Handling a PR crisis demands transparency and confidentiality. How can you strike the right balance?

Striking the balance between transparency and confidentiality during a PR crisis is crucial. One example is the 2022 data breach incident at Singapore's SingHealth. They promptly informed the public about the breach, detailing the extent of the data compromised, while safeguarding patient identities. This approach maintained public trust by being transparent about the issue without revealing sensitive details. Companies should follow a similar model: be upfront about the crisis to maintain credibility, but protect confidential information to avoid further damage. Regular updates can also reassure stakeholders while managing the narrative effectively.

Evaluate the nature of the crisis and its potential impact on your organization. Identify sensitive information that must be kept confidential and determine what can be disclosed to the public. This assessment helps in deciding how much transparency is appropriate.

Handling a PR crisis is like walking a tightrope, where both transparency and confidentiality are critical. By assessing the potential impact on stakeholders and brand reputation, you can craft a strategy that shares essential information while protecting sensitive details. The key is to strike a balance that maintains trust without revealing too much, ensuring the situation is managed without unnecessary escalation.

Begin by evaluating what information can be shared without jeopardizing the organization’s interests or breaching legal obligations. Identify which details are sensitive and need to be kept confidential to avoid further complications or legal issues.

The biggest mistakes brands make when handling a crisis are overreacting and providing the public with unnecessary details. Whether it's a social crisis or one being highlighted in the media, the general public wants to know that it's being addressed. Generally, simply acknowledging that you are aware of the situation, addressing it, and making changes to ensure it never happens again is enough.

Develop clear and consistent messages that address the crisis while respecting confidentiality constraints. Be transparent about what you can disclose, but avoid revealing details that could exacerbate the situation or violate privacy agreements. Focus on providing accurate, timely information to manage the situation and reassure stakeholders.

Craft clear, honest messages that address the core issues while carefully protecting sensitive information. Ensure that your communication is consistent and accurate to maintain credibility.

In a PR crisis, clear, transparent communication is essential to reassure your audience while protecting sensitive information. For instance, when Johnson & Johnson faced the Tylenol crisis in 1982, they recalled 31 million bottles, demonstrating transparency and responsibility, which helped rebuild trust. Similarly, during the 2017 Equifax data breach, the company was criticized for delayed and unclear communication, which eroded customer confidence. In contrast, Target’s prompt response to their 2013 data breach, including offering free credit monitoring, helped them regain consumer trust. Stats show that 86% of consumers say transparency from businesses is more important than ever before.

Share everything you HAVE TO, but nothing more. You want audiences to understand where you were coming from (especially if your intentions were good), but you don't want them to have insight into every internal deliberation.

Select appropriate communication channels to disseminate your messages. Use official channels such as press releases, corporate websites, and social media to ensure that information is consistent and controlled. Consider the urgency of the situation when choosing the channels.

Choose appropriate communication channels for different types of information. Use public platforms to provide necessary updates and maintain transparency, while utilizing private channels for confidential information shared with key stakeholders.

Rather than focusing too much on appropriate channels, I'd look at HOW information is disseminated across those channels. For example, a robotic company statement is unlikely to be received well, but a personalised message from a human spokesperson will be better received - even if through company channels. So, if a statement is issued, WHO is issuing it? CEO, CTO, etc? Put a name to it where possible to humanise things, and it will convey a stronger message that the crisis is being handled, rather than forgotten about. That said the means of issuing info should not be ignored. I'd steer away from a press release in the event of a crisis, though, instead keeping communications to dedicated channels where the message can be controlled.

Engage with stakeholders by providing them relevant and timely updates while respecting confidentiality. Ensure they are well-informed without exposing sensitive details.

It may sound obvious but to 'monitor' feedback, you have to facilitate a platform for it. So make sure that stakeholders and those affected by the crisis have a means of getting in touch to express concerns, ask questions, etc. Timely responses that are empathetic and factual will go a long way to helping people through a stressful situation – no-one wants to be kept in the dark. Otherwise, social media is the obvious platform(s) to monitor and speculation can spiral quickly. Keep abreast of what people are saying and, if it's inaccurate, avoid being condescending in response. Rather, you can issue the correct information as long as you provide proof, whilst staying empathetic to the continued crisis if it's ongoing.

Adapting is fine – indeed necessary – as long as you have a solid understanding of the basic facts. This should be your first action, to get to the bottom of what has happened or gone wrong, and how, before you start issuing statements. From there you can adapt as more details come to light or the situation changes. I'd always say transparency over confidentiality – otherwise you could be accused of a cover up – unless there is information that might harm someone. That said, if you opt for confidentiality, you should be transparent about it! So, be clear on the steps you are taking and why it is, for example, necessary to protect staff members. If you're quelling speculation, make sure you provide proof as to why it's inaccurate.