You’ve built the Boolean string. You’ve tweaked the keywords. You’ve added exclusions, wildcards, and proximity operators and you have a paragraph of “OR”s and “NOT”s. But your media monitoring feed is still full of irrelevant mentions, missed context, or worse: you’re not capturing the stories that matter most, making effective media monitoring feel out of reach.

For Communications leaders, Boolean logic is often the foundation of media monitoring software. But in a world of overloaded news cycles, homonyms, acronyms, and increasingly nuanced brand narratives, Boolean-only media monitoring tools fall short, especially for those tasked with protecting and promoting complex brands.

The Limits of Boolean: When Logic Meets Reality

Boolean logic assumes that words alone are enough to define your brand coverage. But the reality of language and by extension, media, is far messier.

Take Amazon. Are we talking about the company? The rainforest? A person referring to a delivery from “an Amazon seller”? A Boolean string can try to rule these out, but it’s a never-ending game of whack-a-mole.

Or consider Apple. A recipe blog for that mentions “Delicious Apple Pie ” might sneak into your media coverage report, altering your idea of coverage count. Even for a company with an unmistakable name like Disney, not accounting for a nickname or shorthand like “The Mouse House” could mean a deep-dive profile of the company’s executive in Fast Company goes uncaptured because it wasn’t accounted for in the string.

And of course, a Boolean string can’t always distinguish between a brand name and an adjective. Brand names like Chewy pose challenges. Booleans may bring in pet food reviews of “Chewy Treats” that may or may not be relevant depending on the context.

These are everyday examples of why Boolean-only tools struggle to deliver the accurate media monitoring that modern communicators need.

Why It Matters: Measurement Starts with Monitoring

You can’t measure what you can’t reliably monitor.

When irrelevant mentions slip into your reporting—or critical stories are missed—it not only skews volume, it could send you in the entirely wrong direction, distorting sentiment, misrepresenting key message pull-through, and undermining your ability to show impact. You end up with incomplete dashboards, flawed benchmarks, and possibly even lost credibility with leadership.

Put simply: bad media monitoring leads to bad media measurement.

AI-Powered Human Intelligence

A human-supported AI approach saves you the time and resources your team would have to spend cleaning up after imperfect Boolean-only tools, applying human judgment to quickly and accurately filter media coverage, identifying the most relevant stories and surfacing the insights behind them.

This means you can:

• Confidently capture every relevant mention—even the ones Boolean logic would miss
• Eliminate false positives that pollute your reporting
• Identify and measure message pull-through with precision
• Understand tone and context that automation often overlooks
• Feed accurate data into your dashboards, attribution models, and strategic decisions

With a human + AI model, you don’t have to choose between scale and accuracy. You get both.

Want to Get Beyond Boolean Strings?

If you’re tired of building Boolean strings that never quite get it right or are frustrated by media reports that don’t reflect your reality, then it’s time for a better solution.

PublicRelay can help you monitor with confidence, measure with precision, and connect communications to business outcomes. Contact us.

The tariffs media cycle is at an all-time high, with coverage increasing 39% in the first quarter of 2025 alone compared to the entirety of 2024. This surge presents both risks and opportunities for companies across industries. While some brands face reputational challenges, others are leveraging the moment to showcase economic expertise and commitment to domestic investments.

Understanding how different sectors are being covered in the media can help communications leaders craft more effective messaging strategies. This blog will breakdown the following charts and explore how key industries are navigating the tariffs conversation:

Finance & Insurance: Seizing Thought Leadership Opportunities

Finance and insurance firms have found a silver lining in the tariff discussions, benefiting from media interest in their market insights. Coverage has been positive for firms providing economic forecasts, investment strategies, and financial products designed to hedge against trade volatility. This sector’s proactive approach in addressing tariff implications underscores the power of positioning expertise as a media asset.

Tech & Pharma: The ‘Made in America’ Advantage

Technology and pharmaceutical companies are tapping into the growing interest in domestic manufacturing. The media has responded favorably to companies highlighting investments in U.S. production, with Big Tech firms receiving positive attention for securing tariff exemptions on key components like semiconductors. However, companies must balance these narratives carefully. Overstating ‘Made in America’ claims without tangible action could invite scrutiny from skeptical audiences.

Auto & Aerospace: Facing Supply Chain & Cost Pressures

For auto and aerospace companies, tariffs have primarily driven negative coverage centered on rising manufacturing costs and potential operational delays. These industries rely heavily on global supply chains, making them vulnerable to cost fluctuations. The media is closely watching how these companies navigate higher expenses, with a shift in focus likely if price hikes begin impacting consumers directly. Companies in these sectors may benefit from transparency in their supply chain adaptation strategies, positioning themselves as resilient leaders amid economic uncertainty.

