Storm Kristin: When National Crisis Communication Excellence Meets the Last-Mile Problem

Dear {{ first_name | reader }},

An apology, an explanation, and a case study I lived through.

I owe you an apology. No newsletter last week.

The reason is simple, and it turned out to be professionally useful. I was sitting in the dark in São Silvestre, Portugal, with no electricity and no mobile coverage, courtesy of Storm Kristin. Portugal’s most destructive storm in recorded history handed me an unplanned field lesson in last-mile crisis communication failure.

There’s a particular irony in being a crisis communication consultant who can’t communicate during a crisis.

I spent six days with no power, no internet, and no way to reach you (or anyone else beyond shouting distance). My communication world shrank fast. It was my wife, our neighbours, a rescued puppy, and an Italian stovetop coffee maker that suddenly counted as essential infrastructure.

But those six days were valuable beyond the inconvenience for one reason: I felt, firsthand, the gap between what national crisis communication systems promise and what actually reaches people on the ground.

I watched Portugal run a textbook-perfect early warning effort. Then I watched the system go quiet after the storm passed, right when we needed information most.

So this week’s newsletter comes to you late, but with a sharper edge. What follows isn’t just analysis. It’s testimony. And it points to something that matters: even sophisticated crisis communication systems can fail at the last mile.

Let me tell you what happened.

On January 28, 2026, Storm Kristin slammed into Portugal’s central coast with winds hitting 208 km/h. It was the most destructive storm in the country’s recorded history. Ten dead. Nearly one million homes dark. €1.5–2 billion in damages. Within days, the government announced a €2.5 billion recovery package, one of the largest disaster responses in European history.

From a crisis communication perspective, the national response did a lot right.

Portugal’s meteorological institute began tracking the depression two days out and formally named it “Kristin” on January 27. That single act matters: it gave the public a specific threat to picture and talk about.

The National Emergency and Civil Protection Authority elevated the country to Level 4 maximum readiness 24 hours before landfall. SMS and Cell Broadcast alerts reached 2.3 million devices. Authorities deployed 34,000 emergency personnel. Prime Minister Luís Montenegro visited affected areas within 48 hours.

The government’s statement also did something quietly smart. It credited “early warnings issued by civil protection bodies and the responsible and prudent behaviour by the Portuguese people” with mitigating consequences. In one line, it backed the warning system and rewarded the public for listening, which is how you build compliance for the next time.

It was coordinated. It was fast. It looked, at the national level, like competence.

And still, beneath that macro-level success, there’s a problem most crisis communicators recognise: the gap between national messaging and hyper-local experience.

I was in São Silvestre when Kristin arrived. The SMS warnings came through as promised. They stated wind strengths and included a number and a link. Good delivery.

But the message didn’t tell anyone what to do.

Follow the link and you reached the civil protection website, helpfully bilingual in Portuguese and English. The content was clear in a technical sense: overview maps, wind strength data, precipitation forecasts.

What it didn’t provide was practical guidance. No “secure loose objects,” “charge devices now,” “fill bathtubs with water,” “stay inside after X hour.” Just meteorological information that required the recipient to translate risk into action.

That translation step is exactly where warning communication either earns its keep or loses people. Under stress, you don’t want citizens interpreting red zones and wind thresholds. You want them executing a short, concrete checklist.

Then the storm hit. Electricity vanished. So did 5G coverage. The same digital system that performed well before landfall became irrelevant in the recovery phase, when people needed information most.

In villages around Tomar and across rural Portugal, residents saw no civil protection officials for five to six days after the storm passed. No municipal authorities. No emergency services. No community leaders making rounds.

In São Silvestre, we saw no one official for the entire six days the power was down.

This confirmed an axiom I often share with clients: there will be no cavalry, and the first responder you see will be a neighbour.

We checked on everyone nearby to make sure they had food and water. After three days, one neighbour managed to acquire a generator and shared power with us. We helped another neighbour take a shower. Many houses here draw water from wells with electric pumps, which means no water pressure once the power fails.

The real communication hub quickly became the petrol station and café down the road. Everyone who could reach it gathered there for a simple reason: they had a backup system, electricity, and the TV was on (plus excellent coffee). It became the natural information node for the area. People shared updates, compared damage, and figured out who needed what.

One official stopping there daily, even briefly, could have reached dozens of households at once. The information would have spread through the same social networks that were already doing the work. It didn’t happen.

So what did we do during the long hours? We checked for damage. We avoided areas with unstable trees. We rescued a puppy the day after the storm, which gave our dog an unexpected playmate. We brewed Italian-style coffee on our gas stove. My wife finally got me to play extended games of Yahtzee.

It was all manageable. Even, at times, pleasant in its forced simplicity.

But it was manageable because we were lucky. No serious damage. No medical emergencies. No critical dependencies. Many others lost loved ones or their homes. Our experience was privileged by circumstance.

Even so, the complete absence of official communication or presence for six days exposed something important about where crisis communication architectures fail: the last mile.

Several structural realities create that void.

Operational triage creates information vacuums.

With over 8,500 incidents recorded nationally and finite emergency crews, authorities prioritised life-threatening situations, critical infrastructure, and routes serving large populations. A blocked lane serving twenty households routinely waited behind corridors serving twenty thousand. That logic is defensible. The silence it produces for the communities at the end of the queue is still real.

Command structures privilege scale over granularity.

Civil protection is organized through district and municipal commands. Those structures communicate well at aggregate levels: total incidents, restoration percentages, resource deployments. They don’t have a clean mechanism for village-specific updates. An official briefing that says “80% power restoration in Santarém district” gives zero usable information to a village still at 0%, wondering when its turn will come.

