Empowering Deaf people through social media ...

Empowering Deaf people through social media during natural hazard emergencies in Australia.

Dissertation in partial completion of Master of International and Community Development Deakin University Faculty of Arts and Education AIX702 and AIX703 (2016 enrolment)

Sherrie Beaver – Student ID 214291975 Submission date: 15th December 2016

CANDIDATE'S CERTIFICATE FORM B

I am the author of the dissertation entitled Empowering Deaf people through social media during natural hazard emergencies in Australia.

submitted for the degree of Master of International and Community Development.

is the result of my own research, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this dissertation in whole or in part has not been submitted for an award to any other university or institution.

Signature: .................................................................... Date: Name: SHERRIE BEAVER

15/12/2016

Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Vicki-Ann Ware for her guidance, support, advice, patience and for being thorough with editing and grammar. This thesis would not have been made possible without her belief in me as a potential researcher.

Thank you to Deakin University for providing me with a wealth of information. As a recipient of the Deakin University Postgraduate Scholarship for the duration of my Masters, this research would not have been possible without the financial assistance of purchasing required textbooks, other academic resources and study expenses.

Thank you to the teaching team of Master of International and Community Development – you have taught me so much more than you have imagined.

Thank you to Julie Judd, my boss, for your support, guidance, copious amounts of chai lattes, patience, and wisdom whilst I juggled work and study this year. Thank you to Brent Phillips and Vicdeaf for being accommodating and patient as well.

Thank you to my mum for your never-ending support and love, and for teaching me to be the person I am today. Thank you to Jessica and Sophie – my best friends and two pillars – thank you for your love, support, guidance, accommodation, food, chai lattes, hundreds of text messages, dog photos, and memories. Finally, thank you to the Deaf community – that also includes Auslan/English interpreters – for supporting this timely research. Without you, this research would not have been possible. I am so very proud to be able to contribute back to the Deaf community, as you have given me so much over the last 30 years.

Table of Contents SUMMARY of DISSERTATION SUBMITTED ............................................................. 1 DISPOSITION of DISSERTATION............................................................................... 2 Glossary .......................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review ............................................................................................................ 7 Who are the deaf community? ................................................................................................. 7 Capabilities & Unfreedoms ..................................................................................................... 10 Unfreedom 1: Lack of access to oral/aural language .................................................................. 10 Unfreedom 2: Inappropriate understanding and discourse around deafness by the hearing community leading to inappropriate responses .......................................................................... 13 Communicating during a humanitarian crisis .......................................................................... 16 Etic versus emic understandings of the needs of the Deaf community ..................................... 17 Involving Deaf people in identifying and addressing their needs .............................................. 18 Social Media – one way of addressing communicative unfreedoms? ....................................... 20 Summary of learnings from the literature ............................................................................... 22

Methodology ..................................................................................................................24 Research Design..................................................................................................................... 24 Recruitment and sampling ..................................................................................................... 25 Survey ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Interviews ..................................................................................................................................... 25 Data collection process ................................................................................................................ 26 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................................ 26

Findings & Discussion .....................................................................................................27 A snapshot of survey respondents .......................................................................................... 27 Overview of overall findings ................................................................................................... 29 Social Media Use by Deaf People................................................................................................. 29 Meeting the linguistic needs of deaf people on social media ..................................................... 31 Connecting to social media .......................................................................................................... 32 Auslan/English interpreters and social media ............................................................................. 33 Auslan and social media ............................................................................................................... 35 Authenticity of information on social media ............................................................................... 37 How has deaf people been affected by natural hazard emergencies? ....................................... 38 Auslan/English interpreters and natural hazard emergencies .................................................... 39 Obtaining information about natural hazard emergencies ......................................................... 41 Accessibility on social media ........................................................................................................ 43 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 45

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................46 Findings from the literature review ........................................................................................ 46 Findings from empirical data .................................................................................................. 48 Drawing it all together ........................................................................................................... 49 Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 49 Disability Discrimination Act (1992) ............................................................................................. 50 Auslan Videos for Social Media .................................................................................................... 51 Using Social Media to distribute information about natural hazard emergencies ..................... 51 Auslan/English Interpreters and Social Media ............................................................................. 52 Mobile connectivity ..................................................................................................................... 53

Further Research.................................................................................................................... 53

Appendix 1 – Survey Questions .......................................................................................60 Appendix 2 – Interview Questions...................................................................................61

SUMMARY of DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FORM C Summary of dissertation submitted for the degree of Master of International and Community Development. Please give a brief summary of the contents of the dissertation to be submitted for examination (200 words):

The 2010/2011 Queensland floods saw the Deaf community resort to social media to lobby for Auslan interpreters to be provided for the emergency broadcasts. Sen’s notion of unfreedoms is explored through the implications of access to information during emergencies. Deaf people often find themselves left in the lurch when they experience an unfreedom such as inability to access aural/oral information. Social media has provided a new platform for the Deaf community to become informed and empowered during emergencies. In this case, community empowerment is strengthened through the use of social media, especially for Deaf and hard of hearing people during the preparatory, response, and recovery stages of emergencies. Deaf people often do not have the privilege of passively obtaining information in the ways the hearing community might (e.g. radio). Instead they rely on noticing a changed environment around them, to alert them to new information. This paper reports on research which explores the importance of social media for deaf and hard of hearing people during emergencies, and how it relates to community empowerment. It also aims to build on this understanding to propose a social media approach for use by emergency services and community organisations, as a means of disseminating vital information to deaf people in Auslan and English during emergencies. It uses Sen’s notion of unfreedoms to identify the challenges deaf people face, such as lack of access to aural/oral information, and presents some recommendations for ways these unfreedoms could be removed. Signature: .................................................................... Date:

15/12/2016

Name: SHERRIE BEAVER

1

DISPOSITION of DISSERTATION FORM D

I am the author of the dissertation entitled Empowering Deaf people through social media during natural hazard emergencies in Australia. submitted for the degree of Master of International and Community Development. Please tick appropriate box.

I agree to the dissertation being made available for such consultation, loan or printing as may be approved by the School Administrative Officer, provided that no part of the dissertation shall be reproduced without the prior approval of the School Administrative Officer and without the appropriate acknowledgment of the source. OR I disagree

(your dissertation will not be made available for the above)

Signature: …………………………………………………………

Date:

15/12/2016

Name: SHERRIE BEAVER

2

Glossary Deaf: people who identify themselves as culturally deaf, participate in the Deaf community, and use sign language as their primary mode of communication (Holcomb, 2013:38). deaf: refers to an audiological/medical description of deafness (Padden & Humphries, 2005:2) Auslan: Australian Sign Language – the language of Australian Deaf community. Oralism: a communication method used by deaf people who do not use sign language as their primary mode of communication.

3

Introduction There was an elderly Deaf man who was stranded in his house due to the rising floodwaters. The State Emergency Services (SES) did not know he was there until his son who lived elsewhere rang the police and said, “This is my father’s address -- he is Deaf. Can you please go and check on him?”. The SES went back and found him sitting inside with water up to his knees. (Bonser as cited in McKee 2014:111)

During natural hazard emergencies, deaf and hard of hearing people encounter major communication barriers. Alerts and warnings are broadcasted in English, and aurally, which causes deaf and hard of hearing people to miss crucial information in which would allow them to prepare and respond, and most importantly, to stay safe during natural hazard emergencies. Not being able to receive information in Auslan can hamper confidence for deaf people, especially during emergencies which can lead to inappropriate and irrational responses. This is due to English not being the first language for most deaf people, hence their preference to receive information in Auslan.

Social media provides an excellent opportunity for deaf people to receive timely and crucial information during a natural hazard emergency, as it allows Auslan videos to be uploaded with accompanying English text. It also allows the Deaf community to have a sense of ‘connectedness’ especially during a crisis.

Approximately an hour and half after Deaf Services Queensland disseminated information about Queensland Police’s Facebook page, he got a call from the emergency services media team saying, “We need an interpreter over here for the announcements”. The Deaf community saw an opportunity to post messages on Queensland Police’s Facebook page saying “We can’t understand the captions. They’re way behind. They’re jumbled.” They were using a lot of huge words and abbreviations, which made Deaf people confused and they had no idea what was happening - even with the captions there. (Bonser as cited in McKee 2014:111).

4

Social media has the potential to address the issue of communication barriers faced by deaf and hard of hearing people during natural hazard emergencies. Emergency services have utilised the power of social media to post updates whenever there is an emergency; however, not everyone is reached. The majority of updates on social media is in text form, which poses difficulty for many deaf and hard of hearing people as English is not their first and preferred language. A large number of deaf and hard of hearing people have low literacy skills, hence their preference to receive information in Auslan. In recent years, emergency broadcasts with Auslan interpreters have become the norm in Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria; however, not all footages of said emergency broadcasts are available immediately online. News programs often upload footages, but they tend to cut the Auslan interpreter out of frame, or show the footage for a short time. This then causes a large gap of crucial information for deaf and hard of hearing people.

Like many other deaf and hard of hearing people, I have encountered communication barriers all my life. It can become frustrating at times, especially during emergencies where information is being distributed aurally. During the 2011 Queensland floods, I was fascinated at the responsiveness of the deaf community on Facebook when they requested for Auslan interpreters to be allocated for emergency broadcasts provided by the Queensland Government. I developed an interest in natural disasters during primary school, and this was reiterated by seeing deaf people use social media as a platform to advocate for Auslan interpreters to be provided for the emergency broadcasts during the 2011 Queensland floods.

I was given an opportunity to work on an emergency project with a deaf organisation in Sydney a couple of years ago, and this was where I got the inspiration to do this research project. I am currently working on a national emergency management project at Vicdeaf, where we research and establish guidelines for emergency services and television broadcasters to provide Auslan interpreters for emergency broadcasts, and to provide information in Auslan for preparatory, response and recovery stages of natural hazard emergencies.

This project asks the question: how can social media be utilised to empower deaf people during natural hazard emergencies? It will also look at accessible information 5

in Auslan, and how deaf people can be better prepared for natural hazard emergencies.

In literature review, we look at literature relating to social media and emergency services, how community is defined, Sen’s theory of unfreedoms, discourses relating to deafness, and the Deaf community. The methodology chapter looks at research design and why research methods were modified to fit the linguistic and cultural needs of deaf people. The findings and discussion chapter also looks at findings from data collected for this project, and how it relates back to the literature review. The final chapter will conclude this research project and list recommendations for further research and action.

