|
Issue 5
Nine people treated. An office evacuated. But... what happened?
|
Practical PIO analyzes real social media posts to help you improve your communications. All identifying details are blurred or removed because our goal is growth, not criticism. |
Nine people needed medical attention. An office building was evacuated. A hazmat team and lots of mutual aid was called. So... what actually happened? This release has extensive operational detail but never answers the most basic question your readers are asking.
|
Full text
Here’s the full text so you can follow along (or in case the image doesn’t load):
For Immediate Release
Contact: [Chief’s name]
Fire Chief
Fire Department
[Phone number]
[Email address]
[City] Fire Department Responds to Medical Incident
[Dateline], August 20, 2025 - At 1:07 p.m., the [City] Fire Department was dispatched to the 4900 block of [Street] in [City], [State], for a report of multiple individuals requiring medical attention.
Firefighter-paramedics arrived on the scene within two minutes and discovered that an office building had been evacuated. Crews immediately initiated medical triage and confirmed that nine individuals required care. Three patients were transported by ambulance to [Hospital], while six others were evaluated and treated at the scene before being released.
Out of an abundance of caution, firefighters also conducted a thorough search of the building and requested the regional hazardous materials team. After extensive investigation, no hazardous conditions were identified. The scene was deemed safe, and the building was returned to its occupants. Emergency personnel also worked closely with employees to reunite families who were present at the time. This incident is believed to be isolated, and there is no ongoing risk to public health.
The [City] Fire Department's response included three fire engines, four ambulances, two chief officers, one command vehicle, and two utility vehicles. Assistance on scene was provided [City] Police Department, [City 2] Fire Department, [City 3] Fire Department, [City 4] Ambulance, [City 5] Ambulance, [City 6 Ambulance], the [State] Fire Marshal’s Office, the Office of Emergency Medical Services, and [County] Sheriff’s Dispatch. During this time, [City 7] Ambulance and [City 7] Fire Department provided coverage within the City of [City].
While this incident was being managed, the [City] Fire Department also responded to five additional emergency calls for service across the community.
The City of [City] is dedicated to creating a sustainable, healthy, accessible, resilient, and equitable community where every person feels at home.
|
✅ What works well
✅ The outcome is clear early. By the second paragraph, we know nine people needed care, three were transported, six were treated and released. No one’s left wondering about the severity of injuries.
✅ The release addresses follow-up questions proactively. By mentioning the hazmat team was called and found nothing, it heads off speculation about environmental hazards without making it sound alarming. (But the release does raise one big question—see the nitty gritty below.)
✅ The release mentions operational continuity. Noting that other agencies provided coverage AND that the department handled five other calls during the incident shows transparency—the rest of the community wasn’t left unprotected.
✅ Contact information is complete and properly formatted. The header includes name, title, phone, and email—everything the media needs to follow up.
✅ The release acknowledges all responding agencies. This shows respect for the collaborative effort and is important for interagency relationships (though there may be a better way to handle this—more below).
|
🛠️ What could be improved
Big picture
🛠️ Answer the question everyone’s asking: What happened? The release never explains WHY nine people needed medical attention or why the building was evacuated. Was it a gas leak? Carbon monoxide? Medical emergency? If it’s under investigation, say so. If you can’t disclose details, acknowledge that limitation. Don’t leave readers filling in the blanks with speculation. (And in the comments on this post, people were asking this question!)
🛠️ Make your release accessible to everyone. This release was shared as a screenshot on social media (again—we covered this in Issue 1!). Post the actual text so it’s readable on phones and accessible to people using screen readers. Images of text aren’t accessible.
🛠️ Consider a separate thank-you post for mutual aid recognition. Listing 10+ agencies is important for operational records, traditional news releases, and partner relationships, but it overwhelms a social media release. Instead, acknowledge mutual aid briefly in the release (“assisted by multiple agencies”) and create a separate social media post where you can tag/mention each agency directly. That gives them visibility without cluttering your public messaging.
🛠️ Don’t bury the headline in bureaucratic language. “Medical incident” is vague. “Nine people treated after office building evacuation” tells the actual story.
Nitty gritty
🛠️ Cut the clichés. “Out of an abundance of caution” has been so overused in emergency communications that it’s lost all meaning. Just explain what you did: “Firefighters searched the building and called the hazmat team to rule out environmental hazards.”
🛠️ The boilerplate doesn’t belong here. That final line about creating “a sustainable, healthy, accessible, resilient, and equitable community” is fine for letterhead, but it doesn’t add anything to an emergency release. If it’s automatically on your template, consider whether it needs to be on every release or just formal documents.
🛠️ “This incident is believed to be isolated, and there is no ongoing risk to public health” raises questions you haven’t answered. Why mention this unless there WAS a concern about public health risk? If that is relevant context, explain it. Otherwise, this sounds defensive and makes people wonder what you’re not telling them.
🛠️ Use active voice. “Assistance on scene was provided by…” should be “Assisting agencies included…” The passive construction buries the action and makes the writing feel bureaucratic.
|
Practical PIO version
Here are two versions that repackage the incident information into a news release appropriate for a social media post for the community. (One could do a longer, more in-depth traditional news release for media.)
ption 1 is if you know the cause. For the sake of the example, I’m saying it was a carbon monoxide leak, even though the response doesn’t match a typical carbon monoxide leak response.
Nine people received medical care Tuesday afternoon after an office building was evacuated in the 4900 block of [Street] in [City] due to a carbon monoxide leak. Three adults were transported to [Hospital] for further evaluation, and six others were treated at the scene and released.
Firefighter/paramedics arrived within two minutes and began medical triage while crews searched the building and worked to identify the source of the problem. Eventually, a carbon monoxide leak was located and mitigated, and the building was ventilated. A regional hazardous materials team assisted to confirm conditions were safe before the building was turned back over to property management.
The cause of the leak is under investigation.
Option 2 is an example if you don’t know or can’t say the cause.
Nine people received medical care Tuesday afternoon after an office building was evacuated in the 4900 block of [Street] in [City]. Three adults were taken to [Hospital], and six others were treated at the scene and released.
Firefighter/paramedics arrived within two minutes and began medical triage after confirming the building had been evacuated. Because of the number of patients and the nature of the call, firefighters searched the building and requested the regional hazardous materials team to rule out environmental hazards. Investigators did not identify any hazardous conditions, and crews later returned the building to its occupants.
Multiple agencies assisted with the response, and additional crews covered other emergencies across the city during the incident. The [Agency] is investigating.
Notice that even in Option 2, where we don’t know the cause, I’ve acknowledged that limitation directly. Some variation of “the cause is under investigation” tells readers you’re working on it and you’re not just ignoring their biggest question. Transparency about what you DON’T know builds as much trust as sharing what you DO know.
|
What would you have done differently? Hit reply and let me know—I read every email.
I’m building the Practical PIO to make this easier, and your input helps shape what I make.
|
Thanks for reading!
Did someone forward you this email? Subscribe here.
If you’re already a subscriber and you found value in something here, tell your friends and colleagues to subscribe!
|
|