Blogging in a Crisis
These comments are based on an crisis on which I worked recently. The crisis had a bit of everything -- Congressional hearings, sensational charges, innuendos, falsehoods, facts, activists, demonstrations, hate mail, poisonous phone calls and hundreds of stories. It was a difficult time because facts weren't available to the client at the beginning of the turmoil, and there was a period in which the media seemed to know far more about what was happening than the client. The client never did catch up with the news cycle and by time stories died away, the impression that the company had been engaged in wrongdoing was rooted, although the company now has a strong, fact-based case for its innocence.
How would blogging fit into a situation like this? Blogging, as some define it, -- a place to record opinion and insights -- does not fit. However, blogging as a continuous record of facts and corrections of errors in near real time would have been valuable. Regrettably, the client did not use the blogging tool but did make use of its Web page. A key difference between a Web page and blogging was critical. The corporate communications director relied on the Webmaster to upload information to the Web page. With a blog, the director could have created a content stream directly. Speed was critical.
The problem in a crisis is not opinion but facts. What you do not want is opinion or speculation. Either can touch off chaos and lawsuits. You need to state quickly and accurately what happened to whom, where, when and how. You need to state what the company is going to do about it, although you might not be able to give details. You need to answer questions quickly and accurately and to knock down rumors convincingly.
If a company cannot lead the media in getting the 5W's out, it is condemned to follow, and news at the beginning of any crisis is filled with inaccuracy. You have seen this yourself.
"There were 500 people killed. Correction. There were about 200 people killed. Correction, the latest tally is less than 100. Further correction. The final count of people killed was 56. "
Blogging is useful in such instances. One might not have a final count, but absurd figures like "500 people killed" could be knocked down at once. Further, blogging can add detail as it is verified and slow speculation. In the instance above, the last name of an individual convinced some reporters that a foreign country was involved in wrongdoing. The allegation was and is absurd, but it continues to surface and some "investigative" reporters appear to believe it. Blogging could have dented that rumor quickly by showing how stupid the allegation is.
Who should blog in a crisis? One person and one person only reporting directly to the CEO or to the corporate communications person who reports directly to the CEO. Facts as they come in should be verified for this person. Copy should be vetted before publishing -- yes, even by legal counsel. There should be no hint of individuality in the blog and EVERYTHING must be approved. The blogger speaks for the company and never for himself or herself.
The company in the international incident is now fighting lawsuits. You can bet every word the CEO and corporate communications director have spoken and written will go under a tort attorney's microscope. Even a minor slip will be used against them.
To summarize, blogging, because it is an easy tool to use, has a role in crisis communications to get out facts, to project a company's message and to combat error.
Author: Jim Horton | Jul 15, 04 | Permalink
| 7 comments
Category: @ Jim Horton | Topic 4 Crisis Management
Jim - In addition to publishing the latest facts and information more quickly, blogging helps get this information to influencers faster.
Now you don't have to hope everyone visits your site to find the facts, the facts will find them.
Handled carefully, it would seem to be an excellent tool to support a crisis plan. I could see it residing right off the home page, pushing the RSS feeds to the corporate newsroom as well. It would even get your messages into the search engines more quickly.
Posted by: Kevin Dugan at July 15, 2004 12:44 AM
Jim -
Very much agree with your comments and your recommended procedures for how a corporation should utilize a blog in a crisis. However, I think it should be made clear that there is no difference between blogs and web pages -- in the sense that they are both web pages. The key difference for many companies is, as you said, that the web content most often requires the attention of a webmaster or IT staffer. But this is changing. Web content management systems - especially those that are built specifically for public relations - offer the same easy to use web publishing capabilities as blogs, but with many more powerful features (including hi-res. photos, streaming audio/video, secure access areas, campaign and contacts management, even blogs) all designed to provide corporate communications and agency PR practitioners with the ability to get the facts out quickly and accurately, and disclose what happened to whom, where, when and how.