6

Literature Review This literature covers a wide variety of research concerning the nature of the Deaf community, and the use of social media during emergencies. It will focus on four major themes that will emerge throughout the literature reviewed. The themes are: definition of the Deaf community; Sen’s theory of capabilities and unfreedoms, as a framework for understanding the needs of the Deaf community during emergencies; communicating through a crisis; the impact of social media use by deaf people during emergencies.

Who are the deaf community? Before proceeding with an overview of literature relevant to this topic, it is important to introduce the notion of Deaf people in Australia as a ‘community’. In this section, I would like to discuss what a community is, then I will explain the ways in which Deaf people in Australia form a clear community, and why language and specific aspects of identity are such an important part of this community.

Community is a complex and challenging entity to define, and no universally agreed definition currently exists. Kenny (2011:45) defines community as a group of people who share a common identity, often derived from geographical location, values, gender, race, disability, or religion. Ledwith (2005:34) adds to this definition by suggesting that a distinct community share social norms and culture. Key aspects of community include social differences, diverse histories and cultures, political and social trends (Ledwith, 2005:34). Further, Ife (2013:112) states that the idea of community membership is based on belonging, acceptance, and allegiance.

The Deaf in Australia could be seen as a community, based on sharing a common identity and language – that is Deaf identity and the language referred to as Auslan, as well as a range of social and cultural norms, and a clear sense of belonging together as a distinct group. The concept of Deaf identity is based on a ‘rewarding and full life centred on wellness and a non-disabled self-schema’ (Holcomb, 2013:65). This is also linked to the concept of Deafhood, a term coined by Paddy Ladd (1990; 2003:9) which is based on a process of constructing the Deaf identity 7

around priorities and principles, which are also affected by factors such as nation, era and class. Deafhood allows deaf people to achieve a healthy identity in a hearing-centric world. Social and cultural norms within the Deaf community are typically passed down through generations, and they range from tapping on the Deaf person’s shoulder to get their attention, being blunt with others, to long goodbyes where Deaf people take longer to bid farewell to others at an event (Holcomb, 2013:220).

However, the Deaf community is not only limited to deaf people; it also includes parents of deaf children, educators, professionals, sign language interpreters and other hearing people. These people are considered allies of deaf people, because even though they do not share a common identity (i.e. based around deafness), they empower Deaf people to choose their next move by being largely transparent within the hearing community (Thomas-Mowery, 2013).

One important characteristic of the Deaf community in Australia is that it is spread across the continent. There does not exist a single location where Deaf people physically co-locate as a community, and not everyone in this ‘community’ is aware of each other’s existence. This is very much like the concept of ‘imagined community’, an idea developed by Benedict Anderson to describe the conceptualisation of a nation state as a ‘community’ (1983; Ladd, 2003:40). Anderson suggests that some communities or nations can be conceptualised as ‘imagined’ …because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the mind of each lives the image of the communion (Anderson, 2006:6). …Communities are to be distinguished, not by their falsity/genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined (Anderson, 2006:6)

There is an extent to which they exist as a community purely through an imagined sense of connectedness. Since there are no geographical borders within the Deaf community, they tend to only gather for a major event such as the Australian Deaf Games. Events such as these help to create a sense of shared experience, 8

behaviours and belonging. More recently the Internet has assisted in removing geographical limitations within the Deaf community, allowing deaf people to communicate and support each other online across vast distances for the first time.

According to Jankowski (1997:26), sign language is the glue that bonds the Deaf community together. Sign language is also instrumental to the development of Deaf identity, as that language is intertwined with identity (Holcomb, 2013:116). Auslan is the language of the Deaf community in Australia, and it was reported in the 2011 Census that there are 9,723 people who use Auslan (Miers, 2015).

However, the Commonwealth government recognises Auslan as a community language only rather than an official national language (Schembri & Johnston, 2007:30), so it does not have a legal status. Auslan is widely used in education, socialising, and employment. Like many other languages, Auslan has its own grammatical structure (Department of Health & Human Services Victoria, 2012), and does not have a written form because it is a visual/spatial language (Deaf Children Australia, 2012). According to Schembri & Johnston (2007:20), visual/spatial languages do not have a written form, so therefore Auslan does not have a written form and is vastly different to English.

Besides sign language, another defining trait of the Deaf community in Australia is typically lower levels of English-language literacy than their hearing counterparts. This would be due to more emphasis on teaching the deaf child to hear and speak, rather than focussing on their language development. Approximately 90% of deaf children raised by hearing parents experience struggles with language acquisition if they are not exposed to sign language at a young age (Holcomb, 2013:38; Marschark & Spencer, 2007; Wilbur, 2008). Delays in language acquisition can have a life-long impact on the Deaf person and their ability to absorb information in English. This can have implications on their ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergencies, such as relying on captions and/or information pamphlets where they are bound to encounter jargons and terminologies used by emergency services personnel.

9

Capabilities & Unfreedoms As highlighted in the introduction chapter, the deaf community face a number of challenges during emergencies, because they cannot access information in the same way as their hearing counterparts. One framework for understanding what these challenges are and how they impact upon deaf people is Sen’s notion of unfreedoms. Sen’s capabilities approach proposes that development is not simply a pre-determined pathway upon which all people must travel, which includes specific types of economic, health, education and other achievements. Rather, development is about a process of facilitating people to create the life they want by removing the ‘unfreedoms’ that prevent them from pursing what they value. An unfreedom is simply a barrier to one of the five types of freedoms Sen proposes exist in a developed society: political freedoms, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, and protective security (Sen, 1999). Where people do not have these freedoms, adverse outcomes such as poor health (‘preventable morbidity’), low educational opportunities and attainment, and even ‘premature death’ can result (Sen, 1999:36).

Life in Australia affords many of these freedoms for the majority of residents, such as people having the freedom to choose who they want to govern their country, and being able to access health services and basic education. Like their hearing peers, deaf people enjoy many freedoms such as unrestricted travel, education, and good health, when access to appropriate modes of communication is provided. However, where access to these freedoms is not provided, the deaf community can be placed at risk of lower quality of life, including poorer health and educational outcomes, and – importantly for this research project – lack of timely access to vital safety information during emergencies. In this section, I explore 2 specific unfreedoms that impact upon the deaf community during emergencies, and often results in injury or even death.

Unfreedom 1: Lack of access to oral/aural language Tom Humphries coined the term audism to describe one unfreedom that negatively impacts upon deaf people on a daily basis – that is, the lack of access to oral/aural language (Humphries, 1975; Lane, 1992; Holcomb, 2013). However, for the deaf 10

community, one unfreedom that prevents full participation in society is the lack of access to oral/aural language. The inaccessibility of oral/aural sources of information that are readily available to the hearing community, such as passively listening to the radio or television, or overhearing a conversation on the street, are simply not available to those with profound hearing loss. Furthermore, written and spoken English are not the first (or preferred) language for most deaf people. Auslan is generally their first language, and this is structurally distinct from English (Schembri & Johnston, 2007), which further compounds communication and access to information for the deaf community. This adds to the unfreedoms of lack of access to oral/aural sources of information, particularly in an emergency setting.

Auslan is the preferred language for the majority of people who have been profoundly deaf since birth (Schembri & Johnston, 2007:29). English is the second language for many deaf people who acquired Auslan in infancy. However, this is not always the case, as there is a large number of deaf people who acquired Auslan during their school years, or later in their lives after finishing secondary school after having grown up with the oralism method (Schembri & Johnston, 2007:29).

The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) does not clearly recognise and protect deaf people. Further, as noted above, Auslan is recognised by the government as a community language other than English (Lo Bianco, 1987; Dawkins, 1991), therefore it does not have a legal status. Due the vagueness of the DDA and related policies, deaf people still experience communication barriers on a regular basis. Deaf people who regularly communicate in Auslan also encounter difficulties with the Englishbased approach to communicating, which causes problems with current approaches to communication during emergencies. Such problems can range from lack of awareness of the linguistic needs of the deaf community to not utilising an Auslan/English interpreter for emergency briefings. The majority of the communication system utilised by emergency services is typically designed for those who can hear, which leaves deaf people without a clear understanding of what is happening, and the step they need to take to ensure their own safety.

It is therefore important, particularly in an emergency, for deaf people to be able to access information in their preferred language – i.e. Auslan. By removing this 11

unfreedom of lack of access to information readily available to others, they are able to avoid injury and even death (Sen, 1999:36). Essentially, such premature mortality and preventable morbidity can occur in emergencies when they do not receive timely information. Evidence also suggests that deaf people can benefit from being bilingual, however they often leave school with low literacy skills (Napier, 2013:896; Power & Leigh, 2000:3-8), so relying on text-based information can become a barrier. Kenny (2011:403) argues freedom is dependent on equality in access to resources, so in order for deaf people to be empowered during emergencies, resources need to be redistributed in a form that meets their linguistic requirements.

Even where government agencies attempt to accommodate the communication needs of the deaf community, there are additional barriers to effective emergency communication with deaf people, such as cutting the Auslan/English interpreter out of frame on televised emergency broadcasts, unreliable captions such as jumbling of words or lagging, and not having access to passive information shared by the hearing community. While one group enjoys complete freedom (i.e. access to passive aural/oral language), there is potential for lack of freedom for the other (Kenny, 2011:403).

Auslan/English interpreters are a crucial part of the deaf community, as they act as bridges between deaf and hearing communities. They remove the unfreedom by allowing the deaf person to have access to aural/oral language. Where an Auslan/English interpreter is used to facilitate communication, the deaf person becomes a subject in which they become empowered with information and knowledge to share with hearing peers (Peterson, 2013). For emergencies, Auslan/English interpreters are crucial for conveying information to the deaf community so they can prepare and respond better for emergencies. Deaf people will also be reassured at seeing information being conveyed in their language through Auslan/English interpreters during emergencies (McKee, 2014:123).

12

Unfreedom 2: Inappropriate understanding and discourse around deafness by the hearing community leading to inappropriate responses Michel Foucault proposed the notion of discourse, in which he suggests that ‘culturally constructed representation[s] of reality’ actually become accepted as reality (Thomson, 2011). One such ‘reality’ that affects the deaf community in Australia is the notion of physical ‘normality’. Society also has been conditioned to accept a particular view of physical ‘normality’ as not having any physical aspects that do not operate as they should, and to view anyone that does not operate in the usual manner as flawed or abnormal, and hence thus as deviant from the societal norms. Being able to hear is considered ‘normal’, whereas having a lack of ability to hear would be considered as ‘not normal’.