Agriculture & Energy: Bracing for Consumer Price Scrutiny

Tariffs on agricultural goods and energy imports, particularly from Canada, have heightened concerns over consumer price increases. While media coverage currently focuses on investor sentiment and company performance, this may shift as higher costs trickle down to consumers. Communications teams in these industries should be prepared for intensified scrutiny and develop messaging that addresses both market challenges and proactive company responses.

Reputational Risks & Internal Communications Challenges

Beyond external media coverage, tariffs are also creating internal communications challenges. Employees at global companies are increasingly worried about workforce reductions due to trade policy changes. Though labor-related narratives are not yet dominant in media coverage, when they do arise, they spark significant social media reactions. Transparent internal communications can help mitigate employee concerns and prevent negative narratives from escalating externally.

Key Takeaways for Communications Leaders

• Resilience is Key: Supply chain-dependent sectors must communicate operational stability to mitigate reputational risk. Be transparent around solutions to consumer price fears.
• Seize the Moment: Companies less affected by tariffs can stand out by showcasing expertise navigating through trade volatility or amplifying their commitment to US investments.
• The Narrative will Shift: If tariffs have staying power, expect the media to shift to scrutiny of company resilience plans or speculations of consumer price gouging. Positive sentiment will be earned through messaging that aligns with stakeholder concerns.

With tariff discussions continuing to dominate headlines, strategic and sector-specific messaging will be critical in shaping how companies are perceived. Communications leaders who stay ahead of the evolving media landscape can turn challenges into opportunities, strengthening their brands even in a volatile trade environment.

To learn more about where we source our data and even request a full report walkthrough, contact us.

The High Stakes of Data Breach Crises

Few corporate crises have as lasting an impact on stakeholder trust as a data breach. According to PublicRelay’s benchmark data, the reputational impact of a data breach is 9x greater than other governance crises, which is a staggering difference that highlights how sensitive consumers, investors, and regulators are to cybersecurity failures.

And it’s not just a short-term hit. The media fallout from a data breach lingers for over half a year, with companies struggling to regain control of the narrative. Unlike other crises that may fade from public attention, lawsuits, regulatory scrutiny, and newly uncovered details often extend the media cycle, making it difficult to move forward. Effective crisis communication for data breaches is essential to mitigating reputational damage and maintaining customer confidence.

Because of your industry or company size, you may think there is limited risk for a breach, but according to Verizon’s 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report, “threat actors appear to care less about an organization’s size, industry vertical or geographical location than one might think. Today’s cybercriminal is a bit of a pragmatist and largely subscribes to the ‘I’ll be happy to steal whatever you have on hand’ view.” This means no organization is safe, and it’s likely better to be safe than sorry when it comes to preparing response plans.

What to Expect in the Aftermath of a Data Breach

Companies experiencing a data breach should prepare for a long and difficult reputational recovery. The media landscape following a breach remains overwhelmingly negative, with all cases analyzed in our benchmark showing sustained negative media tone scores post-crisis. This means that even well-handled responses tend to face an uphill battle in reshaping public perception.

Beyond negative press coverage, organizations must also anticipate significant legal and regulatory challenges. Data breaches frequently trigger lawsuits, regulatory investigations, and compliance reviews, all of which can stretch on for months or even years. Each new legal development risks reigniting media attention, keeping the crisis alive long after the initial incident.

Finally, a data breach directly impacts the trust of customers, employees, and investors. Stakeholders who once relied on a company’s security measures may now question its ability to protect sensitive information. Without a proactive effort to rebuild credibility, businesses risk long-term reputational damage that could impact customer retention, employee morale, and investor confidence.

Best Practices for Communicating During a Data Breach

The right communications strategy can make the difference between a temporary setback and long-term reputational damage. Here’s how to navigate the crisis effectively:

1. Act Fast. Be Transparent

When a data breach occurs, the worst mistake a company can make is delaying communication. Stakeholders expect to hear directly from the company involved, rather than through media reports or leaked information. Organizations must acknowledge the breach as soon as possible, even if full details are not yet available. This initial response should provide a clear overview of what is known, what steps are being taken, and what affected parties should do to protect themselves.

Transparency is key, but speculation should be avoided. Stick to confirmed facts and ensure that all statements are consistent across channels. This prevents confusion and reduces the likelihood of misinformation spreading. When companies are honest about what happened and what they’re doing to fix it, they demonstrate accountability and begin rebuilding trust.

