1

Crisis Communication

Chirayu Bar Singh Thapa

Westcliff University

BUS 600: Managerial Communications

Professor Tiwari

October 19, 2020

 2

Abstract
 3

Opposing the Opposition

We can take an example of an office building that is burned to the crisp. The building

owner is dogged by our opposition, saying that this was conducted by the owner for the

insurance. With one dead and the entire building decimated, the opponents want criminal

charges and life imprisonment.

First and foremost, we analyse the information that has already started circulating

about the company. Understanding and knowing the opponent will allow the company to

formulate tactics that they can use to rid themselves of this problem. The main problem for

the company now is just going to be random surprise attacks that they are not prepared for.

The moment that the opponent’s faith, position, and the background is understood, the

company has a greater chance of assessing and dealing with threats[ CITATION Bel17 \l

1033 ]. The company will also have to understand the religious background of the opponent,

or if there are any links to religion for the strong hate. We also need to ensure that have

enough history on the person that we can retrace all his public appearances for the past 10

years. We as a company will have to go through all the media, the newspapers, ex-

employees, and various friends of our opponent. As the opponent has labelled the company

owners as arsonists, we have to use this to our advantage[ CITATION Civ16 \l 1033 ]. When

talking to the media we will have to put our story up first. We need to change every negative

aspect into a positive one.

Once the Opposition has given their share and we have researched ours, we go to the

media. We need to address the people that the flame that engulfed the building was so huge

that the fire fighters took 9 hours to subdue. We will then be talking about the lost life in the

inferno. We don’t let the interviewer ask question about the opposition first. We first

remember the departed for a minute. We then talk about how much that one life meant for us.
 4

We explain the loving bond that the company and the employee both shared. We then talk

about how the company will be taking care of the family of the departed, clearly

understanding that we cannot bring back the dead, the most we can do is attempt to ease the

burden on his family. With that already said, we then talk about how the company had

designed the building to be earthquake resistant in a modern manner and was built with fire

escapes and a sound warning system for fires[ CITATION Coo07 \l 1033 ]. As we also find

out the cause of the fire, we mention this to the media as well. Even though the fire has been

indirectly caused, we highlight how we have taken care of the family of the departed. The

loss of life has to be the vocal point and not the loss of money. The other thing that we

highlight will also be the brave firefighters who fought for their lives in order to control the

blaze. We need to influence the general crowd that whatever is being told by the opposition is

false. Our image needs to be clean in the public[ CITATION Kai13 \l 1033 ].

By allowing the opposition to speak first, a defence is mounted. We need to

understand why the opposition is after us. Marlboro looked at Juul, saw how disruptive one

product would be to the entire tobacco industry and then decimated. They lobbied extensively

to create immense taxation on the product and started telling media that the teenagers are

being adversely affected and being addicted to nicotine. This came from a corporation that

has been selling cancerous products for multiple years. The outcome of this later concluded

once Marlboros parent company bought 30% share in Juul.

The opposition will also have tended to highlight their strengths while pointing out

our weakness in the crisis. Even though it may look good in public, but that also does leave

them vulnerable to their weaknesses[ CITATION Lee16 \l 1033 ]. The goal in such a

situation would be to garner public trust with replies and without having to resort to using

their weaknesses. After we garner public trust, then we can use their weaknesses against
 5

them. This creates a better standing ground and more people would be inclined to come to

you.

We also publicly tell why and how the opposition is doing this. We lay down their

entire strategy of coming at us. Sympathy generation can be achieved once we showcase how

they are wrongly targeting us. As they have gone against us, we are already the under dogs.

Everyone wants the underdog to win. We need to also ensure that we publicly state when the

opposition deflecting from the debate at hand. Whenever they try to bring something

irrelevant into the conversation, it is necessary to call them out. As opponents want the

procedure to drag on so that the audience loses interest, we need to ensure that we don’t allow

it. If the public is swaying into what the opposition is saying, then it is good measure to

address the issue[ CITATION Spe07 \l 1033 ]. This will show inclusiveness and the public

will also be aware of the actuality. Whenever opponents delay and deflect, it is of utmost

importance to ensure that the focus is brought back to the topic at hand.

The response to opposition should also be immediate. Even if information has not

fully been gathered, the main basis of the argument can be refuted. The statements made by

the opposition must be refuted clearly, quickly, and by force. Oppositions may showcase one

part of the story and give the public incomplete information. Whenever they also try to prove

a point by misquoting people and fact, we need to ensure that the public sees the deception

being created. Just by telling the public about what has happened, then the deception of the

opposition is lifted. The public may already be under the impression that the opposition is

deceiving. We also help ourselves by showcasing a positive image of the company.

The opposition will discredit us for all of our positive progress that we have made

throughout the years for one crisis. They will showcase the public that we are not necessary

in the community and we are incompetent. We still cannot change our stance, we do not
 6

adhere to bullying, and the public needs to know that this is also another tactic being used just

to discredit us.

Conclusion:

In order for the company to place any counter measure apart from refusal, information

is required. When we are informed, our confidence shoots up and dealing with the

oppositions various comments becomes easy. We need to be vigilant and ensure that we keep

on predicting what the next move of the opposition is going to be. Only by constant thoughts

can we be ready for the onslaught the opposition will bring, and we can increase our

confidence to counter all the opposition attacks.

 7

References

Beldad, A. D., Laar, E. v., & Hegner, S. M. (2017). Should the shady steal thunder? the

effects of crisis communication timing, pre-crisis reputation valence, and crisis type

on post-crisis organizational trust and purchase intention. Journal of Contingencies

and Crisis Management, 68-73.

Civelek, E. M., Cemberci, M., & Eralp, N. E. (2016). The Role of Social Media in Crisis

Communication and Crisis Management. International Journal of Research in

Business and Social Science, 111-120.

Coombs, T. W. (2007). Protecting Organization Reputations During a crisis: The

development of Application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate

Reputation Review, 163-176.

Kaibin, X., & Wenqing, L. (2013). An ethical stakeholder approach to crisis communication.

Journal of Business Ethics, 371-36.

Lee, S. Y. (2016). Weathering the crisis: Effects of stealing thunder in crisis communication.

Public Relations Review, 336-344.

Spence, P. R., Lachlan, K. A., & Griffin, D. R. (2007). Crisis Communication, Race, and

Natural Disasters. Journal of Black Studies, 539-554.