As Jankowski (1997:40) stated, it becomes a strategy of powerful or privileged groups in society to maintain the status quo and to generate a language of domination. Essentially, with the use of language to deviate from what is normal, it gives the hearing community power in regards to decision-making for the lives of deaf people, and people with disabilities. There is a long history of discourse concerning deaf people, starting back in 355 B.C. when Aristotle said “Men that are deaf are in all cases also dumb; that is, they can make vocal sounds, but they cannot speak” (1910, cited in Jankowski, 1997:41). Kenny (2011:117) argues that the discourse of ‘disability’ can have profound implications on people who are labelled as disabled and how they are treated by able-bodied people. The deaf community has reacted strongly against being labelled as ‘disabled’. As Holcomb (2013:244) states that deaf people have claimed they are normal in every sense, other than having the ability to hear. Hearing people make decisions on behalf of deaf people, rather than including them in decision-making. This is otherwise known as a top-down approach, where the strengths, resources, skills and expertise in the community are completely ignored by decision-makers (Kenny, 2011:11). These decisions are often inappropriate because the deaf community is often left powerless thus resulting in negative outcomes, especially in emergencies.

13

The implications of poor decision-making on behalf of the Deaf community are so serious, that this highlights the importance of utilising a participatory approach to planning appropriate actions for information the Deaf community can use before, during and after an emergency. This approach empowers people so they can mobilise their own capabilities, become social actors, rather than passive subjects; manage resources, make decisions, and control activities that affect their lives (Cernia, 1985 cited in Duraiappah, Roddy & Paddy, 2005:3).

A participatory approach empowers the deaf community by allowing them to participate in the decision-making process by collaborating with the government and/or public sector agencies. For example, the Deaf Society of New South Wales (2016) has been leading the ‘Get Ready’ Project, where a group of Deaf Liaison Officers are trained to educate the deaf community of the preparatory, response, and recovery stages of natural hazard emergencies, and to provide deafness awareness training to emergency services personnel across NSW. This project has been highly regarded by the emergency services in the state, although it does not touch on the importance of social media use by the deaf community.

The medical model is another discourse about deafness which creates unfreedoms for Deaf people in managing emergencies. This model is based on a perception of deafness as a physical flaw. The inability of deaf people to hear can lead them to being perceived and hence treated as somehow abnormal or deficient. However, Ladd (2003:35) states that both medical and social models of deafness have viewed deaf people as disabled for more than 100 years. The majority of the hearing community is used to a ‘normal’ situation where the people around them can all hear them, so being deaf is not normal in this sense.

Seeing deafness as abnormal or deviant also leads to a situation where deaf people are viewed as somehow deficient, and are thus rendered as ‘disabled’, thereby requiring ‘help’ from the hearing community to rehabilitate their physical imperfection. The government’s understanding of the deaf community is largely based on the medical model of deafness, rather than as a distinct cultural and linguistic group. This can be explained by Solvang’s model of three interrelated discourses: normality/deviance, equality/inequality, and us/them (2003:3), and is summed up in 14

the following table. Solvang (2003:6) has defined equality/inequality as a materialistic and economic discourse, as having a disability can cause unfreedoms in different aspects of life, thus the government is expected to compensate for inequality.

Discourse

Important examples

Core concept

Normality/deviance

Rehabilitation

Human sciences

Prevention of disability Normalisation policy Equality/inequality

Client role in the welfare

Money

state Redistribution for democratic participation Political suppression Us/them

Celebration of difference

Identification

Embracing stigma Table 1 - Source: Solvang, 2000:4

In Australia, the government compensates through the Disability Discrimination Act (Commonwealth of Australia, 1992) and has been a signatory of the United Nations Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) since 2008. However, despite viewing deaf people as ‘disabled’, the DDA does not completely protect their rights. For example, the legislation states ‘reasonable adjustments’ can be provided by governmental agencies and private institutions to accommodate the needs of deaf people.

Emergency communications are not explicitly mentioned in the legislation, although accessible emergency communications are mentioned in state emergency management plans. For example, Section 7.8 in South Australia’s State Emergency Management Plan states that ‘issues for declared emergencies are supported with the use of an accredited Auslan interpreter’ (Government of South Australia, 2015:191). Whilst this is a policy, emergency services in South Australia have an obligation to ensure their live emergency briefings are supported with the use of Auslan interpreter. However, this is not the case in all states so it is not a legally binding requirement, and is not mentioned in the DDA. 15

The discourse of us/them, as defined by Solvang (2003:8), is related to identity and cultural standardisation. Deaf people have endured a long journey to achieve a positive identity as a deaf person in a hearing-centric world where they encounter unfreedoms that are driven by the implicit assumptions and attitudes of the hearing community (Holcomb, 2013:65). This discourse can cause freedoms to become unfreedoms for deaf people, especially during emergencies, thus putting the deaf community at risk for injury or even death.

Essentially, this discourse has disempowered deaf people, thus resulting in oppression for many years. One of the most crucial events oppressing deaf people was the shift from sign language to oralism based on resolutions passed at the second International Congress on Education of the Deaf in Milan (Jankowski, 1997:23). This is an example of the paternalism discourse, as Jankowski (1997:101) stated that the hearing society was largely responsible for the care of deaf people, thus conditioning them to think that deaf people were unable to determine their own lives. The discourse[s] stemming from the Milan Congress has had severe implications on the deaf community around the world for more than a century, in which disempowerment and oppression were one of those implications.

Communicating during a humanitarian crisis Communication is crucial during the preparatory, response and recovery stages of emergencies. Mileti and Fitzpatrick (1992, cited in Boon, 2014:17) found that communicating risk information was most effective when additional information and/or cues which allowed communities to become more prepared for disasters. However, the majority of information delivered throughout these stages are transmitted aurally in spoken English, and sirens (Tannenbaum- Baruchi & FederBubis, et al, 2014:106).

To further complicate this, the nuances of communication methods designed for emergencies, particularly television and radio, do not meet the needs of deaf people, particularly their linguistic needs. Emergency services in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria have recognised the need to provide Auslan Interpreters for live 16

emergency briefings. However, according to McKee (2014:110), pre-existing broadcasting and emergency management plans did not include the requirement of Auslan interpreters prior to the provision of Auslan interpreters for emergencies. For example, captions are not wholly reliable as they tend to become jumbled or lagged during a live broadcast; or in the event of technological failure. Captions do not meet the linguistic needs of deaf people who prefer to use Auslan. Deaf people’s ability to prepare, respond and recover during emergencies becomes hampered when information prepared by emergency services are in English, in which does not meet the linguistic needs of those with limited English skills (Beaver, 2016).

Etic versus emic understandings of the needs of the Deaf community One concept from anthropology and linguistics that may be useful in understanding why government agencies fall so far short of effective emergency communication with deaf people is the notion of etic versus emic understandings of how the deaf community typically convey information. Alexander (2013:xi) defines etic as outsider perspective, and emic as insider perspective. To obtain an emic understanding of a community, be it deaf or any other culture, the researcher needs to immerse themselves into the community to gain a better understanding of how a specific community functions.

The government only has an etic understanding of the deaf community, which is not helpful during emergencies as this has stopped deaf people from being able to prepare and respond effectively. Essentially, the government makes assumptions about the needs of the deaf community based on its medical model of deafness, as explained with Solvang’s model of discourse, so they make decisions based on their perspectives and the top-down approach, which does not exactly empower the deaf community. The hearing community more broadly also rely upon an etic understanding of the deaf community – they do not have the lived experience of a deaf person. Without taking the time to listen to the deaf community and the types of communicative difficulties they have, emergency services are not able to provide effective communication in an emergency.

17

People who are deaf or have direct contact with deaf people have an emic understanding of their communicative needs, thus they are better equipped to advise emergency services on how to improve communication with deaf people during emergencies, as they are familiar with basic aspects of the deaf community, and communication methods used by deaf people (Tannenbaum-Baruchi, Feder-Bubis, Adini et al, 2013:110). The empirical data presented later in this dissertation goes some way towards addressing this shortcoming in planning for emergencies by relevant agencies – the voices of the deaf community, as well as Auslan/English interpreters who work between the deaf and hearing communities, will be presented. These will be used to explain in details the ways in which communication is often ineffective in emergencies, and to propose some concrete ways in which communication can be improved.

Involving Deaf people in identifying and addressing their needs As early as the 1860s, scholars of both community development and democratic theory have discussed the importance of governments and other community agencies engaging and working with communities, rather than doing programmes to them. Key terms often used to describe this are ‘participation’ and ‘engagement’. Stewart (2009:3) suggests that …’participation emerged as a concern in the radical 1960s as a reaction against the dominating influence of big business and big government. … ‘Engagement is clearly a related concept, but it is more instrumentalist in a character. By engagement, I mean deliberate strategies for involving those outside government in the policy process.

18

One such author is Sherry Arnstein (1969), who conceptualised community participation in decision-making as a ladder, to indicate varying degrees of participation and control over decisions by citizens:

Figure 1 – Source: Arnstein, 1969:9.

Arnstein (1969:9) explains that power is redistributed when decision-makers and citizens negotiate on sharing planning and decision-making responsibilities. I propose that partnership, the sixth rung on Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation (1969:2), would enable the deaf community to work with emergency services to improve information distribution in Auslan.

This is already beginning to happen, with numerous partnerships established between state deaf societies and state emergency management agencies, such as the partnership between Vicdeaf and Emergency Management Victoria where both organisations provide weekly Auslan interpreted emergency updates. By participating with deaf people in regular discussions and briefings, this participatory approach allows the government and agency staff to obtain a more emic understanding of the deaf community. It also allows the deaf community to become engaged with the public, especially with the government. This is an interactive

19

process, as it allows decision-makers and participants to communicate with each other (Hendricks, 2014:190).

