't wait for the official announcement to go on an unscheduled vacation.  I could be on the road with a tent, bag, mag-lite and large bottle of firewater on very short notice.  Personally, I'd prefer a one or two day headstart on the mayhem.  So, I'd say that the appropriate strategy is to be conservative on your announcements and warnings.  It's certainly a sensible thing to do and it gives some of us a leg up on the cretins when the exodus is at hand, which throws in a nice Darwinian element as a bonus. 

[Chino]

 

[rumborak]

I think one must not fall into the trap of deriving group behavior from individual behavior. Individuals are quite well able to do rational things based on information given to them. But you can't just extrapolate that to a whole country.

rumborak

[gmillerdrake]

PlayslikeMyung's example of gracery store panic coupled with what we witnessed in the aftermath of Katrina illustrates why the government would want to keep the illusion of structure in place for as long as possible. When there is an absence of law and order man will revert back to barbaric antics to survive and those who don't believe that and aren't prepared for it will learn the hard way.
  Being that I live in the midwest very close to the New Madrid fault which could snap for a large quake at any moment, I have put my Boy Scout motto into service and am 'prepared' for a considerable duration of time without modern ammenities. That along with a fairly nice supply of ammunition should sustain protect my family as we survived.  
   Threre is no excuse for not preparing yourself, especially if you are responsible for the safety and well being of a wife and children. Sure it's the governments "job" to let us know when and if something dire is going to transpire but I do not belive it's thier ultimate position to make sure I am ok throughout whatever crisis arises.

[PlaysLikeMyung]

Seriously. If people freak out over 4 inches of snow, imagine what they'd do if there were an imminent nuclear plant disaster? It would be mayhem. And Barto is right; those of us who are rational would know when to get the hell out beforehand. I echo his sentiments