Abstract

This study examines tensions between participants’ roles as emergency planners and as points of contact for public access to chemical reports. The two organizations in this study, both Texas Local Emergency Planning Committees, maintained web sites and were concerned about the misuse of chemical reports. Each organization used ambiguity to give members a sense of control over right-to-know access to reports. One largely avoided online mention of such access. The other used strategic ambiguity to encourage the public to access reports locally rather than through a state office and to discourage unwelcome viewers. The study found that the former organization’s use of ambiguity impeded action, but the latter organization’s use of strategic ambiguity was productive.