Social Media – one way of addressing communicative unfreedoms? A growing body of research in recent years has demonstrated the importance of social media use in emergency management and community resilience (e.g. Howell & Taylor, 2011; Dufty, 2012; Bird, Ling & Haynes, 2012). However, there is little to nothing that directly discusses the importance of social media for the deaf community, particularly during emergencies. Social media has played a crucial role in improving communications during emergencies. Howell and Taylor (2011:4) conducted a research paper on the importance of social media use during emergencies, and they found that 50% of respondents relied on official and unofficial sources of information shared on social media. This is particularly important for community resilience, as social media has allowed people to respond to help requested by those affected and to provide support. This empowered communities as they were no longer bystanders and victims (Howell & Taylor, 2011:4). Social media has proven to be beneficial during emergencies because it allows information sharing between emergency services and communities, thus emphasising on community accountability. Howell & Taylor (2011:5) reported that ‘social media is a timely, highly responsive and effective form of communication’, as it allows people to provide information, feel connected to their community, offer support to those affected, and most importantly, to feel a sense of purpose/usefulness. Anecdotally, the deaf community has found social media to be particularly useful during emergencies, which will be discussed in further detail in findings and discussion.

According to a national review conducted by Emergency Management Victoria (2014:47), traditional technologies and communication methods failed to cope with the severity of Canberra bushfires in 2013 and the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria. However, emergency services are now realising the potential of new technologies and communications platforms for emergency communication. The use of social media during emergencies is relatively new, as Howell & Taylor (2011) argues that emergency services need to establish guidelines to utilise social media as a new communication tool and to take advantage of the tools and platforms 20

designed for social distribution and redistribution. Social media also has provided a platform for community resilience, especially during emergencies, as it includes a grassroots effort to ensure the safety of the community (White, 2012:187, cited in Dufty, 2012:40). Groups and pages have been established on Facebook to provide updates to residents of affected areas. This provides a sense of community, which allows people to feel connected and to be able to actively provide information and support (Howell & Taylor, 2011:5).

The deaf community has likewise begun to realise the importance of social media in providing for their emergency communication needs, and is now beginning to use this tool to advocate for its further development for this purpose. For example, they took to social media to demand for Auslan interpreters to be provided for emergency briefings during the 2011 Queensland floods. According to McKee (2014:111), Queensland Police advised the deaf community to ‘like’ their Facebook page as it would be the quickest way for them to keep abreast of updates regarding the emergency. ‘Liking’ pages of emergency services such as Queensland Police allows people to automatically receive updates on their newsfeed, which is particularly useful for emergencies. Bosner (cited in McKee, 2014:111) said that not long after Deaf Services Queensland notified the deaf community of Queensland Police’s message, Deaf community members were quick to get online and posted messages saying that they were confused, and did not understand the captions which included abbreviations and jargons. The deaf community in Queensland had no idea what was going on due to their limited literacy skills and the reliability of captions during the emergency. Emergency services in Queensland, such as Queensland Police Service, and the Queensland Government responded immediately to the demands from the deaf community, and got in contact with Deaf Services Queensland so Auslan interpreters could be provided for televised emergency briefings.

These anecdotes illustrate growing calls for the use of social media to address the communication needs of Deaf people during emergencies. However, there is little research regarding the importance of social media for the Deaf community, but there are none based on emergencies. This dissertation seeks to begin addressing that gap, by providing empirical evidence in the follow chapters, highlighting access to

21

information in Auslan and ease of obtaining information without the need to rely on hearing people.

Summary of learnings from the literature The literature highlights two major unfreedoms for the deaf community, which impacts upon their ability to stay safe before, during and after natural hazard emergencies. The first major unfreedom is lack of access to aural/oral language during emergencies, as emergency communications is quite heavily aural/oral in which the deaf community does not have access to. Another major unfreedom is inappropriate understanding and discourse towards deaf people, resulting in inappropriate responses.

Despite the best intentions of emergency services and other government agencies to provide appropriate communication to the deaf community, these agencies lack an emic understanding of the deaf community and their linguistic needs. The majority of state emergency management plans are quite hearing-centric, and only in recent years they have taken upon putting a statement where Auslan/English interpreters should be provided for emergency briefings, however, they are not legally required to do so. Deaf people have found it particularly difficult to communicate with emergency services and the hearing community during emergencies due to linguistic differences, and lack of awareness on how to communicate with those who are deaf and use Auslan as their primary language. Being unable to receive timely information to be prepared to respond in emergencies becomes an unfreedom for people, especially for those who are deaf. Additionally, there is a discourse where deaf people are considered to be ‘disabled’, even though this does not tally with their own deaf identity or their capacity to participate in effective planning for their community.

One technology that is beginning to be recognised for its potential importance in communicating during emergencies is social media. Emerging research demonstrates the importance of this to affected communities in general. However, there has been no research conducted on the impact of social media use by deaf people during emergencies. The emergency management sector is still largely hearing-centric and does not really take the needs of the deaf community into 22

consideration, so that means barriers and misunderstandings will continue. Additionally, all live emergency briefings are not always uploaded online, which means deaf people who do not have access to a television will not receive crucial information if they find themselves in the midst of an emergency.

The following chapters will use empirical data to demonstrate difficulties deaf people have in accessing information during emergencies, the challenges Auslan/English interpreters face in communicating with the deaf community, and how social media may prove effective in empowering deaf people to be more prepared for future emergencies.

23

Methodology Research Design This research was positioned within a constructivist perspective because it offers an opportunity to understand the barriers Deaf people encounter in receiving timely information during natural hazard emergencies, and how social media can empower Deaf people to become effectively prepared to respond to an emergency. According to Mertens (2004:19), the constructivist approach allowed me to opt for a personal and interactive mode of data collection, which means I am able to collect data by using a bilingual approach consisting of both Auslan and written English. This helped me to construct an understanding of how Deaf people utilise social media as a vital conduit of information around the time of a natural hazard emergency.

The research approach used in this project was designed to meet the cultural and linguistic needs of Deaf people by providing survey questions in Auslan and English, and interviews were conducted in Auslan via Skype. This was important for Deaf people to be able to access the survey and/or interview in Auslan to enable them to effectively provide answers for data collection.

I chose to collect most of my data through the form of survey because I did not want to overwhelm participants and deter them from participation. I then interviewed a further group of Deaf people and Auslan/English interpreters because this allowed me to obtain in-depth information, whereas the survey offered limited information. I hoped that interviews would confirm findings from the survey and vice versa.

The survey and interview were also easy for deaf people to access, especially in Auslan which provided for ease of understanding and communication. These methods of data collection were appropriate for addressing research questions. Open-ended interview questions allowed me to ask further exploratory questions where unexpected responses occurred. This allowed me to collect more information where necessary. Nonetheless, the interview participants gave me profound and extended answers, which yielded more data than I expected.

24

I wanted a spread of respondents – deaf people and Auslan/English interpreters – because I wanted to get a variety of responses. Deaf people were the most crucially important group to engage through this research project because they are most directly affected by natural hazard emergencies compared their hearing peers, and would have had different experiences during the preparatory, response and recovery stages of an emergency.

Auslan/English interpreters were also an important group to engage with through this research project because they provide access to emergency briefings in Auslan where necessary, and they also have been instrumental to empowering Deaf people during emergencies. Auslan/English interpreters have played an important role in providing accessible information during emergencies since 2011, hence their involvement in this research.

As a Deaf researcher, it was important for me to ensure that my chosen research methodologies were modified to meet the linguistic and cultural needs of deaf participants, especially by adopting a bilingual approach of both Auslan and written English.

Recruitment and sampling Survey The survey was administered via Google Forms for ease of receiving responses and the ability to include Auslan translations of survey questions. An email with a link to the survey was sent to state Deaf societies and deaf advocacy organisations, such as Deaf Services Queensland, Deaf Society of NSW, Vicdeaf, Deaf Victoria and Deaf Australia. Forty-five Deaf people participated in the survey.

Interviews An email was sent to the same organisations as the survey recruitment, asking interested participants to send an email to me. Just four Auslan/English interpreters indicated their willingness to participate. Recruiting Deaf people to participate in an

25

interview was even more difficult, so I resorted to recruiting via Facebook, in which 3 Deaf people showed interest. So a total of 7 people participated in interviews.

Data collection process For ease of data collection, questions for both survey and interviews were conducted in Auslan in order to meet the linguistic needs of myself and Deaf research participants. Participants for both survey and interviews were based all over Australia

Interviews were done via Skype, and all answers were translated into English for ease of data collection. However, two interviews were conducted in person due to location and ease of access. The interviews were not recorded; I asked participants to wait whilst I recorded their answers on paper. Each interview took approximately 30 minutes, which was suitable for myself and participants. This gave interview participants ample time to provide their answers in Auslan, and the time frame also allowed participants to think before providing answers.

Ethical considerations Low-risk ethics clearance from the Deakin Faculty of Arts and Education HEAG was obtained. The approval number is HAE-16-043. Participants were assured that complete privacy would be guaranteed throughout this research project, which meant no identifying information would be used to expose their identities. This is particularly important in such a small community, where many people know each other thus their identities could be easily exposed through identifying data.

26

Findings & Discussion This chapter will outline and analyse findings, and common themes in reference to research questions. Data will be presented in graphs to provide a visual snapshot of the deaf community that were interviewed and surveyed. Direct quotes will be used where necessary to emphasise relevant themes.

A snapshot of survey respondents The demographics from the survey gives a snapshot of the members of the deaf community who responded to the survey for this research project. Among survey respondents, the majority of participants self-reported as being deaf (n=34), with smaller numbers of hard of hearing (n=10) and deafblind (n=1) respondents.

Respondents to survey (n=45) 34

10 1 Deaf

Hard of hearing

Deafblind

Figure 2

Of 45 respondents to the survey, the majority were female (n=38) with smaller numbers of male (n=7) respondents.

Gender (n=45) 38

7 Male

Female

Figure 3 27

The majority of survey respondents represented the age range of 25-34 (approx. 38%), with a significant number in the 35-44 age range (approx. 27%). Smaller numbers of respondents were seen in other age ranges (see figure 3 below).

Age of Respondents (n=45) 17 12 8

6

18-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

1

1

55-64

65+

Figure 4

The majority of survey respondents were from metropolitan areas (n=32), whereas smaller numbers of respondents said they were from regional (n=10) and rural (n=3) areas.

Location (n=45) 32

10 3 Metro

Regional

Rural

Figure 5

The majority of survey respondents use Auslan (n=36), whereas 9 respondents do not use Auslan as their primary means of communication. These respondents would primarily communicate using spoken English.