After its data breach in 2013, which affected up to 110 million customers, Target faced criticism from stakeholders for knowing about the breach but not relaying the news until four days later. Though compared to other incidents, this is a relatively quick response, the fact that the news was broken by the cybersecurity blogger Brian Krebbs before any official announcement came from the retailer did not help perspective. Backlash was compounded by what was deemed inadequate communications with customers post-announcement. Customer services lines were flooded, “and a website banner informing customers of the breach was too small to see.” (Forbes).

2. Prepare for Extended Media Attention

Unlike other crises that fade quickly, data breaches tend to have a long media tail. The initial announcement is just the beginning. New details often emerge in the following weeks and months, reigniting coverage. Companies must be prepared for this prolonged cycle and should proactively provide updates rather than waiting for media inquiries.

A strong media strategy involves controlling the narrative by consistently reinforcing what the company is doing to enhance security. Regular updates on security improvements and internal investigations help shift the focus from the breach itself to the company’s commitment to preventing future incidents. Additionally, senior leadership should take an active role in public communication, demonstrating that cybersecurity is a top priority at the highest levels of the organization.

3. Use Cybersecurity Thought Leadership to Rebuild Trust

One of the most effective ways to recover from a data breach is to position the company as a leader in cybersecurity. Organizations that took this approach in past crises saw the strongest reputational recovery in our benchmark analysis. This means going beyond simply fixing the problem. Companies must actively engage in cybersecurity conversations, advocate for stronger protections, and showcase their commitment to data security.

Announcing an internal investigation is a critical first step. When companies publicly commit to identifying the root cause of the breach and implementing corrective measures, it reassures stakeholders that they are taking the issue seriously. However, it’s just as important to publicize new policies and security enhancements that demonstrate long-term improvements. Whether through blog posts, executive interviews, or industry panel discussions, organizations should make cybersecurity a central part of their messaging.

Finally, engaging in thought leadership by participating in cybersecurity forums, collaborating with experts, and contributing to discussions on data protection can help reposition a company as a proactive player in the security space. This shifts the narrative from one of crisis response to one of innovation and leadership.

4. Strengthen Your Cybersecurity Reputation Before a Crisis Hits

The best way to manage a data breach crisis is to build a strong cybersecurity reputation before one occurs. Companies that had existing credibility in this space experienced less severe reputational damage and faster recovery in our benchmark data.

Proactively communicating security efforts is essential. Organizations should regularly highlight their commitment to data protection through corporate communications, media engagements, and industry partnerships. This establishes a foundation of trust that can serve as a buffer in the event of a breach.

Additionally, building relationships with journalists and media outlets covering cybersecurity ensures that a company is seen as a credible source. This can be particularly valuable during a crisis, as having existing media connections can help ensure accurate reporting and prevent the spread of misinformation.

Your Response Matters

A data breach doesn’t have to define your company’s reputation, but your response will. The organizations that recover strongest are those that act swiftly, take accountability, and use the crisis as a catalyst to reaffirm their commitment to cybersecurity.

Key Takeaways

• The best PR responses to a crisis occur within 24- to 48-hours after the initial media firestorm.
• Product issues can generate the worst PR crises in the short-term. A failing product can generate 135x more negative coverage for a brand than during an average day.
• Data breaches and governance crises have the biggest long-term impact on reputation. Companies with those crises had the most negative media sentiment six months later.
• Social and political crises have relatively minor long term impacts. Stakeholders may ultimately judge companies on their commitment to core business goals over their social and political values.

PR crises can swiftly impact a company’s reputation and bottom line. Some crises can shed up to half of a company’s stock price for over 2 years.

Yet few companies are adequately equipped to respond to a crisis. It’s vital for PR teams to build concrete plans ahead of time, so what should they consider when building crisis communications plans?

A good crisis response first requires understanding the types of crises and how they unfold. While crises have similarities, they’re not all created equal. The media treats news around a product failure differently than a DE&I controversy, for example. Communicators need to be ready to respond to different crises differently.

What is a PR Crisis?

A PR crisis is an event that harms an organization’s reputation, credibility, or operations. In these moments, negative media coverage reaches new highs. PR teams often drop everything to focus on the problem.

PublicRelay reviewed 100+ crises across nearly 40 companies spanning over 10 industries. Pulling this data together gives insight into how a crisis could play out during the initial shock period of media reporting.

