THE ROL E OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN CORPORATE CRISIS COMMUNICATIO N [624319]

THE ROL E OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN CORPORATE CRISIS COMMUNICATIO N

Final thesis

Joonas Salminen

Bachelor ’s thesis
Instructor: Mirjal iisa Charles
Date of submission: 10.4.2017

Declaration

By completing this cover sheet and dec laration, I confirm that this assignment is my
own work, is not copied from the work (published or unpublished) of any other person,
and has not previously been submitted for assessment either at Aalto University, or
another educational establishment. Any direct or indirect uses of material (e.g.: text,
visuals, ideas …) from other sources have been fully acknowledged and cited
according to the conventions of the Harvard Referencing System.

THE ROL E OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN CORPORATE CRISIS COMM UNICATION

Final thesis

Joonas Salminen

Bachelor ’s thesis
Instructor: Mirjaliisa Charles
Date of submission: 10.4.2017

Declaration

By completing this cover sheet and declaration, I confirm that this assignment is my
own work, is not cop ied from the work (published or unpublished) of any other person,
and has not previously been submitted for assessment either at Aalto University, or
another educational establishment. Any direct or indirect uses of material (e.g.: text,
visuals, ideas …) from other sources have been fully acknowledged and cited
according to the conventions of the Harvard Referencing System.

AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF BUSINES S
Mikkeli Campus ABSTRACT OF
BACHELOR ’S THESIS

Author: Joonas Salminen
Title of thesis: The Rol e of Social Media in Corporate Crisis Communication

Date: 10 April 2017
Degree: Bachelor of Science in Economics and Business Administration
Supervisor: Mirjaliisa Charles

Objectives
This study aimed to find out how the emergence of social media and its
various platforms have change d corporate crisis communication. It also aimed
to look at how companies utilize social networking channels in their crisis
communication. The final objective for the paper was to find out if the general
guideline s of crisis communication apply to communication through social
media networking channels.

Summary
The study was conducted as a combination of a literature review on
current research about crisis communication, and interviews of crisis
communication pro fessionals. The literature review identified the key crisis
communication theories and the interviews built on those by asking more social
media specific questions from the professionals.

Conclusions
It was identified in this study that the nature of cri sis communication has
changed due to the emergence of social media. Crises can develop much faster
in social media and often, communication must be faster too. However, the
general guidelines and theories of crisis communication usually still apply, but
the companies must consider the often -intensifying effect of social media.
According to this paper, companies can utilize social media in their crisis
communication by using it before a crisis arises, using Twitter to communicate
quickly, and addressing cris es in the channels were the audience is discussing
it.

Key words: Communication, Business Communication, Corporate
Communication, Crisis, Crisis Management, Crisis Communication, Social
Media, Reputation Management

Language: English

Grade:

Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 1
1.1. Background ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. … 1
1.2. Research Problem ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………. 1
1.3. Research Questions ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 2
1.4. Research Objectives ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 2
1.5. Definitions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 3
1.5.1. Social media ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 3
1.5.2. Crisis ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……. 3
1.5.3. Crisis c ommunication ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 4
2.1. Corporate Crisis Communication: Overview ………………………….. ……………… 4
2.1. Image Restoration Theory ………………………….. ………………………….. …………. 7
2.1.1. Introduction to the Image Restoration Theory ………………………….. ……… 7
2.1.2. Crisis Respon se Strategies Based on Image Restoration Theory ………. 8
2.2. Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) ………………………….. ……… 9
2.2.1. Introduction to S CCT ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 9
2.2.2. Crisis Clusters ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 10
2.2.3. Crisis Response Strategies Based on SCCT ………………………….. …….. 13
2.3. Social -Mediated Crisis Communication Model ………………………….. ………… 15
2.4. National Center for Food Protection and Defense (NCFPD) Guidelines for
Crisis Communication ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 16
2.4.1. Introduction to NCFPD Guidelines ………………………….. …………………… 16
2.4.2. Establish Plans in Advance ………………………….. ………………………….. … 17
2.4.3. Plan Pre -event Logistics ………………………….. ………………………….. ……. 17
2.4.4. Partner with the Public ………………………….. ………………………….. ………. 17
2.4.5. Understand the Audience ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 18
2.4.6. Communicate with Honesty, Candor, and Openness ………………………. 18