28

Auslan users (n=45) 36

9

Yes

No

Figure 6

Overview of overall findings The impact of social media has on deaf people during emergencies became very apparent from interviews and surveys with deaf people and Auslan/English interpreters around Australia. There are barriers and challenges to empowering deaf people through social media for emergencies, yet the majority have reported that they have found social media to be extremely useful. As mentioned in the literature review, deaf people do not have immediate access to aural/oral language through mediums such as radio, thus social media becomes a vitally important alternative means of receiving timely information about emergencies. Barriers such as technology and telecommunications access are also raised in both interviews and survey responses.

Social Media Use by Deaf People In the survey, all respondents indicated they are active users of social media, although one slight weakness of the survey was that they were not asked how often they use social media. Facebook was the most commonly used social media platform amongst respondents (66%), as deaf people use this platform to keep abreast of information and to stay in touch with their family and friends. This finding was not surprising, since research has shown that deaf people use Facebook as an outlet to communicate with their family and friends and to keep abreast of news around Australia and the world, as we discussed earlier in the literature review chapter where the importance of social media was emphasised for deaf people during emergencies. Facebook also provides a platform for community resilience, as 29

it involves a grassroots effort to ensure the safety of the Deaf community affected by a natural hazard emergency (White, 2012, cited in Dufty, 2012:40). Instagram was another social media platform commonly used by deaf people (n=19), however it only uses photos and videos so this would not be appropriate for emergency services to upload information due to time constraints imposed by said platform. This would be useful to upload videos of emergency briefings with Auslan/English interpreters in frame, so deaf people can watch later if they miss out on the initial broadcast on television.

Number of deaf social media users (n=45) 44

19 2 Facebook

Twitter

2 Instagram

Other

Figure 7

The following quotes show the range of ways interview participants reported using social media for communication: “I use social media to communicate with my family and friends, especially if I don’t have their mobile number. Social media also allows me to share information, and it’s also great for emergencies” ~ Deaf female, 28y.o. “Social media has allowed me to access information concerning the Deaf community, and it also keeps me abreast of changes with technology, world, politics, and so on. It also provides me a platform to advocate for the education of deaf children, and to ensure my children have opportunities to socialise with other Deaf people” ~ Deaf female, 44 y.o.

30

Social media has allowed deaf people to communicate with their loved ones, as indicated by this quote: “Social media makes it a lot easier for me to stay in touch with my family and friends. I am also able to get information in an instant” ~ Deaf male, 35 y.o.

It also allows deaf people to receive information instantly, especially during emergencies. This also means that they are also able to let their loves ones know that they are safe, especially with Facebook’s Safe Check feature where users can mark themselves safe during an emergency situation.

Figure 8 - Source: Beckman, 2015.

Meeting the linguistic needs of deaf people on social media “English hard” ~ Deaf female aged 65+

The above quote is typical of the responses received from survey and interview participants, as English is often not their preferred language and they often find it hard to register information when it is not in Auslan. The majority of information on social media is in English, which does not very effectively meet the linguistic needs of deaf people for whom Auslan is their primary means of daily communication. Interview and survey respondents alike indicated that updates about natural hazard emergencies posted on social media by emergency services are often difficult for 31

deaf people to understand, which results in frustrations. This was shown explicitly through interviews with three Deaf people, as their facial expressions and body language clearly showed their frustration. This is due to the amount of jargons and terminology relating to natural hazards and meteorology. The majority of respondents have said they would like to see more Auslan translations of emergency information on social media. “Auslan interpreted emergency announcements are valuable due to my poor English skills. I’d like to see more of those” ~ Deaf female aged 28.

The general consensus was that they would like to see more Auslan interpreted emergency announcements because it would allow them to prepare and respond effectively to the emergency situation. Survey and interview participants repeatedly indicated that the severity of the emergency usually gets lost in translation due to the unfamiliarity of terminology used in regards to the natural hazard emergency (McKee, 2014:108). Captions are unable to convey tones and facial expressions which would signify the severity. Auslan is a visual/spatial language and can show the nuances of the context that spoken/written English would not otherwise show. With Auslan/English interpreters, the severity of the emergency can be conveyed through Auslan, body language and facial expressions. An interview participant explained it in this way: “My English isn’t very good, and I cannot fully rely on captions. This can cause me to freak out if there’s an emergency if no Auslan interpreted announcements are available” ~ Deaf female, 28y.o.

Connecting to social media There are issues with connecting to social media because it requires an Internet connection, whether at home, work or school. Some respondents have said that mobile reception and/or internet connectivity is quite poor in their locality, which means they are sometimes unable to access to instant information.

32

“My place doesn’t have the NBN and the choice of internet service providers is very limited where I live. I cannot afford unlimited data plans, although it would have been perfect for myself and my family” ~ Deaf female, 44y.o.

Another issue highlighted by interview participants is that they have a limited quota for data. This means if their data runs out, they cannot access information whilst they are away from home. The following quotes indicate several barriers to mobile data access, as deaf people often use their mobile data to check social media, especially when they watch Auslan videos. “Mobile reception is unreliable at home, so I rely on WiFi to check Facebook, emails and whatnot. However, when there is a blackout, I cannot access the Internet. I am left in the lurch because I cannot hear the radio” ~ Deaf male, 35y.o.

Deaf people typically have low income, which means they might not be able to afford to increase their data limit for both home and mobile internet connections. “I don’t have WiFi at home, so I use a lot of mobile data to be able to access the Internet, particularly social media as I like getting information from Facebook. However, when I run out of data, I cannot access Facebook and the Internet otherwise I would have to pay for more data.” ~ Deaf female, 28y.o.

Auslan/English interpreters and social media In some states around Australia, emergency services have an agreement with their local deaf society so Auslan/English interpreters can be called up whenever there is an emergency briefing. For example, Emergency Management Victoria and Vicdeaf have an arrangement where a team of accredited professional Auslan/English interpreters are on call, especially during the summer when there is a higher chance of natural hazard emergencies.

33

Most Auslan/English interpreters are also active users of social media because it is one of the essential tools they utilise for their interpreting assignments. Social media helps keep them updated with news around Australia. Keeping up to date with what is happening in the Deaf community helps them prepare better for their interpreting assignments. They also want to feel included by having the ability to share information with their deaf peers – after all, interpreters are a vital part of the deaf community. Interviews with 4 Auslan/English interpreters indicated a range of ways in which they utilise Facebook and other social media platforms to assist with their interpreting work: “I use Facebook regularly so I can be kept abreast of current news. Facebook also gives me the opportunity to share information with the deaf community and my interpreting colleagues” ~ Auslan/English Interpreter #1 “I have a secret Facebook profile, so I am kept in the loop of the current news concerning the Deaf community and emergencies. I’m not a big social media user, and I would rather keep my professional and private lives separate.” ~ Auslan/English interpreter #3 “Facebook has been useful for whenever I need information for urgent/last minute interpreting assignments, so I could prepare on the go” ~ Auslan/English Interpreter #2

Social media is particularly useful for Auslan/English interpreters during emergencies when they are called up to interpret for an emergency briefing, as it allows them to prepare by obtaining essential information. For example, there have been cases where emergency services have refused to brief the Auslan/English interpreter prior to emergency briefing. It is essential for Auslan/English interpreters to prepare due to the unfamiliarity with terminology, locations and the context used in emergency briefings. “I asked an emergency service for briefing and they refused to do so, so I had to resort to getting information from Facebook so I could prepare to be able to interpret accurately and effectively” ~ Auslan/English Interpreter #2 34

“In 2014, the emergency services commissioner organised a community briefing for the upcoming bushfire season. They refused to provide an Auslan/English interpreter, which hindered the ability of deaf people to prepare for the bushfire season” ~ Auslan/English Interpreter #2

However, Auslan/English interpreters are bound by ethics and confidentiality policies as set by Australian Sign Language Interpreters Association (ASLIA), which means they cannot share details about their interpreting assignments. This also means they are unable to notify the deaf community about emergency announcements via social media, which means deaf people will miss out. This hampers the ability of Deaf people to prepare and respond to emergency situations. One interpreter explained it this way: “We’re not allowed to publicise events we’ve been booked to interpret due to ethics and confidentiality” ~ Auslan/English interpreter #2

Auslan and social media One of the questions I asked in the survey and interviews was about the additional ways Deaf people and Auslan/English interpreters think the use of social media could enhance their ability to access emergency information in a timely and effective manner. Since the majority of information provided by emergency services is in English, deaf people have said they would like to see Auslan translations accompanying all emergency updates. This also includes ensuring Auslan translations of emergency information being available on social media, as indicated by an interview participant: “Auslan videos with English captions should be made available on social media for clarity of information, and this also guarantees full accessibility for deaf and hard of hearing people who are fluent or not fluent in Auslan” ~ Deaf female, 44y.o.

35

However, it is not enough simply to interpret community briefs or to upload videos to social media. Internet connectivity through broadband and mobile are sometimes unreliable, which means Auslan videos uploaded to Facebook tend to buffer and deaf people have to wait until the video is watchable. That can result in a delay of receiving vital information, which means the Deaf person’s response will be delayed. This is a matter of life or death during natural hazard emergencies, where the Deaf person’s ability to access timely information urgently is hampered. One interview participant suggested that different forms of social media are more or less effective for specific information formats: “I’ve had trouble watching Auslan videos on Facebook because they tend to buffer often. If they’re uploaded to YouTube as well, that works better for me” ~ Deaf male, 35y.o.

Another interview participant emphasised on the importance of having their whole family being able to understand and discuss information being distributed through videos in Auslan: “I have deaf children, and they also rely on Auslan videos. I would rather my family to watch together so we can discuss afterwards” ~ Deaf female, 44 y.o.

According to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (2008, cited in Hodge, Linder, Whynot, et al 2015), Deaf people who use sign language as their primary language and have English as their second language sometimes have limited reading ability require media content to be translated into sign language. However, Möbus (2010:572) argues that the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines is quite vague on the need of sign language content on the internet, thus the demand is not widely recognised. Content translated into Auslan would enhance understanding for Deaf people, thus increasing their ability to prepare and respond to emergency situations. A survey respondent explained it this way: “We need a direct signing person, not an interpreter with emergency staff on news – this is always too visually ‘busy’ and feels quite hearing orientated. We need deaf style emergency warnings” ~ Deaf female 25-34 36

Authenticity of information on social media Both deaf people and Auslan/English interpreters have raised their concerns about the authenticity and reliability of information presented on social media regarding natural hazard emergencies. There is a high chance of social panic and biased information, as well as scaremongering from media outlets on social media. So many survey and interview participants indicated that they prefer to receive information from trusted sources such as emergency services and reliable news agencies.