These crisis shocks have little warning. On average, crisis chatter grows rapidly in just a day to reach peak negativity, or when the media firestorm reaches its highest point.

On one hand, crisis shocks are generally short-lived. Negative coverage usually returns to pre-crisis levels in little over a week following a rapid decline within the first two days.

On the other hand, there is very little time to respond. The news cycle may move on after a few days, but public opinion cements quickly and can generate lasting reputational damage.

We found that the best PR responses occur within 24 to 48 hours after peak negativity. This window is when counter-messaging is most effective and communicators can mitigate the long-term reputational damage caused by the crisis.

What are the different types of crises?

Understanding how crises are different can also help predict how bad they will be. We grouped crises into three broad categories:

• Governance Crises: Triggered by lawsuits and regulatory investigations, these occur most often in the corporate landscape. Examples include misleading product claims, blocked mergers, and product safety lawsuits. They call into question a brand’s corporate integrity and compliance.
• Consumer Impact Crises: Issues like product failures, safety concerns, and price hikes fuel this type of crisis. They drive a customer’s experience with a brand. As a result, they generate headlines in mainstream media. Common examples include prolonged service outages and product recalls.
• Environmental and Social Crises: These crises are tied to a company’s socio-political standing. Examples include backlash over diversity issues and ecological damage. Crises like these often drive social media buzz and potential boycotts.

In the short-term: How bad is bad?

In the moment, some crises can be worse than others. To compare how bad crises are as they’re happening, we analyzed their peak negativity. We examined how bad the most negative day of a brand crisis was by comparing it to the brand’s negativity during an average day. 

Crises like Product Failures and Safety lead to the most negativity. A failing product can generate 135x more negative coverage for a brand than during an average day. Product stories impact everyday news readers, so they quickly catch the attention of mainstream outlets.

In contrast, issues like Executive Behavior and Environmental Misconduct only receive 20-30x more negative coverage than during a brand’s average day. Those crises are serious, but they may generate less news. Their impact on the public may be hazy and the media pickup can be limited to niche trade publications.

In the long-term: How will it affect my reputation?

Once the initial shock dissipates, the PR work isn’t over. Even when the media cycle moves on, the effects of a crisis can linger for months or years.

To understand the long-term effects of crises on brand reputation, we compared the average media tone of each brand six months before and after a crisis.

The results showed that some crises are easier to recover from others. Data Breaches stand out for their enduring negative impact on reputation. Companies with data breaches had the most negative media sentiment six months later. Leaks from hacks can generate panic and concern among key stakeholders. Data breaches also attract lawsuits and regulatory responses which draw out their lifespan.

Similarly, governance crises that erode shareholder trust can have lasting repercussions on a company’s reputation. Executive Misconduct, for example, had a persisting negative impact. This was despite those crises seeing less coverage when they first occurred.

Notably, social and political crises are easier to recover from. Backlash to a company’s Political Stances or Diversity & Inclusion initiatives did not often generate long-term negative reputational impacts. Stakeholders may ultimately judge companies on their commitment to core business goals over their social and political values.

Understand the crisis to plan your response

Becoming familiar with the different types of PR crises is critical. Not every crisis is the same, and they each have different short-term or long-term effects.

Consider the types of PR crises that can affect your brand and examine their characteristics. Doing so can help you plan your response strategy and resourcing needs for each different type of PR crisis. 

To learn more about our research on PR crises, contact us here.

In the age of social media, PR crises have become increasingly common. While your team may have a rough idea of how to respond to a negative situation that threatens the reputation of your company, it requires precise and swift action to minimize fallout.

Being prepared with a data-driven plan can help you save your company’s reputation, extensive amounts of money, and the resources of your communications team.

What is Public Relations Crisis?

A public relations crisis is a situation in which a company’s reputation is threatened by a negative event covered in the press. Topics that often require PR management can range from workplace scandals and product issues to executive malfeasance, and a litany of other possibilities.

Modern-day PR crises, however, can reach far beyond a single negative article in a high-power outlet: they can go viral on social media and stain corporate reputations for months or even years. An executive scandal can quickly result in a brand boycott, turning one person’s actions into an immediate financial loss for a corporation. These issues can also cause long-term harm to a company’s brand and reputation, pressing PR teams to rethink their crisis strategies and ask themselves critical questions about various scenarios. For instance, how does a nonprofit regain trust after an employee accidentally tweets an inappropriate comment on the company’s Twitter handle?

Why Do You Need a Crisis Communication Plan?

