While spring weather brings the chirping of birds, spring disasters have brought about tweets of a different kind. From Fargo flooding to Italian earthquakes to volcanoes in Alaska, Twitter has gained much attention as a means of communicating during disasters—but despite all the Twitter chatter, there are many who just don’t get it.

Why would they? People sign up, get a feed and a fill it with continuous bursts of 140 characters or less in what, to some, might seem like the most nonsensical and narcissistic exercise known to man. Yet there are some (and Natural Hazards Center researcher Jeannette Sutton is one) that would argue Twitter has an intrinsic networking value on both sides of the tweet.

Although a lot of research and news reports focus on Twitter users making organic social connections and communicating information during disaster, emergency managers can also use the tool to their advantage, even during downtime.

“Part of it is that you can develop a familiarity with your audience,” Sutton said, adding that that could lead to building community trust, increased understanding of what emergency managers do, and a direct market for preparedness and event information. Furthermore, each Twitter user represents their entire network—“purchasing power” that you don’t generally get from e-mail blasts or other media.

But still, to get the full advantage, some network grooming is required. While everyone from FEMA to the CDC has Twitter feeds, that doesn’t mean they’re doing it right. Anyone with a 140-character attention span is bound to be a least a little fickle, so agencies would do well to balance useful information with insider views and other more “social” items.

On the flip side, when emergency business is booming, Twitterers can provide eyewitness reports and information from the scene, but emergency agencies would have to have the resources to sift the chaff from the grain, Sutton said.

“There might be a lot of value there because people could be sharing information about needed resources,” she said. “One of the problems with Twitter though is that we haven’t found a way to manage the information yet. For the most part, it’s going to be on the level of chatter or noise.”

Of course, there are some that get Twitter, but just think it’s a bad idea. A recent and rather vigorous discussion on the International Association of Emergency Managers listserve cited concerns about authenticity of information, usurped emergency agency identities, and old-fashioned information overload as reasons the industry might want to steer clear of the new technology.

Still, if you’re ready to try this at home, you might find you’re in the company of many who’ve discovered the unexpected marketing advantage of the free site—at least one agency has used it to divert site-crushing web traffic caused by disasters and others have used it to send updates from accident scenes, according to a recent Government Technology article. Considering the cost, it’s a lot of bang for the buck.