CRISIS COMMUNICATION IN THE 21ST CENTRURY 1

Name

Critique Number

What is Crisis Communication in the 21st Century?

Introduction

The technological advancement and the rise of the users of the internet through social

media, blogs, and email lists have offered new information distribution lists. All these media

can manipulate public perception which could affect the company’s reputation. Crises can be

categorized as a surprise like natural disasters, a threat like situations that are beyond the

organization's typical issues, and short response time which requires immediate action to

minimize the danger (Ulmer, Sellnow & Seeger 2017). Therefore, crisis communication in

the 21st century includes the use of key strategic communication channels to stabilize and

advance the firm by inspiring trust while engaging stakeholders during a crisis. The purpose

of the paper is to critique the concept of crisis communication in the 21st century by

comparing external findings and personal experiences.

The concept of time is the most important concept to consider during crisis

management by Coombs (2013) was that one of the most interesting ideas. In other words,

successful crisis communication should include the firm taking a rebound to normal

operations after a crisis. Although customers often forget a crisis and continue using the

company’s products and services, poor crisis communication is going to make the situation

worse because the reputation drops down hence a damaged public image. The crushing of the

two Boeing planes exposed the failure of the management to make an immediate response to

the crisis. However, Boeing took a long time to accept their mechanical errors and

communicate to the public to rebuild confidence and inspire trust in their products. Although
CRISIS COMMUNICATION IN THE 21ST CENTRURY 2

Boeing could regain their market position in the future, its lack of quick response to the crisis

is likely to ruin its reputation for a long time.

Ulmer, Sellnow & Seeger (2017) reports that there is a need to focus on managing

communication ambiguity during a crisis. In most cases, a crisis leads to communication

ambiguity whereby there are multiple interpretations of the situation at the same time.

Therefore, trust becomes an issue because the stakeholders and the public may not fully

ascertain clear responses to the questions about a crisis. For example, workers, customers,

stakeholders, and the affected public may hold different views about the event. The issue of

ambiguity was also addressed by Coombs (2013) who consider that how the CEO

communicates critical information about a crisis could maintain, serve or reduce the level of

ambiguity. Moreover, ambiguity has become a critical issue in the 21st century due to the

widespread of false news using social media and blogs. However, there is a tendency of firms

to utilize ambiguity as a strategic approach to create more uncertainty as a way to escape

blame. I believe that it is unethical for a firm to purposely use modern communication

channels to deliberately heighten the ambiguity of their crisis to distract or deceive the public.

Also, Coombs (2020) provides an interesting perspective on the solution to the

conflict of interest when dealing with a crisis in the modern era. According to Coombs

(2020), a crisis often leads to a conflict of interest between the organization and stakeholders,

each utilizing communication channels to protect their interests. The use of situational crisis

communication theory (SCCT) can act as a mediator between conflicting parties to achieve

an optimal crisis response. The company should be the first to disclose the existence of a

crisis, take curative actions like physical protection of stakeholders, then help them recover

psychologically, and provide compensations if possible. On the other hand, Coombs (2013)

reports that firms often miss critical concepts of the SCCT when dealing with a crisis. For

example, firms could focus so much on reporting about their financial losses due to a crisis
CRISIS COMMUNICATION IN THE 21ST CENTRURY 3

while forgetting about the victims. Therefore, the firms should keep in mind that social media

waits for no one and that if a crisis occurs, employees or the management may find out after

its spread in the social platform.

In summary, strategic crisis management in the 21st century requires a deliberate and

fast approach by staying ahead of social media. The time of response is important and the

company should utilize all social platforms to reach out to their customers in the shortest time

possible. Communication ambiguity is another issue that firms need to tackle in the 21st

century because fake news spread faster and could ruin the firm’s reputation. The Situational

Crisis Communication Theory offers the guideline to the strategic use of technology and

social media to achieve optimal responses. As a future manager, I hope to utilize the SCCT

theory in applying modern technology and social media to maintain a brand reputation while

developing long-term solutions to the event.

CRISIS COMMUNICATION IN THE 21ST CENTRURY 4

References
Coombs, T. (2013) The Institute for Public Relations. Situational Crisis Communication
Theory. YouTube. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from
https://youtu.be/2EOZPGdmbQ0.
Coombs, T. (2020). The Institute for Public Relations. Tim Coombs Crisis 31 July 2020.
YouTube. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=BIuDfmS_xqc.
Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2017). Effective crisis communication:
Moving from crisis to opportunity. Sage Publications.