2.4.7. Collaborate and Cooperate with Credible Sources …………………………. 19
2.4.8. Meet the Needs of the Media and Remain Accessible …………………….. 19
2.4.9. Communicate with Compassion, Concern, and Empathy ………………… 19
2.4.10. Accept Uncertainty and Ambiguity ………………………….. ………………… 20
2.4.11. Provide Messages of Self -efficacy ………………………….. ………………… 20
2.4.12. Acknowledge and Acc ount for Cultural Differences ……………………… 20
2.5. Crisis Communication through Social Networking Channels ………………….. 21
2.5.1. Introduction to Social N etworking Channels ………………………….. ……… 21
2.5.2. Social Media and Crisis Communication ………………………….. …………… 22
2.6. Conceptual Framework ………………………….. ………………………….. …………… 25
3. DATA & METHODOLOGY ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 26
3.1. Qualitative Method: Interviews ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 26
3.1.1. How and why the interv iewees were chosen ………………………….. …….. 26
3.1.2. Background of the interviewees ………………………….. ………………………. 27
4. FINDINGS & ANALYSIS ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 28
4.1. The Effect of Social Media on Crisis Communication ………………………….. .. 28
4.2. General Guidelines for Crisis Communication on Social Media ……………… 29
4.3. Different Social Media Channels in Crisis Communication …………………….. 30
4.4. Communicating Uncertainty ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 33
4.5. The Relationship Between Social and Traditional Media ……………………….. 34
4.6. Utilizing Social Media Opinion Leaders in Crisis Communication ……………. 35
4.7. Other Thoughts from the Interviewees ………………………….. …………………… 36
5. CONCLUSIONS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 38
5.1. Main Findings ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 38
5.2. Implications for International Business ………………………….. …………………… 40
5.3. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research ………………………….. …… 40
6. References ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 41
7. Appendix ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……….. 45
7.1. Interview Questions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 45

1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Crisis commu nication is needed by organizations whenever a crisis arises. This
crisis can be for example a traditional crisis such as an accident or fire at a factory, a
reputation crisis such as the company getting caught for doing something illegal, or
someone else claiming, sometimes untruthfully, that the organization has done
something wrong. Recent examples of corporate crises are for example the
Volkswagen emission scandal, Samsung ’s Galaxy Note smart phone issue, and
Apple ’s fight against the US government after the San Bernardino terrorist attacks.

Social media has truly emerged during the last decade and today, it is part of
everyday life for the majority of people in countries where internet penetration is high
and most people have smart phones. Therefore, i t is only logical that companies,
especially in the consumer industries, need to be in social media channels as well. As
the companies are still somewhat finding their feet in social media, they are more likely
to make mistakes in their communication there compared to traditional media. When
this is combined with people being more connected to the world than ever and ,
commenting on current affairs becoming possible for everyone, there is a potential for
crises. In addition, as mentioned later in the paper, social media has its way of creating
crises that did not exist before. These crises can result, for example, from consumer
complaints that are followed by other consumer s sharing their negative experiences in
the comment section or consumers rating the com pany negatively on social media
after a crisis.

1.2. Research Problem
The relationship between social media and crisis communication is a relatively new
phenomenon, and therefore, it has not yet been extensively researched and theories
do not yet exist specifi cally for social media. Hence , this paper will address that
relationship and aims to find out, how exactly does social media affect crisis
communication. In addition, it aims to provide recommendations on how companies
could utilize social media in order t o make their crisis communication more effective.

2
Lastly, as there is a limited amount of research regarding social media crisis
communication, but extensive theories on crisis communication itself, this paper tries
to analyze if existing crisis communicat ion guidelines could be used also in social
media.