Your team needs a crisis communication plan because having an actionable and informed strategy prepared can help protect your company’s reputation from media scandals. Though such crises may seem exclusive to Fortune 500 companies – infamous situations like Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol recall or Chipotle’s year-long battle with E. coli are the PR bogeymen – with social media, a viral tweet or a trending hashtag about your company can draw significant traditional media coverage.

However, having a plan for a theoretical crisis is not enough on its own. Your plan must be airtight and quick to execute, as even a misspelled apology tweet can balloon the size of a PR problem. Yet, with the endless variety of potential PR crises, where do you start planning?

Examples of Crisis Communication

Planning your team’s crisis response by rooting it in peer examples is the strongest way to ensure your path to resolution is efficient and effective. By looking at multiple scenarios and case studies of other companies’ action plans, your team can identify the best strategies for resolving a crisis and maintaining the strength of your brand.  

Addressing Product Issues

Product issues and recalls are the most common forms of PR crises and, if mishandled, they can cost companies millions. In 2016, Samsung’s flagship phone, the Note 7, began catching on fire and exploding. The company quickly voluntarily recalled 2.5 million units of the phone, but it was not until airlines banned the phone that Samsung pulled it completely from the market. At this point, Samsung went a step further – it sent automatic messages to Note 7 owners to return their phones, it remotely locked phones to make them unusable, and it ultimately reclaimed 99% of the phones sold. The concern Samsung displayed for removing a dangerous product from the market, and its subsequent battery safety initiatives, allowed the company to financially recover and continue the Note phone line.

Leadership Crises

In some situations, the words or actions of leadership can compromise a company’s reputation. Communications departments must be involved in crafting executive statements and taking measures to prevent potential repercussions. The following examples outline how the words and actions of leadership can make or break a company brand.

CEO Behavior

In 2020, CrossFit CEO Greg Glassman said that neither he nor any CrossFit gym owners were mourning the death of George Floyd. His comments, recorded on a Zoom call, were publicly released. Almost immediately, Glassman stepped down and offered a strongly worded apology that revoked his comments and emphasized his dedication to the company and desire to free CrossFit of his controversy. By stepping down immediately and taking ownership of his actions, Glassman turned the press attention on himself and spared the CrossFit brand of intense scrutiny or criticism.

Spokesperson Scandals

PR crises can also arise from notable company spokespeople, especially if they appear in advertisements and represent the brand. In 2018, “Papa John” Schnatter, the spokesman and CEO of Papa John’s, admitted to using a racial slur during a company conference call. Shortly thereafter, Schnatter resigned as the chairman of Papa John’s. But stepping down was not enough – Schnatter’s image and Papa John’s had become synonymous, and the fast-food chain needed to find meaningful ways to communicate its distance from the former spokesperson and CEO. In response, Papa John’s implemented an anti-bias training, acknowledged the issue on Twitter, and apologized for Schnatter’s actions, yet the brand still struggled to bounce back.

Executive Communication

The actions of your C-Suite can also exacerbate problems. When two Boeing 737 Max aircraft tragically crashed in 2019, CEO Dennis Muilenburg allegedly stressed to President Trump that pilots could easily be trained to counteract any technical problems, absolving Boeing of the need to fix the technical issues. Muilenburg’s choice of language, which implied the technical issues would persist in 737 Max airplanes, stoked further fear and compelled countries to ground the aircraft. Though 737 Max planes have recently been allowed to fly again, traveler anxiety persists over the safety of the planes due to Muilenburg’s choice of language and response to the crisis.

Employees’ Social Media Activity

PR crises can also come from within: current and former employees can make problematic comments about their employers on social media. In one example, Chipotle fired an employee who voiced criticism on Twitter about the company’s low wages. The mismanagement of the employee’s complaint not only spurred increased media attention but also a lawsuit against Chipotle that it eventually lost. Employing real-time monitoring of social media sites like Twitter can help your team catch and respond to damaging comments from employees before they gain traction online, allowing internal resolution that avoids controversy.

Franchisee Controversy

In 2021, a UPS store in small-town Newport, Vermont refused to follow the Governor’s mask mandate intended to curb the spread of COVID-19. Social media outcry was swift: in a town of roughly 4,500 people, news of the UPS store garnered more than 390 social shares and almost 2,500 reactions and comments on Facebook. Nearly half the town was talking about the news. Just one day later, UPS announced it was ending its relationship with the store owner, with coverage jumping to national outlets, including the Associated Press. UPS’s quick response curtailed social media outcry, publicly cemented the company’s concern about the COVID-19 pandemic, and distanced its corporate reputation from further coverage focused solely on the former franchise owner.