A mix of survey and interview participants have expressed their concerns about the authenticity of information distributed on social media: “Social panic and bias plus scaremongering from newstreams” ~ Deaf female aged 25. “I find it hard to trust social media because of the authenticity of information, especially from various media outlets. I’d much rather get news directly from a trusted source” ~ Auslan/English Interpreter #3 “I’d rather get factual information from a trusted source” ~ Deaf female 35-44 “I did not know which organisation to refer to online for immediate information about a current natural hazard emergency – i.e. there are about 10 different organisations to refer to...which one?” ~ Deaf female 25-34

However, this is a common problem for deaf and hearing people alike. This is where community accountability comes into play, as rumours can cause scaremongering for people affected by a natural hazard emergency, so moderators of Facebook pages need to particularly vigilant and prompt in ensuring information distributed is accurate and reliable.

Inaccurate information circulating on social media can often lead to irrational responses by people. For example, there was an opportunity for official government sources such as Queensland Police Service to ‘mythbust’ rumours distributed

37

through community pages and other media outlets (Queensland Police Service, 2011 cited in Bird, Ling & Haynes, 2012:31)

How has deaf people been affected by natural hazard emergencies? Like everyone else, deaf people have experienced a number of natural hazard emergencies. Australia regularly experiences a range of natural hazards such as bushfire, flood, storms, heatwave, earthquakes and a few more (Dominey-Howes, 2016).

Natural hazards experienced by deaf people (n=45) 15 13

13

7 2

Bushfire

Cyclone

Earthquake

Heatwave

Other

Figure 9

Prior to social media, deaf people often found themselves unaware about natural hazard emergencies as they did not receive crucial information in time. A survey respondent said that she found it difficult to receive timely information about emergencies: “I didn’t receive any information about natural hazard emergencies, but I got more information afterwards through friends and TV. However, during a natural disaster, the only communication I had was via texts with an employer” ~ Deaf female 25-34y.o.

38

Auslan/English interpreters and natural hazard emergencies Since 2011, we have seen Auslan interpreted emergency briefings around Australia, and this has raised the profile of the importance of delivering of emergency information in Auslan for ease of understanding and response by deaf people. McKee (2014:123) suggests that deaf people were overwhelmed with appreciation at being included in the public discourse during emergencies. “Auslan interpreted emergency briefings on TV showed the severity of the emergency. This made me realise we need to take the emergency seriously” ~ Deaf woman, 44y.o.

Auslan interpreted emergency briefings were very well received by the deaf community, as it allowed them to prepare and respond better to emergencies thus reducing the risk of injury or even death.

However, there are some drawbacks to having Auslan interpreted emergency briefings for the Deaf community. For example, one problem that occasionally arises is the risk of tokenism and ‘look at me’ amongst interpreters. This is due to the appetite for human interest stories from the media, which meant Auslan/English interpreters acquired minor celebrity status (McKee, 2014:124). An interpreter explained it in this way: “We tend to become prolific when we interpreter for a large public event, such as an emergency broadcast. Our faces become easily recognisable from TV broadcasts, and this can lead to unwanted attention from the media and the public” ~ Auslan/English interpreter #1

However, this can detract from effective communication when the Auslan/English interpreter volunteering to interpret for an emergency briefing so they can get their 15 minutes of frame. This can lead to inconsistency amongst Auslan/English interpreters, in which can cause the Deaf viewer to become confused and unsatisfied with the quality of interpreting shown in the emergency briefing. McKee (2014:112) said that based on feedback from Deaf people in Queensland, they wanted to see 39

consistency amongst the interpreting team for emergency briefings, so this lead to a selection of three senior interpreters to cover the broadcasts for Cyclone Yasi. For example, in Victoria, an Emergency Services Interpreting Team was established to ensure consistency in interpreting for emergency briefings in collaboration with Emergency Management Victoria.

Nonetheless, Auslan/English interpreters do become public figures when they interpret for an emergency briefing. One example of this occurred in early 2015 during Cyclone Marcia in Queensland, where an Auslan/English interpreter became a minor celebrity and acquired his own hashtag on social media, which was #signguy. “It’s been very surprising, extremely unexpected, particularly because there’s been interpreters used for previous natural disasters so I didn’t think it would cause as much of a stir as it has” ~ Cave, 2015 cited in Moore, 2015.

A number of media outlets picked up on the #signguy hashtag as it had gone viral. For example, Buzzfeed wrote an article on the #signguy. Here is an excerpt from this article:

Figure 10 - Source: Lee, 2015.

The public interest in Auslan/English interpreters has allowed the Deaf community to educate the public about the importance of interpreting and why Deaf people need sign language interpreters. According to McKee (2014:125), interpreters agreed to 40

interviews on the basis of promoting awareness of the interpreting profession and access to information in sign language.

Obtaining information about natural hazard emergencies Deaf people are quite innovative and resourceful when it comes to obtaining information, especially for emergencies. However, in this day and age, deaf people want to be able to receive information in an instant – in the same way as any other member of the community expects immediate access to emergency information. Approximately 84% of survey respondents said that they use social media to obtain information about emergencies.

Did they use social media to obtain information about emergencies? (n-45) Yes

No

16% 84%

Figure 11

The majority of survey respondents (n=16) said they relied on social media to receive information and updates during natural hazard emergencies, whereas 9 survey respondents relied on their family and/or friends to give updates. Some respondents indicated that they relied on more than one source to receive information pertaining to emergencies. This suggests that emergency information distributed amongst multiple communication channels would be more effective, especially for deaf people.

41

Types of mediums used to receive information during natural hazard emergencies (n=45) 16 9

6

5

0 Newspaper

Social media

Television

Family/friends

Other

Figure 12

The majority of survey respondents (n=37) said they use Facebook to receive information about natural hazard emergencies. This may be due to the capability of Facebook to give lengthy updates alongside with videos and photos, whereas Twitter is limited to 140 characters and does not give much information. Only three respondents said they used both Facebook and Twitter to receive timely information for emergencies.

Which social media platforms did they use? (n=45) 37

3 Facebook

Twitter

0

2

Instagram

Other

Figure 13

42

How useful was the information distributed on social media? (n=45) 14

16 7

1

2

Not useful at all

A bit useful

Moderately useful

Useful

Very useful

Figure 14

Information distributed on social media was found to be useful by the majority of survey respondents (n=16), when 14 survey respondents found the information to be moderately useful. This might be based on their literacy skills, as Deaf people with low literacy skills would have said otherwise. The majority of survey respondents were assumed to have reasonable literacy skills to be able to complete the survey, yet most of them still raised the struggles they have in accessing and understanding information presented in English.

Accessibility on social media The majority of emergency information is delivered in English, which can cause discomfort for Deaf people who are not confident with their literacy skills and/or prefer to receive information in their preferred language. This can also lead to a higher risk of injury or even death during emergencies if timely information is not delivered in Auslan. Three survey respondents explained why it is important to ensure information is available in Auslan, especially during emergencies: “Too many word by word; need Auslan 24/7 when it comes to emergencies. Sometimes my data goes over its limit, and I need to rely on SMS for updates, or watch TV but I still don’t get enough information. I was told that more vital information is provided on radio” ~ Deaf female 25-34. “Lots of Auslan with some maps showing where the area is being affected with more description. Sometimes I cannot check social media if I run out of

43

phone data. Need a special channel for deaf people on TV or one page dedicated to emergency updates in Auslan” ~ Deaf female 25-34 “More Auslan videos for emergency information” ~ Hard of hearing female 2534

Not all deaf people are fluent in Auslan, hence the need for English captions to accompany Auslan videos on social media. However, three survey respondents have raised concerns about the availability and reliability of captions provided on online videos: “About 90% of videos on social media do not have captions and Auslan interpreters. Inadequate information is often provided via captions and/or descriptions” ~ Deaf female 25-34. “Prompt information – ongoing access. Most information is spoken – live captioning sucks! So either complete transcripts, captions which are better (i.e. more timely and accurate, no deletions/backtracking/freezes or crazy typos), or Auslan versions from Auslan users (i.e. Deaf people) ~ Deaf female 25-34. “If videos are being used, ensure it is captioned or Auslan interpreted” ~ Deafblind female 25-34.

Television broadcasters often tend to cut Auslan/English interpreters off from broadcasts, thus leading deaf people to miss out on vital information for emergencies. This is also reflected on social media when emergency broadcasts are uploaded, especially without captions as well. This can cause frustrations for Deaf people because they are aware that they are missing out on timely and crucial information. “Auslan interpreters are cut off from video announcement updates and emergency reports uploaded on social media” ~ Deaf female 35-44

44

“They always upload the video with Auslan interpreters cropped out! It does not make any sense and it’s such a waste of money having an interpreter in first place if its inaccessible” ~ Deaf female 18-24.

Conclusion The Deaf community is diverse in their needs around accessing information, although there was a consistent theme around accessibility provided through the use of Auslan on social media. However, the majority of respondents indicated more emphasis is needed on the quality of captions provided during emergencies, and the quality of information provided in English with accompanying visual images.

As mentioned earlier, Auslan/English interpreters are bound by ethics and confidentiality which means that they cannot share information about emergency broadcasts they have been assigned to interpret. This means it is completely up to the emergency services and/or the Auslan interpreter booking agency to let the local Deaf community know of an upcoming emergency briefing they need to watch.

It is evident that the use of social media to access timely information during emergencies has had an impact on the Deaf community, so I will be drawing everything together in the next chapter for conclusions and recommendations for action.

45

Conclusion This chapter will summarise the challenges and opportunities for the use of social media by deaf people during natural hazard emergencies, which were identified in this research project. It will draw conclusions about the effectiveness of social media as a medium of accessible communication for the deaf people surveyed and interviewed. From these conclusions, recommendations will be made for ensuring accessibility on social media during emergencies, and further research will also be suggested. The key concern raised by participants was access to information provided by media outlets and emergency services on social media.

Findings from the literature review The application of Sen’s theory of capabilities approach to Deaf studies is new, as far as I can identify. So it was important to draw this up and to show how it is particularly important in the current research. As demonstrated in the literature review chapter, deaf people experience a higher number of unfreedoms due to their inability to access aural/oral language, and the discourse built around deafness by the hearing community. Unfreedoms experienced by deaf people can be particularly problemic during emergencies, especially where their ability to prepare for and respond becomes hampered thus increasing the risk of injury or even death. These unfreedoms often have adverse outcomes such as preventable morbidity and/or premature morality (Sen, 1999:36).