This is done by combining a literature review that looks into existing research on
crisis communication and social media with interviews conducted with crisis
communication professionals.

1.3. Research Quest ions
The research questions for this paper are the following:

1. How has the introduction of different social networking channels changed
corporate crisis communication?

2. How should companies utilize social networking channels in their crisis
communication?

3. How do general guidelines of crisis communication apply to communication
through social networking channels?

1.4. Research Objectives
Based on the research questions, the following research objectives arose for this
paper:

1. To find out if the nature and requi rements of successful crisis communication
are different between social and traditional media .

2. To find out if the general guidelines of crisis communication also work in social
networking channels .

3. To find out the threats and opportunities that the insta nt nature of social
networking channels brings to crisis communication .

3
1.5. Definitions
1.5.1. Social media
According to Wright and Hinson (2009) cited in Austin et al. (2012: 189), “social
media are digital tools and applications that facilitate interactive communic ation and
content exchange among and between audiences and organizations .” This is further
defined by Aula (2010) who suggests that social media consists of blogs, micro -blogs,
forums, photo and video sharing, wikis, social bookmarking, and social networki ng.

1.5.2. Crisis
Crises are abnormal events. According to Heath and Palenchar (2009: 278), crisis
is an event that “creates an issue, keeps it alive, or gives it strength ”. Coombs (2007)
says that it is something that provides people with reasons to think badl y of an
organization.

There are two main types of brand crises, performance -related crises and values –
related crises. The first one usually involves certain products not functioning in a
desirable way. A values -related crisis usually involves a broader i ssue when the values
of a company do not meet their actions, for example in the form of social or ethical
issues (Wang, 2016)

1.5.3. Crisis communication
Freberg et al. (2013: 2) define crisis communication as “the provision of effective,
efficient messages to r elevant audiences during the course of a crisis process. ” In
addition to that, Reynolds and Seeger (2005: 46) state that it “seeks to explain the
specific event, identify likely consequences and outcomes, and provide specific harm –
reducing information to a ffected communities in an honest, candid, prompt, accurate,
and complete manner. ”

4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Corporate Crisis Communication : Overview
There are several comprehensive definitions of crisis communication in corporate
communications research. For e xample, Freberg et al. (2013: 2) define corporate
communication as “the provision of effective, efficient messages to relevant audiences
during the course of a crisis process. ” An earlier definition by Reynolds and Seeger
(2005: 46) is on the same lines bu t goes more into specifics with stating that crisis
communication “seeks to explain the specific event, identify likely consequences and
outcomes, and provide specific harm -reducing information to affected communities in
an honest, candid, prompt, accurate , and complete manner. ” Both of these definitions
suggest that crisis communication should be efficient and effective. This , of course,
makes sense and sounds obvious. The question then is, how to make crisis
communication efficient and effective and this paper will address that question.

Crisis communication can be used for different purposes. The creator of Situational
Crisis Communication Theory, Timothy Coombs (2007), says that crisis communication
is either used to repair the reputation after a crisis or during one to prevent damage to
the reputation. Therefore, even though several authors ( e.g. Coombs, 2007; Veil et al.,
2011; Austin et al., 2012; Freberg et al., 2013) suggest that crisis communication plans
should be made well in advance, crisis comm unication itself always has to be done in
the moment when the crisis occurs and after it.

Coombs (2007) suggests that the first priority of crisis communication is to do
everything possible to protect stakeholders from any harm. In other words, it could be
said that the first mission is to provide them with information that they need to protect
themselves from the physical threat of the crisis. Examples of this could include sirens
if people need to take shelter or warning s not to eat contaminated food. T hese are the
ethical responsibilities that companies have when they face a crisis.

This priority is also supported by earlier research by Sturges (1994). His research
states that providing information quickly in a crisis helps people to cope with the
psychological threat from it. This is because a crisis is an abnormal situation and

5
therefore, creates uncertainty. This uncertainty produces stress for the stakeholders
and can be relieved by providing relevant information (Coombs, 2007 ).