Ground Crisis Communications in Data

PR crises are complex, variable situations that threaten to stain company brands if not handled properly. From executive malfeasance to employee social media activity, the spectrum of potential crises is broad. While the best response to such situations is to act immediately with a data-driven plan rooted in industry analysis, it is also possible to nip crises in the bud before they bloom.

PublicRelay recently launched a product designed to help jumpstart crisis management: Predictive Alerts. Using AI, the PublicRelay system can predict, with up to 80% accuracy, how likely an article is to go viral on Twitter. If a given tweet seems likely to go viral, PublicRelay can automatically alert your communications team to the tweet within several hours of its initial posting. This gives PR teams the unique opportunity to implement their communications response to a crisis before it has even happened. Getting ahead of a viral tweet can forestall virality, and potentially eliminate the crisis, saving your team – and company – valuable time and money.

PublicRelay also offers comprehensive competitor media tracking, which can provide your communications team with vital information about how competitors respond to critical events. Following the press of your industry peers can help your team create data-based strategies to quickly resolve crises. The PublicRelay system can even help monitor your response in real-time, giving your team the flexibility to pivot your messaging, if necessary.

At PublicRelay, our human and AI hybrid approach to analyzing traditional and social media can help your team build a plan for managing and identifying a crisis the moment (or even before), it breaks and monitor the impacts of your strategy in real-time. To learn more about using PublicRelay to monitor your brand online, click here.

A crisis communication plan has three phases that consist of planning for, responding to, and assessing methods. It is a strategy for companies’ communications teams to respond to events that attract negative media attention. Media crises that may impact a company’s reputation and require an immediate response from communications teams can range from criticisms of a company’s products or services to executive scandals.

Why is a Crisis Communication Plan Important?

A crisis communication plan is important because it can enable the effective flow of information between a company and its stakeholders. It can also provide direction for the communications team in responding to negative media coverage. The communications department plays an integral role in managing a company’s image when a crisis has occurred and operating from a predetermined plan can improve your team’s response time.

Elements of a Crisis Communication Plan

Each phase has important steps when developing a plan that can promote trust between you and your stakeholders and reduce reputational damage to your company. It also makes it easier for the communications team to remedy any situation that may have a negative impact on the organization’s reputation or brand.

1. Build your crisis communications team
2. Develop scenario-specific strategies
3. Develop and deliver your message
4. Monitor the impact of your message
5. Evaluate your methods
6. Continue to monitor the industry 

Pre-Crisis: Planning Phase

The planning phase is an in-depth preparation to consider all the logistics involved in a communications crisis. If the foundation of your plan is not established, the repercussions could be significant. For example, without a plan in place, your communications team’s response could be delayed, thus there may be more negative press accumulating while the team formulates a plan of action. During this phase, building a crisis communications team and developing scenario-specific strategies are important parts to ensure your team is sufficiently prepared.

Build Your Crisis Communications Team

The team should have representatives from various departments across the company. By building a team with representatives from multiple departments – such as finance, sales, legal, and customer service – you can ensure that your plan will address every aspect of company operation that could be impacted. Though some departments may not be affected, their representatives can offer insight to help mitigate damage and develop a response that addresses the full spectrum of stakeholder needs.

When a team is built, a single member acts as the designated spokesperson responsible for disseminating the company’s key messages. The most effective spokesperson is often a high-ranking member of the department who demonstrates likeability and professionalism and is skilled at building trust. The spokesperson should be provided with relevant training during the planning phase to ensure they are prepared to act once a crisis occurs. 

Develop Scenario-Specific Strategies

Having multiple responses ready that are specific to a variety of scenarios is crucial during preparation. For instance, an executive scandal would likely require a different communications response from a product recall. 

In 2019, McDonald’s responded to the scandal implicating their former CEO, Steve Easterbrook, by severing ties with the executive and issuing public statements that condoned his behavior. However, this response does not apply to all communications crises as some will implicate the company rather than a single individual. For this reason, you will benefit from having alternative, scenario-specific strategies prepared. 

One of the most effective methods for developing situation-appropriate responses is to look to the experiences of your competitors. By actively researching and analyzing your competitors’ media coverage and response impact, companies can create data-driven response plans.

During the Crisis: Response Phase

It is not always possible to predict when a communications crisis will occur, but with proper planning your team is always ready to respond. Your team knows their roles and you have strategies for the most likely scenarios; Implementation is the most appropriate plan of action and designing a message to address the issue at hand. 