However, the discourse built around deafness is based on the etic understanding from government agencies and emergency services, and particularly the hearing community. This is due to the medical model used to make decisions for deaf people, and renders them as ‘disabled’ where they are assumed to require help to rehabilitate their physical imperfection. Essentially, the discourse does not recognise the Deaf identity and instead focuses on us/them as defined by Solvang (2003:8), where deaf and hearing people are separated entities. This effectively disempowers deaf people, especially during emergencies where they are not included in preparation and response events leading to the natural hazard emergency.

46

The nuances of communication methods used for emergencies are particularly designed for people who have the ability to receive information aurally and orally. This puts deaf people at a major disadvantage during emergencies, where information is not delivered in Auslan accompanied with English captions. Moreover, the majority of information distributed by emergency services do not meet the linguistic and cultural needs of deaf people. This is due to Auslan being recognised by the government and state bodies as a community language (Lo Bianco, 1987; Dawkins, 1991) and therefore does not have protection by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. Essentially, resources need to be redistributed in a form that meets the cultural and linguistic needs of deaf people, as their freedom is dependent on equality and accessibility (Kenny, 2011:403).

The importance of participatory approach with the Deaf community during emergencies was discussed along with Arnstein’s model of community participation to display varying degrees of participation and control (1969:9). However, emergency services and state deaf societies have begun to realise the importance of this approach, thus establishing partnerships such as Emergency Management Victoria and Vicdeaf, and the partnership established by The Deaf Society of New South Wales (2016) with numerous emergency services in NSW as a result of their Get Ready program. This is particularly important for the Deaf community because it allows them the opportunity to communicate with decision makers and to influence decision-making in regards to emergency management and communications concerning deaf people.

Social media has an important role in emergency communications as Howell & Taylor (2011:5) stated that highly responsive and timely communication is possible through the use of social media during emergencies, as it allows the provision of information, a sense of community and connectedness for people, and to seek support for affected communities. However, there is little to no research on the implications of social media use by deaf people during emergencies. Literature has shown the importance of utilising social media by emergency services and communities, and there is no doubt that there will be more literature pertaining to the use of social media platforms to communicate with affected communities.

47

Findings from empirical data Most emergency information on social media is provided in written and/or spoken English, which can leave deaf people overwhelmed if they find themselves during an emergency without access to timely information. Deaf people are often not confident about their literacy skills, especially during an emergency which can lead to misinterpretation of information and inappropriate responses. This can become a unfreedom when information is not presented in Auslan to guarantee appropriate responses to a natural hazard emergency, in which can leave deaf people in the lurch.

Most Deaf people prefer to receive emergency information in Auslan due to varying literacy skills within the Deaf community. However, not all deaf people have the same literacy skills, as they might have grown up using Auslan, or learnt Auslan later in their lives. It is important to ensure information is accessible, especially for Deaf people who prefer to receive timely information in Auslan. This will allow them to effectively prepare for, respond to and recover from natural hazard emergencies.

There are also deaf people who do not rely on Auslan, so their access needs also need to be considered. They prefer to rely on English captions to ensure full access to information, on top of lip-reading and being able to receive aural information using their residual hearing with the assistance of hearing aids and/or cochlear implants. One important way of meeting these needs, which was identified in research, is to ensure all videos have English captions, and that they are accurate without relying on YouTube’s automatic captions which is, most of the time, inaccurate. However, this group of people can still encounter a lack of access to aural/oral sources of information due to their hearing loss, so it is important to ensure full accessibility is provided for emergency information distributed by emergency services and other reliable sources. Essentially, a bilingual approach should be adopted when presenting emergency information for everyone as freedom is dependent on equality (Kenny, 2011:403). Deaf people, regardless of their levels of deafness, can be empowered to prepare and respond effectively during natural hazard emergencies when resources meets their linguistic needs. 48

Lack of access to aural/oral language was identified as a major unfreedom in empirical data collected through survey and interviews, as participants mentioned that they were frustrated with lack of information available in Auslan especially for natural hazard emergencies. There was also confusion of which source to rely on for accurate information, and whether they can be trusted to provide information in Auslan. Based on anecdotal evidence, the Deaf community in Victoria are very satisfied with the partnership between Emergency Management Victoria and Vicdeaf where weekly updates are provided during the bushfire season each year.

Empirical data shows that social media has removed the unfreedom of aural/oral language by providing timely emergency information in written English, however, when videos are provided online, the unfreedom remains if there are no captions and/or an Auslan interpreter, or an Auslan translation of the video.

Drawing it all together Findings from both literature review and empirical data show the importance of utilising social media to communicate with deaf people during emergencies. One major finding was the importance of Auslan interpreted and/or translated videos to accompany information distributed by emergency services in order to meet the linguistic and cultural needs for deaf people. More so, it is also important to ensure full accessibility is provided such as English captions to meet the linguistic needs of deaf people who are not wholly fluent in Auslan. In the next section, I will be drawing recommendations for practical ways in which emergency services can ensure accessible information is distributed, particularly by harnessing the potential of social media to empower deaf people during emergencies.

Recommendations My findings point to a number of areas where information-sharing practices could be changed to better accommodate the informational needs of deaf and hard of hearing people during natural hazard emergencies. In this section, I outline several recommendations which would engender best practice of accessible communication with the Deaf community during an event of a natural hazard emergency. The two

49

unfreedoms identified in the literature viewed will also be addressed in recommendations, and how they can be removed to ensure deaf people can access timely information on social media during natural hazard emergencies.

Disability Discrimination Act (1992) The Disability Discrimination Act (1992) needs to be revisited and reviewed, and a section should be added which focuses on accessible communication during emergencies. This would go a long way towards facilitating transparency and accountability for emergency services to ensure accessible communication is provided to deaf people during emergencies through the means of Auslan videos. Additionally, Australia ratified the United Nations Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; Article 21 states that state bodies are responsible for ensuring that deaf people have the right to seek, receive and impart information on an equal basis with others and through all forms of communication of their choice (United Nations, 2006). For example, Section D of Emergency Management under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) explicitly states that emergency services should ensure this: “…combining visual and audible alerts will reach a greater audience than either method would alone. Auto-dialed telephone typewriter (TTY) messages to pre-registered individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, text messaging, emails, and innovative uses of technology may be incorporated into such procedures. For announcements by government officials on television, providing qualified sign language interpreters and open captioning will ensure that all people tuning in are able to access the information provided.” (United States Department of Justice, 2009).

Something similar to this could be inserted into the DDA to improve the legislated mandate for more flexible and tailored communications. This would lessen the risk of injury and even death if the unfreedom of lack of access to timely information that is readily available to others is removed.

50

Auslan Videos for Social Media Issues with accessibility provided in videos uploaded by emergency services were identified in empirical data collected from survey and interview responses. Two main issues were captions and Auslan translations for online videos, which were not often done by emergency services. Most commonly, information uploaded to social media by emergency services are in spoken and/or written English, which hampers the ability of deaf people to comprehend so they can effectively prepare and respond to a natural hazard emergency. Emergency services need to ensure they adhere to Australian Communications Consumer Network’s English-to-Auslan Translation for Online Videos Guidelines to engender best practice of distributing accessible emergency information in Auslan with English captions.

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 also need to be reviewed, as it does not currently recognise the demand for web content to be translated into sign language to meet the linguistic and cultural needs of deaf people. However, it does recognise the need of captions where a text copy is not available to accompany videos. Captions are paramount to ensuring accessibility whilst viewing videos online, especially on social media - particularly when it is about a natural hazard emergency.

Using Social Media to distribute information about natural hazard emergencies Emergency services should endeavour to distribute timely and crucial information to all social media channels where possible, as not all deaf people use Facebook, Twitter or other social media platforms. Additionally, an Auslan translation should accompany emergency updates that are provided in written and/or spoken English.

Emergency services should also establish a partnership with the relevant state Deaf Society to ensure information pertaining to natural hazard emergencies is distributed to the Deaf community through all communication channels, including social media. For example, Vicdeaf and Emergency Management Victoria have a partnership where Auslan/English interpreters are provided for emergency briefings thus Vicdeaf is required to share Auslan interpreted emergency briefings via social media as soon as they are available. This will guarantee accurate and reliable information from a 51

trusted source, and this sort of partnership should be negotiated in all States and Territories. Timely access to information would also be guaranteed through such a partnership, especially during crises.

A specialist social media team in each state should be established to ensure timely information is translated into Auslan and distributed to the Deaf community affected by a natural hazard emergency. The team would also consist of Deaf people who are native Auslan users and have translation skills, as well as proficient English skills to guarantee accurate translation to meet the needs of the Deaf community. This would guarantee empowerment of deaf people during emergencies.

Auslan/English Interpreters and Social Media The Code of Ethics and Confidentiality set by Australian Sign Language Interpreters Association (ASLIA, 2016) need to be revisited and reviewed in regards to emergency briefings. The current code of ethics and confidentiality prevents Auslan/English interpreters from notifying their local Deaf community so that deaf people do not miss out on timely and crucial information during an emergency. Alternatively, interpreter booking agencies such as Auslan Connections and Auslan Services should alert the Deaf community of an upcoming Auslan interpreted emergency briefing. This would allow the Deaf community to prepare and respond effectively to an emergency, as the unfreedom of lack of access to aural/oral language would be removed when Auslan/English interpreting services are utilised during emergencies. Where Auslan/English interpreters are used, deaf people become empowered with crucial information thus they will be able to empower others to effectively prepare for and respond to natural hazard emergencies.

For consistency and trust from the deaf community, there needs to be a team of professional accredited Auslan/English interpreters who have been trained to interpret for the media especially during emergencies. According to McKee (2014:123), deaf people will feel reassurance by seeing information conveyed in their language by a team of trusted Auslan/English interpreters during emergencies. One of the outcomes from the current National Emergency Management Project, lead by Vicdeaf in collaboration with other state Deaf Societies, is to deliver a specialist

52

training course for a select group of Auslan/English and Deaf interpreters who have experience in interpreting for the media and/or during emergency broadcasts. It is anticipated that this training course will commence early next year, pending funding.