After making sure that the stakeholders know what to do in order to protect
themselves, Coombs (2007) says that it is time for an organization to communicate the
corrective actions that are being taken. This is the phase of crisis communication when
corporates start to eit her repair or protect their reputation. It could be argued that the
faster the corporation communicates safety instructions to its stakeholders, the faster
it can proceed to protect its reputation. Therefore, corporations should be as efficient
as possible in their crisis communication.

When it comes to protecting , or repairing th e reputation of an organization , many
authors suggest that the right framing of the message is critical (Druckman, 2001;
Cooper 2002 ; Freberg et al., 2013 ). Cooper (2002) suggest s that people define
problems, solutions to them, and attributions of responsibility based on the framing of
the message. Druckman (2001, cited in Coombs, 2007: 167), on the other hand, says
that “the framing effect occurs when a communicator selects certa in factors to
emphasize. The people who receive the message will focus their attentions on those
factors when forming their opinions and making judgments. ” Based on these findings,
it could be suggested that communicators should form their messages to draw
attention to either the good side or to the smaller problems caused by the crisis.

With traditional media, organizations may have had less control of the framing of
their message than with social media. This could be due to the fact that in traditional
media, the message is usually interpreted and reformatted by journalist s. However,
with social media, the company can publish the message themselves and potentially
reach millions of people without the help of journalists. In addition, there could be an
opportunity related to opinion leaders in social media. These are people who are
followed by large audiences and can also influence the opinions of many people. They
could be easier to affect and cooperate with than journalists who are typically
somewhat neu tral. This is also suggested by Veil et al. (2011), who propose that
companies should identify bloggers before crisis situations because they could act as
allies during a crisis.

6
Greyser (2009) and Freberg et al. (2013) also advice communicators on the
message form. Greyser (2009) states that the best approaches in order to restore trust
are directness in communications and concrete actions to correct the behavior of the
organization. Freberg et al. (2013) gives more specific advice by suggesting that cris is
messages are most effective when they are personalized to some extent a nd provide
recipients with clear action steps to take. In this context, it is usually impossible to
personalize the message to every single recipient. However, especially with the
internet and the social media, it is possible to identify key target groups for different
types of messages and reach them with personalized messages to each stakeholder
group.

Social media is a relatively new phenomenon when it comes to crisis
communicati on, but there has already been specific research also on its usefulness for
corporate crisis communication. The obvious advantage of social media from crisis
communicators ’ point of view is of course that it provides channels through which large
audiences can be reached very quickly (Veil et al. 2011; Wang, 2016). In addition to
organizations sharing information, the recipients can easily share that information to
their networks (Aula, 2010; Veil et al., 2011) .

As mentioned earlier, the framing of a messa ge is vitally important for corporate
communicators. In addition to this, there are suggestions that the medium used for
messaging could be equally, or even more important than the message (Jin & Liu,
2010; Schultz et al., 2011). In one study, Twitter was found to be more effective in
reducing negative crisis reactions such as boycotting and negative word -of-mouth than
newspaper articles and blogs (Schultz et al., 2011). Moreover, Schultz et al. (2011)
also found that Twitter users shared information more o ften than blog users and non –
users of social media. This is not surprising given the nature of Twitter and the ease of
sharing on most social networking and microblogging services. It could be argued that
the importance of the medium does not come only fro m how the message is interpreted
in that form, but also from how easily big audiences can be reached by using that
specific medium .

There are several key t heories to crisis communication with the most significant
ones being the Situational Crisis Communi cation Theory by Coombs, and the Image

7
Repair Theory by Benoit. These will be discussed in the latter part of this literature
review along with the more recent Social -Mediated Crisis Communication Model by Liu
et al. (2012) .