Develop and Deliver Your Message

Developing and disseminating an appropriate message helps responding in a timely manner. Your response should be one of the earliest messages out there, or else you risk losing control of the narrative. Get your team together, evaluate the facts that are available to you at the time, and decide how your company will respond. Deliver a single, unified message, as conflicting messages can lead to doubts about the credibility of your message and spokespeople. 

Once you have decided on your message, nominated a spokesperson, and issued a press release, begin reaching out to the authors and media outlets that have positively covered your company in the past. By utilizing media influencers, you can amplify your company’s message and reach a larger audience.

Monitor the Impact of Your Message

Monitoring the performance and impact on the crisis narrative of your message is key. Some metrics to consider measuring are:

1. Key message penetration: track the volume of your company’s media coverage related to the situation to evaluate the impact of your messaging.
2. Outlets: track to see if your message is being picked up by media outlets or journalists that are important to your brand
3. Social media sharing: monitor how far both the initial crisis is being shared and how much your response is being seen.
4. Sentiment: assess whether a spike in coverage is positive or negative to determine whether your message is changing minds.

Tracking all these together will give you a holistic view of how your message is performing, allowing you to assess and adjust accordingly.

After the Crisis: Assessment Phase

By evaluating and continuously monitoring your industry, you can better prepare for the future and improve your company response.

Evaluate Your Methods

Review your response and its impact. Identifying what worked as well as areas for improvement will pay dividends for the future. For example, Chipotle was the center of a major E. coli outbreak in 2015. They responded defensively, by outlining the company’s improvements to food safety protocol and explaining that the real number of E. coli cases was marginally lower than the number reported. However, this did not stop their reputation and stock price from falling significantly. 

Since their response was poorly received, they examined their internal process and adjusted their approach to a later crisis. In 2018, one Chipotle location was reported for selling contaminated food. This time, however, the company closed the offending location, extended a promotion to all other locations world-wide, and announced a number of new menu items. As a result, Chipotle’s stock prices rose, and the E. coli incident flew under the radar for many consumers.

Continue to Monitor the Industry

Continuing to track your industry and cultural changes over time can impact the effectiveness of your response. Crisis communication planning is a cycle, and should be routinely reassessed, evaluated, and modified according to the industry and social climate. 

Develop a Data-Driven Strategy

A crisis communication plan should be part of your wider communications strategy to safeguard your company’s reputation in the face of public relations crises. By monitoring industry trends, measuring your campaigns, and tracking competitors, you can develop a data-driven strategy that will prepare you for any communications crisis.

At PublicRelay, we use a combination of artificial intelligence and human analysis to draw actionable insights from your media coverage. Click here to elevate your media monitoring into media intelligence today!

The editorial team at PublicRelay contributed to writing this blog.

A company can build up a great brand reputation one day, only to have an unforeseen PR crisis tarnish its brand the next day. Effective crisis management can not only mitigate the negative impact that such an event causes, but also has the potential to build up a company’s brand reputation in the long run. Organizations will inevitably face crises, so they must prepare for the unexpected and know when and how to respond under pressure.  

We recently spoke with Choice Hotels VP of External Communications and Public Relations, Lorri Christou and Prudential Financial VP of Global Communications, Allyson Hugley about the essentials of top-notch crisis and risk management. Our guests shared valuable insights on how to plan proactively, how to determine the impact of a crisis, and how to respond appropriately. 

Make an Actionable Game Plan

No matter the industry, company size, or business model, every organization must have protocol set in stone in case of a crisis. Christou found herself amidst a crisis soon after she had started working at Choice, and on a Saturday no less. Upon realizing that the company’s crisis plan was outdated, unactionable, and impractical, Christou set out to better prepare the organization moving forward.

Starting from scratch to develop an actionable crisis plan, Christou created an enterprise-wide crisis management response team (CMRT), which ensures that the right people are in the right places to provide fast and seamless responses. Furthermore, she recommends training the CMRT appropriately and implementing a call platform, so that when the time comes, there are people throughout the organization that know what to do and how to contact one another. Annual tabletop drills, which test and improve defined processes, are also conducted to ensure that the crisis plan works and does so efficiently. 

Leverage Internal and External Expertise

While it is essential for all businesses to have an actionable crisis plan, reputation management doesn’t mean an organization should act on every disgruntled customer’s complaint. How do you figure out when to respond, or equally importantly, when not to respond?

Hugley recommends leveraging partners both inside and outside your organization for a comprehensive understanding of a potential crisis and its impact. In order to develop a response strategy, it is necessary to have designated risk management personnel who are asking the right questions and are thinking through suitable frameworks to assess reputation impact.

