The crisis in crisis communications.

If you have a plan, is it one that will work today?

Over the years, we’ve helped lots of companies, large and small, with crisis communications.  We’ve been counsel during crises, and in many more cases, we’ve worked with organizations as they develop plans for events that may or may not occur.

There are lots of ways to approach crisis planning.  Some companies go into great detail, rehearse many different scenarios, and even have pre-prepared communications ready to go.  Others may have educated their staff on key procedures and practiced how to assess situations, communicate internally, and create the messages that they want to release to the public.

 But in any case, if the plans haven’t been re-evaluated in the last two years, they’re probably obsolete.  Because the way messages travel now (and the speed with which they can travel) has changed dramatically.

Consider these scenarios:

• During the Virginia Tech shootings, much of the communications to students, faculty (and especially parents) occurred with the school’s website.  This required not just posting of information, but key web design changes to manage increased traffic.
   

• During the San Diego fires last year, when cell towers were overloaded, citizens and authorities used tools like Twitter to communicate escape routes.
   

•  Business Week Tech Reporter Sarah Lacy found herself in a crisis about her interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg at the South By Southwest conference DURING her interview, thanks to Twitter messages being sent back and forth throughout the audience about how bad her interview was.  She eventually lost control of the interview to the audience.

So any crisis communications plan—no matter how well thought out—which doesn’t take into account new electronic methods (and their value) is creating a situation where management will likely have to play catch up.  Not what you want to do during a crisis.

The basics of crisis communications haven’t changed.  Effective assessment, prompt response, and ongoing evaluation are still the keystones.  But until very recently (pretty much the last five years), most communications was still handled through traditional media sources.  And while newspapers, broadcast, and magazines (consumer or trade, depending on the situation) are still very important, there are numerous other media sources to consider.  These include:

•  E-mail

•  Websites

• Blogs

• Social Networks

•  Real-time messaging (like Twitter)

And many of these are going to spread information in faster or (just as important) different ways than traditional media.  In fact, the traditional media are going to be watching these sources closely to see if the information provide there is the same or contradictory to what your organization is saying about the crisis.

So the playing field is bigger and more complex.  That will typically require more effort on the part of the organization to get messages into the forms needed for different media.  However, the fact that there are more media outlets available during a crisis means that you have the opportunity to better manage it.

Consider this:  when the media covering a crisis was only the traditional broadcast and print media, communications had to conform to deadlines.  That meant information (often partial) could only be communicated once or twice a day, or weekly, or even monthly (unless the situation was sensational enough to have crews on scene all the time).  The initial version of the story (typically just the bad news) was all that could be conveyed.  With electronic sources, there is now the opportunity to provide updates more frequently and provide a more complete picture of the situation.  There is also the opportunity to offer more viewpoints, rather than just a reporter and a spokesperson quote.  (Note:  many traditional media outlets now use websites, blogs and other sources to effectively supplement their regular broadcast and print schedules.)

Obviously, this can be a double-edge sword, because information can come from many sources.  And unlike broadcast reports, which disappear within a couple of days, information can be archived and accessed electronically for a long time. 

But with the new media resources that are available, here are some additions we suggest clients (and others) add to their crisis communications planning.

• A process for frequent website updates.  Unless someone changes your website daily now, plan to have the technical expertise available to make this happen.  You may also have to eliminate flash, video, and other bandwith-eating components to keep the site from crashing under heavy traffic.  (Virginia Tech tried to add an audio message during its crisis, but the traffic was more than the server could manage.)
   

• A way to communicate via blog and with bloggers.  Some companies have “stealth” blogs in place for emergencies with key information already loaded.  These aren’t public now, but they can be in an emergency.
   

• Effective electronic distribution.  Subscription services are available to let you communicate with audiences via e-mail, fax, or phone quickly and effectively.
   

• Procedures (if the situation requires) for communicating with Twitter or other messaging resources.

Of course, the basic principles of crisis communications still apply:  If you stonewall, you’ll turn the message more negative.  If you lie, you’ll get caught.  If you’re forthcoming and truthful, you’ll help the crisis pass faster and with less damage.

But understand that the firestorm of communications that occurs during a crisis is a lot more intense today than it was even a few months ago, because there are more ways for people to talk.  And you have to know how to manage all these to effective manage the crisis.

Want to learn more about effective crisis communications? Click here or call (865) 330-0033.

 comment I back to top I archive I home