To me, this is really the key benefit of all of this technology -- with dynamic content management tools, such as blogs, the PR professional is now able to contribute directly, without intermediaries, to building, managing and perhaps controlling their reputation online.
Posted by: Chris Bechtel at July 15, 2004 12:58 AM
If you plan to put the commentator on scene at a crisis, you need to ensure you put both the training and the technology in place to meet this mission requirement. I have blogged from crash sites using a Nokia 9210i. After two years of field use, it continues to be less expensive than a cybercafe, easier to carry than a laptop and 100% reliable. Add to that metric the rock-solid uptime of our blogging service (Typepad) and you could have tools that facilitated live-time responsiveness over blogs and RSS as a crisis unfolded.
But you have to train for this contingency if you intend to use this channel of communications.
Notes:
http://irish.typepad.com/irisheyes/2003/10/cheaper_than_a_.html
Posted by: Bernie Goldbach at July 15, 2004 02:57 AM
Done right, crisis management through a blog is an effective tool, but should not be the only tool. Depending on the crisis -- it's a great way to keep customers up to date and face the situation head on. Customers appreciate honesty as opposed to dancing around the issue.
I just finished reading a book about publicity. It said that if Clinton had admited to the Lewinsky deal up front, apologized, and moved on; the press would have to and it wouldn't be as memorable as it is today. But because he admitted no wrongdoing, the press wasn't satisfied and keep flying around until it could get what it wanted.
Blogging offers quick, frequent, real-time updates that you can't get from newspapers and TV exposure. Besides, after it's been reported once or twice, the media may lose interest and the company needs to have a way to keep those interested up to date.
Posted by: Meryl K. Evans at July 15, 2004 09:46 AM
Hey, Jim.
There's also the issue of the communication staff monitoring what other bloggers are saying during the crisis and the influence they're wielding with their audiences. How long would it take an activist or adversary to launch a blog that kicks an organization while it's down? And how does an organization factor that kind of reporting into its crisis planning?
Shel
Posted by: Shel Holtz at July 15, 2004 11:11 AM
I think it is important to see blogs as a possible ally, not just an adversary. If the traditional media is negative, there is at least the possibility to get a completely different spin going in blogosphere. Indeed that is what happened when the White House went after the Dixie Chicks. Traditional media were very critical of the Dixie Chicks’ pubic criticism of Bush, but blogosphere became their champions, linking to Amazon sales of their CD, and keeping it on the best-selling album list for weeks.
Posted by: Alice Marshall at July 15, 2004 07:05 PM
*Traditional media were very critical of the Dixie Chicks’ pubic criticism of Bush, but blogosphere became their champions*
Hmmm... and rather more blogs were forming virtual lynch mobs. In fact it was really only a segment of the left wing oriented political/commentary blogs that had anything good to say about the Dixie Chicks (it struck me at the time how several leftie blogs were none too enthusiastic in the support of them)... and as any dispassionate observer of the blogosphere can see, left wing oriented blogs are in the distinct minority to begin with as conservative oriented and libertarian oriented political/commentary blogs outnumber them very considerably.
Posted by: Perry de Havilland at July 17, 2004 07:23 AM
- About
- The Global PR Blog Week 1.0 is an online event that will engage PR, marketing and business bloggers from around the globe in a discussion about blogging and communications. The event is scheduled for July 12 - 16, 2004.
- Links
- The New PR Wiki
- Recent Entries
- Looking forward to 2.0
- Site Statistics and Trends
- A participant’s final thoughts
- Traditional PR is dead - Long Live DIY PR
- Quiet is the new loud
- Recent Comments
- Rick Barry on A Very Brief Look at Blogging for the Uninitiated Executive
- George Mc Quade on The Battle Over PR
- Duncan Adams on Robert Scoble interviewed on Corporate Blogging
- Kevin O'Keefe on How to launch a corporate blog for a professional services organization
- William Luu on Site Statistics and Trends
Comments