Coupling internal assessments with external resources, from entities responsible for understanding the potential for risk and reputation events, will properly inform your company’s response strategies. By seeking out and working with different types of partners, your organization can make the most effective decisions around when and how to react.

Use Data Analytics for Message Optimization

Understanding the scope of a crisis event goes hand in hand with crafting an appropriate and effective message. In addition to knowing when to respond, it is just as important to know how to respond and who to prioritize in that response.

Data analytics plays a significant role throughout this process by measuring the reputation damage and guiding the messaging strategy. For example, Christou suggests that sometimes there is more emotion in a crisis issue than there really is reputation damage. In other words, people may be interacting with the brand in a very emotional manner, but it doesn’t translate to altered buying patterns. By utilizing data analytics to detect this, a proper response can be formulated to manage the situation.

In any case, internal teams must be very mindful of what their statements say or don’t say. A nuance in wording, Christou emphasizes, can really change the meaning of a message and potentially inflict further damage. Thus, a well-executed message must be crafted using a data-driven response strategy.

Sometimes it’s difficult to quantify the business impact of a PR crisis. But in the case of Uber’s string of bad publicity in 2017, the business impact of PR is quite clear – and devastating.

A recent Stratechery article (if you don’t already subscribe, I highly recommend) makes a compelling case for the idea that Uber’s PR problems actually saved their biggest competitor, Lyft.

In 2017 Uber dealt with a federal lawsuit over stolen technology, workplace harassment accusations, and a series of high-level executive mishaps  that ultimately ended with the resignation of then-CEO Travis Kalanick.

At the same time Uber was fighting these crises, Lyft gained significant market share as seen in the chart below from Lyft’s S-1.

 Lyft provided an explanation for these results in their S-1 saying,

“The growth rate in Revenue per Active Rider increased significantly in the first and second quarters of 2017 as our brand and values continued to resonate with riders and they increased their usage of Lyft instead of competing offerings.”

“As our brand and values continued to resonate with riders” is key here. There has been much talk recently about the importance of brand advocacy and values. It’s well-documented that consumers increasingly expect their brands to make a positive impact on society – or at the very least, not make a negative one, as I’d argue Uber did in 2017.

For example, in a recent study from APCO Worldwide, respondents said the single-most important thing a company can do when it comes to being “good to society” is  treat their employees well. Amid harassment allegations and high employee turnover, Uber clearly did not live up to this order and paid the price  – in market share that they have not been able to win back and eventually the loss of their CEO.

Brand building and public relations was a key  differentiator between these two companies in a competitive marketplace where the switching barriers are minimal. If this case study proves one thing, it’s that the strategic and business value of PR cannot be underestimated – Just ask Uber and Lyft.

When a large nonprofit children’s hospital garnered negative publicity around their executive compensation practices, the organization’s issue management team needed to determine if and how to react. The most important questions on their minds were:

• Is this a crisis or not?
• How does this coverage compare to other peers in their industry?
• And will this negative coverage upset our target audiences and donors?

PublicRelay helped the communications team formulate a plan to analyze and handle this looming issue.

Step 1: Determine the severity of the issue and who is producing the coverage

First, the nonprofit’s communications team referred to their historical data to determine the significance of the story. They analyzed where it was coming from by outlet power as well as volume. The team was able to determine the coverage was not being produced by the high power outlets that typically influence the hospital’s donor base. The negative attention was also not significant in volume compared to other brand crises that the hospital had seen in the past. Therefore, the negative press about the brand was unlikely to immediately impact donations.

Step 2: Determine if it is spreading

The communications team paired the information with social sharing data to ensure that the story wasn’t gaining traction. Millennial donors are a key public for the hospital, so the organization was concerned about the reach of this potential issue on specific channels like Twitter and Facebook. After tracking the coverage across social platforms, the team was able to confirm that it was not picking up many social media shares nor growing in traction.

Step 3: Compare the coverage to others in the industry

As a final precaution, the team wanted to compare the issue about its compensation practices with other peers in the nonprofit realm to ensure that they were not getting more attention than their counterparts. The media analysis revealed that out of all the other major research foundations and hospitals of similar size, they had far less negative coverage than their peers during a similar event.

Step 4: Monitor the topic more closely moving forward

Although this instance did not require a response, the communications team now proactively analyzes the topic of executive compensation throughout its industry to ensure that they are not blindsided by any negative stories. Furthermore, they can consistently keep their C-Suite informed about trends in this domain and prove that they are appropriately tailoring their responses to negative stories.