2.1. Image Restoration Theory
2.1.1. Introduction to the Image Restoration Theory
Another key theory in the field of crisis communication is the Image Restoration
Theory introduced by William L. Benoit in 1997. Benoit (1997) states that image, also
known as reputation, is important to organizatio ns. This is supported by multiple
researchers such as Timothy Coombs (2007) and Pekka Aula (2010). Image is
important to organizations even though it is to growing extent not a single impression
shared by the whole audience (Benoit, 1997).

Usually, there are multiple audiences that organizations need to address and these
audiences may have varying interests, concerns, and objectives. Therefore, the crisis
communicator must prioritize the audiences (Benoit, 1997). Social media could help in
addressing thes e audiences with differing agendas, because it increases the amount
of different communication platforms drastically and makes it easier to address smaller
individual groups.

An attack, which causes a problem to the organization, has two components. Firs tly,
the accused is responsible for the action. However, this does not have to be true, it is
enough if the audience perceives the company responsible (Benoit, 1997). This comes
back to what Seeger ( 2006 ) said about the public ’s perception being their real ity.

The second component is that the act is considered offensive. In this part, what
matters is the salient audience. If the salient audience disapproves the act, the other
audiences do not matter (Benoit, 1997). Similarly with the first component, this does
not have to be true either, it is enough if the salient audience perceives the act to be
offensive (ibid; Seeger, 2006).

8
2.1.2. Crisis Response Strategies Based on Image Restoration
Theory
According to Benoit (1997), message options are the key in image restoration
discourse. This was also suggested by Coombs (2007), who based his theory on the
assumption that communication can change people ’s perceptions of a crisis. However,
Benoit ’s (1997) statement is in contrast with more recent research conducted by
Schultz et al. (2010) who suggested that the medium is more important than the
message. This could have changed after 1997 with the introduction of numerous new
communication platforms.

The strategies that Benoit (1997) provides crisis communicators wit h, are largely
similar with the ones that Coombs (2007) suggested ten years later. However, whereas
Coombs (2007) divides the strategies into three primary response strategy groups and
one secondary response strategy group, Benoit (1997) divides them into five groups.
These five main groups are denial, evasion of responsibility, reducing the
offensiveness of event, corrective action, and mortification. Communicators can
choose the strategy in accordance with the seriousness of the situation and they can
often also combine different strategies listed. The groups and strategies contain are
introduced more specifically in table 3 (Benoit, 1997).

9

Image Restoration Strategies
Strategy Key Characteristic Illustration
Denial
Simple Denial Did not perform a ct Coke does not charge McDonald's
less
Shift the Blame Act performed by another Exxon: Alaska and caused delay

Evasion of
Responsibility
Provocation Responded to act of another Firm moved because of new state
laws
Defeasibility Lack of informati on or ability Executive not told meeting changed
Accident Act was a mishap Sears' unneeded repairs inadvertent
Good Intentions Meant well in act Sears: No willful over -charges

Reducing Offensiveness of Event
Bolstering Stress good traits Exxon's s wift and competent action
Minimization Act not serious Exxon: Few animals killed
Differentiation Act less offensive Sears: Preventative maintenance
Transcendence More important
considerations Helping humans justifies tests
Attack Accuser Reduce credibi lity of accuser Pepsi: Coke charges McDonald's
less
Compensation Reimburse victim Disabled movie -goers given free
passes

Corrective Action Plan to solve or prevent
problem AT&T promised to improve service

Mortification Apologize for act AT&T apo logized

Table 3: Image Restoration Strategies (Benoit, 1997)

2.2. Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)
2.2.1. Introduction to SCCT
The Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) is a theory created by
Timothy Coombs and published in 2007. It is a framework for understanding how
managers can use crisis communication to protect reputational assets during a crisis.
It divides crises into three different clusters to help man agers understand what kind of

10
response is required to a crisis (Coombs, 2007). Based on the framework, Coombs
(2007) comes up with evidence -based communication guidelines for responding to
different types of crisis. Although this paper considers mostly corporations ’ crisis
communication, Coombs (2007) claims that this framework is a pplicable also to
different types of other organizations such as non -profits.

