What is humanitarian communication?
Three activities are routinely bundled under one name. Separating them clarifies who decides what, and which of them carries a security consequence.
Communication with the affected population is the one that is a condition of doing the work. People need to know what assistance exists, where it is, who is entitled to it and on what basis, and they need a way to raise a problem with it. This is not publicity. It is the difference between a programme that people can use and one they cannot.
Advocacy is directed at the people who decide: governments, armed actors, institutions. It seeks to change a policy or a practice. It is legitimate and it is the activity that most often puts an organisation's access at risk, because advocacy takes a position and a position creates a party that disagrees with it.
Public information is directed at donors, the public in donor countries and the media. It accounts for money spent and sustains the support that pays for the work. It is necessary and it is the activity most likely to be driven by the organisation's own need for visibility rather than by anything the programme requires.
The three are usually handled by the same small team, and the security consequence is that decisions belonging to one are taken with the logic of another. A photograph chosen to satisfy a donor says something to the armed group that controls the area the photograph was taken in. A statement drafted for a domestic audience is read by the authorities in the country where the staff are.
The correction is procedural. Communication decisions that disclose presence, location or activity go through the same decision process as any other measure that changes the organisation's exposure, with the same assessment and the same record of who decided. A pre-agreed position exists on what the organisation will say if a member of staff is detained or abducted, agreed with the families involved before anyone needs it. Staff are briefed on what they may post about their own location and work. And the community feedback route is treated as a security measure, because an organisation that cannot be approached is one that will be resented, and resentment is a risk.
Practical guidance and research on the security of humanitarian staff, for the organisations that send them.