Digital communication assumes connectivity and capacity.

Much official information flowed through hotlines, municipal websites, the Prociv mobile app, and social media channels. Those tools presume electricity, internet access, mobile data, and familiarity with the platforms. When electricity and 5G disappear together, every one of those channels collapses.

Symbolic presence matters as much as operational presence.

The absence of any official contact for six days isn’t only an operational gap. It’s a narrative failure. Even a single visit from a municipal officer, without immediate solutions, does essential communication work: “you are seen,” “you are counted,” “here’s what we know,” “here’s what’s next.” When that doesn’t happen, the vacuum fills itself. People default to abandonment stories and urban–rural grievance.

This gap creates what communication scholars call a “meaning divergence,” where different audiences build fundamentally different understandings of the same event based on where they sit in the information architecture.

At national level: comprehensive preparedness, rapid mobilisation, substantial financial commitment. Official statements emphasise 34,000 operatives deployed, millions of devices warned, €2.5 billion allocated. Media coverage shows ministerial site visits, restored train lines, progress statistics.

At village level: self-reliance, neighbour-to-neighbour mutual aid, slow institutional response. Residents organised chainsaw crews to clear roads themselves. Shared generators. Checked on elderly neighbours without official prompting. Helped each other access water. Gathered at the petrol station café because it had power and became, by default, the community centre. Then waited. And waited.

Both narratives are true. Both happened.

The failure sits in the missing bridge between them. National authorities struggled to translate macro-level activity into micro-level presence and usable information. Rural communities lacked channels to make their specific situation visible to decision-makers managing the response at scale.

Each day that residents experience institutional absence while watching television coverage of “comprehensive response” erodes trust in emergency management systems. Communities that already feel peripheral have that perception reinforced.

The next time officials ask people to evacuate, prepare, or comply early, the ask lands differently if the lived memory is: “You warned us, and then you disappeared.”

Trust isn’t rebuilt with press releases.

Several practical adjustments emerge from this case.

Make warnings actionable, not just informational.

International emergency notification templates allow behavioural specificity. Use it. “Winds 180+ km/h expected. Secure outdoor furniture now. Charge devices. Fill containers with water. Stay indoors 14:00–22:00.” Do the cognitive work for people.

Identify and use organic gathering points.

In prolonged disruption, communities self-organize around nodes that keep functioning: petrol stations with generators, cafés with backup power, pharmacies, churches. Pre-identify likely locations in emergency plans. Task mobile civil protection officers with daily visits to post updates, answer questions, and gather intelligence on emerging needs. One person, thirty minutes, outsized communication leverage.

Invest in parish-level communication cells.

Each freguesia should maintain a crisis communication plan: contact trees (who checks which streets), physical information points, printed template notices with key numbers and an update schedule, coordination with local associations that already act as amplifiers.

Use analog channels during digital disruption.

Deploy parish vans with loudspeakers. Maintain physical notice boards updated every 24–48 hours. When networks fail, presence becomes the channel. Plan for that reality instead of treating it as an edge case.

Communicate realistic timelines, even when they’re bad.

Telling a village “crews won’t reach your area for 5–6 days due to prioritisation of X, Y, Z” is better than silence. It lets residents organize generator sharing, coordinate water distribution, arrange temporary relocation for the vulnerable, and manage expectations. Uncertainty is harder to live with than unfavourable certainty.

Measure last-contact metrics, not just incident-clearance rates.

Emergency systems measure operational efficiency: incidents resolved, kilometres cleared, customers reconnected. Add a communication metric: maximum time any community went without official contact or an official update. Make the gap visible in after-action reviews.

Storm Kristin will be studied as a success in early-warning crisis communication. The 24-hour notice, multi-channel alerts, and rapid political engagement prevented worse outcomes and should be preserved. The government’s public crediting of early warnings and responsible behaviour was also strategically sound.

But the more important lesson sits in what came after.

The multi-day absence of official presence in rural communities. The disconnect between national progress narratives and local lived experience. The structural factors that make this gap predictable, not exceptional.

Most advanced nations can do early warning. The harder job is extending the communication architecture to the last mile: the smallest aldeia, the individual household with no electricity, no signal, and no one official in sight.

Sitting in São Silvestre during those six days without power or contact, brewing coffee on a gas stove while neighbours shared generators and gathered at the local café to watch news coverage of the “comprehensive response,” the sophistication of the warning system felt far away.

What mattered wasn’t the initial SMS or the bilingual website. What mattered was the silence that followed, and the quiet realisation that recovery would be hyperlocal and self-organised.

Until emergency management systems solve that last-mile problem, their crisis communication success will remain partial: effective for those within reach of the network, and invisible to those beyond it.

And those beyond it will remember.

ChatGPT is a superpower if you know how to use it correctly.

Discover how HubSpot's guide to AI can elevate both your productivity and creativity to get more things done.

Learn to automate tasks, enhance decision-making, and foster innovation with the power of AI.

Download the free guide

PS: I hope you've enjoyed this newsletter! Creating it each weekend is a labour of love that I provide for free. If you've found my writing valuable, the best way to support it is by sharing it with others. Thank you for reading!

_{Parts of this newsletter were created using AI technology to draft content. In addition, all AI-generated images include a caption stating, 'This image was created using AI'. These changes were made in line with the transparency requirements of the EU AI law for AI-generated content. Some links in this newsletter may be affiliate links, meaning I earn a small commission if you click and make a purchase; however, I only promote tools and services that I have tested, use myself, or am convinced will make a positive difference.}