Mobile connectivity Telecommunications companies such as Telstra, Optus and Vodafone should consider establishing Deaf friendly mobile plans for pre-paid and post-paid contracts. A Deaf friendly mobile plan would include a large quota or unlimited data instead of voice-calling minutes, as deaf people do not use voice calls and would be wasting a portion of their money that goes towards paying for access and service they receive on their mobile phones. For example, T-Mobile in the United States offers an unlimited plan for $US70 per month, which includes unlimited data, text and voice calls. This would enable deaf people to watch Auslan videos posted on social media platforms without worrying about going over their monthly mobile data limit, especially during emergencies. Alternatively, if a such plan is not possible, telecommunication carriers should consider providing unlimited data for people affected in a natural hazard emergency until it has passed.

When I was leaving Washington, D.C. earlier this year, the city was hit by torrential rain and thunderstorms, and I received a text message from T-Mobile advising us to avoid the northwest DC area due to flash flooding. This is an initiative Australian telecommunications carriers should consider adopting so that it can engender timely information alerts to everyone, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Further Research This paper calls for further research regarding the use of social media within the Deaf community in Australia, especially how it has given them a platform and a voice. There is a small number of research done in the United States which focuses on the use of social media in the Deaf community, but there is no Australian based research. Further research is also needed on deaf people and natural hazard emergencies in Australia, as this is a newly emerging research having only started in the recent years.

53

Additionally, further research on the Deaf community within the community development sector is need, as this would enhance better understanding of this community for people who have an etic perspective. Research on the Deaf community would also be better conducted by researchers who have an emic understanding as they know the community better than those who have an etic understanding. Finally, further empirical exploration and application of Sen’s theory of unfreedoms and a capabilities approach to development within the Deaf community could enhance development practitioners’ understandings of ways in which the Deaf community could be empowered to participate more fully in the life of the broader Australian community.

54

Reference List Alexander, M. (2013) Constructions of flood vulnerability across an etic-emic spectrum. Available at: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/13530/1/MAlexander_thesis.pdf (Accessed: 7 October 2016). Anderson, B. (2006) Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London, United Kingdom: Verso Books. Arnstein, S.R. (1969) ‘A Ladder of Citizen Participation’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), pp. 216–224. Australian Sign Language Interpreters Association (2007) Code of ethics and guidelines for professional conduct. Available at: https://aslia.com.au/wpcontent/uploads/2016/03/ASLIA-Code-of-Ethics.pdf (Accessed: 20 November 2016). Beaver, S. (2016) Analysis of existing Auslan information resources. Melbourne: Vicdeaf.Unpublished report for National Emergency Management Project funded by Attorney-General’s Department and lead by Victorian Deaf Society Beckman, B.L. (2015) Facebook safety check connects those affected by devastating Nepal earthquake. Available at: http://mashable.com/2015/04/25/facebook-safety-check-nepalearthquake/#1oCSI4WFmkqG (Accessed: 26 November 2016). Bird, D., Ling, M. and Haynes, K. (2012) ‘Flooding Facebook - the use of social media during the Queensland and Victorian floods’, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 27(1), pp. 27–33. Boon, H. (2014) ‘Investigation rural community communication for flood and bushfire preparedness’, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 29(4), pp. 17– 25. Disability Discrimination Act 1992, c. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00763 (Accessed: 1 October 2016). Dawkins, J. (1991) The Australian language and literacy policy. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. 55

The Deaf Society of New South Wales (2016) Get ready: Emergency preparedness. Available at: http://deafsocietynsw.org.au/information/page/get-ready-project (Accessed: 1 October 2016). Department of Health & Human Services Victoria (2012) Sign language - Auslan. Available at: https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/sign-languageauslan (Accessed: 20 October 2016). Dominey-Howes, D. (2016) Community risk & Hazard profiles in Australia. Melbourne: Vicdeaf.Unpublished report for National Emergency Management Project funded by Attorney-General’s Department and lead by Victorian Deaf Society Dufty, N. (2012) ‘Using social media to build community disaster resilience’, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 27(1), pp. 40–45. Duraiappah, A.K., Roddy, P. and Parry, J.-E. (2005) Have Participatory Approaches Increased Capabilities? Available at: http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2005/economics_participatory_approaches.pdf (Accessed: 2 October 2016). Emergency Management Victoria (2014) National Review of Warnings and Information. Available at: https://www.emv.vic.gov.au/publications/national-review-ofwarnings-and-information (Accessed: 28 September 2016). Government of South Australia (2013) State Emergency Management Plan. Available at: http://www.safecom.sa.gov.au/site/emergency_management/emergency_manageme nt_arrangements/state_emergency_management_arrangements.jsp (Accessed: 1 October 2016). Hendriks, C. (2014) ‘Participatory and collaborative governance’, in Smith, R., Vromen, A., and Cook, I. (eds.) Contemporary Politics in Australia. Cambridge University Press (CUP), pp. 188–198. Hodge, G., Goswell, D., Whynot, L., Linder, S. and Clark, C. (2015) What standards? The need for evidence-based Auslan translation standards and production

56

guidelines. Available at: https://accan.org.au/files/Grants/ACCAN_AuslanTranslationProject_FullReportaccessible.pdf. Holcomb, T.K. (2013) Introduction to American deaf culture. New York: Oxford University Press. Howell, G.V.J. and Taylor, M. (2012) ‘When a crisis happens, who turns to Facebook and why?’, . Humphries, T. (1975) The making of a word: Audism. Available at: http://teckensprak.nu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Toms-audism.pdf (Accessed: 26 September 2016). Ife, J. (2013) Community development in an uncertain world: Vision, analysis, and practice. 5th edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jankowski, K.A. (1997) Deaf empowerment: emergence, struggle, and rhetoric. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press. Johnston, T. and Schembri, A. (2007) Australian sign language (auslan): An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, New York. Kenny, S. (2011) Developing communities for the future. 4th edn. Australia: Cengage Learning Australia. Ladd, P. (2003) Understanding deaf culture: In search of Deafhood. London, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters. Ledwith, M. (2011) Community development (second edition): A critical approach. 2nd edn. Bristol: Policy Press at the Univ of Bristol. Lee, A. (2016) Everyone is falling for this Cyclone sign language guy. Available at: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexlee/everyone-is-falling-for-this-cyclone-sign-languageguy?utm_term=.qf1OREVa#.jgJqxvyR (Accessed: 10 November 2016). Lo Bianco, J. (1987) National policy on languages. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. 57

McKee, R. (2014) ‘Breaking news: Sign language interpreters on television during natural disasters’, Interpreting International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, 16(1), pp. 107–130. doi: 10.1075/intp.16.1.06kee. Mertens, D.M. (2004) Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Miers, K. (2015) Captioning Regulatory Framework. Available at: https://www.communications.gov.au/sites/g/files/net301/f/submissions/Deaf%20Austr alia.pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2016). Möbus, L. (2010) ‘Making web content accessible for the deaf via sign language’, Library Hi Tech, 28(4), pp. 569–576. doi: 10.1108/07378831011096231. Napier, J. (2013) Available at: http://www.racgp.org.au/download/Documents/AFP/2013/December/201312napier.p df (Accessed: 20 October 2016). Padden, C.A. and Humphries, T.L. (2005) Inside Deaf Culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Peterson, P. (2013) ‘Losing My Train’, Sydney: The 2nd International Conference for the World Federation of the Deaf. . Power, D. and Leigh, G. (2000) ‘Principles and practices of literacy development for deaf learners: A historical overview’, Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), pp. 3–8. Sen, A. (1999) Development as freedom. New York: Anchor Books. Solvang, P. (2000) ‘The emergence of an us and them discourse in disability theory’, Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 2(1), pp. 3–20. doi: 10.1080/15017410009510749. Stewart, J. (2009) The dilemmas of engagement the role of consultation in governance. Available at: http://press.anu.edu.au/publications/series/australia-and-

58

new-zealand-school-government-anzsog/dilemmas-engagement (Accessed: 21 October 2016). Tannenbaum-Baruchi, C., Feder-Bubis, P., Adini, B. and Aharonson-Daniel, L. (2014) ‘Emergency situations and deaf people in Israel: Communication obstacles and recommendations’, Disaster Health, 2(2), pp. 106–111. doi: 10.4161/21665044.2014.989131. Thomas-Mowery, H. (2013) ‘Allies: Sign language interpreters and a bigger picture view’, Street Leverage, 20 May. Available at: http://www.streetleverage.com/2013/05/allies-sign-language-interpreters-and-abigger-picture-view/ (Accessed: 20 October 2016). Thomson, P. (2011) ‘A Foucauldian approach to discourse analysis’, 10 July. Available at: https://patthomson.net/2011/07/10/a-foucualdian-approach-todiscourse-analysis/ (Accessed: 7 October 2016). United Nations (2006) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United States Department of Justice (2009) ADA Tool kit: Curb ramps and pedestrian crossings under title II of the ADA. Available at: https://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm (Accessed: 20 November 2016).

59

Appendix 1 – Survey Questions 1. Are you Deaf, hard of hearing or deafblind? 2. What is your gender? 3. How old are you? 4. Where do you live? 5. Do you prefer to use Auslan? 6. Where do you use the Internet the most? 7. What is your preferred way to access the internet? 8. What type of internet connection do you use? 9. Do you use social media? 10. Which social media platforms do you use the most? 11. Have you experienced any natural hazard emergency? 12. Which natural hazard emergencies have you experienced? 13. How did you receive information about the natural hazard emergency you experienced? 14. Have you ever used social media to obtain information about a natural hazard emergency? 15. Which social platform(s) did you use? 16. How useful was the information? 17. Were there any problems with accessing information in this format? 18. If so, what were the problems you experienced? 19. What would you prefer to see on social media for emergency information? 20. Would you prefer to see emergency information and updates in Auslan available on social media for ease of access and to share with your family?

60

Appendix 2 – Interview Guide Questions 1. Do you live in the city or country? 2. Do you use social media? If not, why? 3. If so, which platforms? 4. Why do you use social media? 5. How does social media help you when you need to know important information? 6. Have you experienced any natural hazard emergency, such as bushfire? 7. During an emergency, has social media helped you in getting information you needed to know? How has it helped? 8. Have there been any times when social media has hindered you in gaining important emergency information? How? 9. What type of internet connection do you have? NBN or broadband? 10. Are you able to view Auslan videos online? 11. What would you like to see on social media during emergencies?

61