The new crisis communication response: be honest, be fast, be frequent ... and be distributed

For corporate crises, the hits have just kept on coming the past few months. Motrin ticked off moms who wear baby slings. An Amazon "glitch" made sales ranks disappear from gay and lesbian books. Domino’s has -- err, had -- a couple of incredibly disgusting – and dumb – employees film their food exploits and share them on YouTube. We are firmly in a new era of public relations crisis, and the traditional response model clearly needs some updating.

For all these companies, the crisis occurred and outrage spread like wildfire (thanks, Jared, for the right analogy) across a range of communication platforms. The companies, at least temporarily, were left flat-footed. As they hemmed and hawed and grappled with how best to respond -- or not respond -- folks continued to pound them on the internet. Their lack of a planned response made things worse.

When I was in college (and well after) Johnson & Johnson's response to the 1982 Tylenol cyanide poisonings served as the ultimate example in public relations crisis response. Johnson & Johnson has been long praised for jumping all over the situation, communicating well and halting advertising and production of the pain killer. The company likely saved lives and the Tylenol business itself in the process with a commendable plan and execution.

Much of the Johnson & Johnson case study remains relevant today. When it comes to crisis response communication, be honest, be fast, be frequent. Yet as I watched what happened to Motrin, Amazon and Domino’s, the public response and the analysis by online thought leaders, it dawned on me just how much has changed. More is needed now than a single-channel, press release and spokesperson response.

Shel Holtz provided fantastic analysis of the Domino's situation in two posts:

In not so many words, Edelman defined the altered nature of the news machine. No longer does the public catch the news at 6 p.m., then wait for updates at 11 p.m. A variety of sources, from bloggers and Twitterers to journalists and analysts, are covering the news on an ongoing basis; the thirst for news is insatiable and if PR counselors do not satisfy that thirst on an ongoing basis, alternative sources will fill in. Your opportunity to tell your company’s/client’s story is based on your ability to maintain a presence. As Edelman puts it, “We will have to persuade our clients to be more public with more news. News is less an event and more a continuous flow of information informing the ongoing discussion; we must correct misstatement with alacrity.”

The landscape is shifting fast. Best as I can tell, being honest, being fast and being frequent, as Johnson & Johnson was in '82, still holds true. But now we need a fourth tenant: be distributed. We don’t get to pick the platform anymore and we don’t answer just to the media. We answer to everybody, on their schedule and on their terms.

I think that so many of us in marketing are not ready to respond like this yet. Not only do we need updated crisis response plans, but we need to establish new channels -- blogs, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube -- to allow us to talk directly to those who our outraged on their preferred platform. Even when the stakes are high and emotions are running at a fever pitch, public relations is still a conversation. A very difficult conversation, but a back-and-forth exchange nonetheless. Press releases and spokespeople are not enough.

Be honest, be fast, be frequent -- and be distributed. The relentless news cycle, driven by not journalists but everyone who's interested, demands it. That's the emerging model for the modern crisis repsonse.