The theory is based on Attribution Theory. It claims that people are interested in
and search for causes of events. This is especially true for negative and surprising
events, such as crises (Weiner, 1985; Weiner, 2006). Weiner (2006) also states that
people react negatively when a person is judged responsible and positively when a
person is judged not to be responsible for what has happened. In addition, anger is
evoked in the first case and in the latter, people feel sympathy for the person involved.

SCCT hypothesizes that the crisis managers can determine the most suitable crisis
response strategy or strategies by understanding the situation and the type of the crisis
(Coomb s, 2007).

2.2.2. Crisis Clusters
According to Coombs (2007), in a crisis situation, there are three factors that form
the reputational threat. These factors are initial crisis responsibility, crisis history, and
prior relational reputation.

Initial crisis res ponsibility refers to how responsible the organization is for the crisis
in the eyes of the stakeholders (ibid). The more responsible the stakeholders deem the
company, the more severe the reputational threat caused by the crisis (ibid; Claeys et
al., 2010 ). As stated by Seeg er (2006: 239), “the public ’s perception is its reality. ”
Therefore, even if the company is not actually responsible for the crisis but the
audience think s they are, they should act as if they were responsible.

Crisis history addresse s the case of the organization having experienced prior
crises . This can be especially important if the prior crises have been of a similar nature.
If this is the case, the organization may be deemed more responsible to the current

11
crisis because it will s eem like they have not taken enough corrective actions in the
past (Coombs, 2007).

Prior relational reputation on the other hand refers to how the company has or is
perceived to have treated their stakeholders in general. If the company has a history
of treating their stakeholders badly, they may be seen as more responsible for the crisis
(Coombs, 2007). This could be an example of Schadenfreude , a phenomenon where
people are happy when another party suffers.

As mentioned, there are three different cris is clusters. These clusters are the victim
cluster, the accidental cluster, and the preventable cluster which can also be called the
intentional cluster. In victim crises, someone else caused the crisis and therefore, the
organization is seen as a victim. In accidental crises, the crisis was caused by actions
by the organization, but these actions were unintentional. In preventable crises, the
organization knowingly took a risk by for example violating a regulation or putting
people in danger. Table 1 below explains the clusters further by dividing them into more
specific types (Coombs, 2007).

12
Table 1: SCCT crisis types by crisis clusters

Victim cluster : In these crisis types, the organization is also a victim of the crisis.
(Weak attributions of crisi s responsibility = Mild Reputational threat)
Natural disaster : Acts of nature damage an organization such as an earthquake.
Rumor : False and damaging information about an organization is being circulated.
Workplace violence : Current or former employee attacks current employees onsite.
Product tampering/Malevolence : External agent causes damage to an organization.

Accidental cluster : In these crisis types, the organizational actions leading to the crisis were
unintentional.
(Minimal attributions of cr isis responsibility = Moderate reputational threat)
Challenges : Stakeholders claim an organization is operating in an inappropriate
manner.
Technical -error accidents : A technology or equipment failure causes an industrial
accident.
Technical -error product harm : A technology or equipment failure causes a product to
be recalled.

Preventable cluster : In these crisis types, the organization knowingly placed people at risk,
took inappropriate actions or violated a law/regulation.
(Strong attributions of crisis responsibility = Severe reputational threat)
Human -error accidents : Human error causes an industrial accident.
Human -error product harm : Human error causes a product to be recalled.
Organizational misdeed with no injuries : Stakeholders are deceived wit hout injury.
Organizational misdeed management misconduct : Laws or regulations are violated by
management.
Organizational misdeed with injuries : Stakeholders are placed at risk by management
and injuries occur

Table 1: SCCT crisis types by crisis cluster (Coombs, 2007)

In his theory, Coombs (2007) presents a two -step process for assessing the
reputational threat by using the three factors. In the first step, the manager should
figure out the initial crisis responsibility attached to the crisis. Based on this, they should
initially determine which crisis cluster the crisis belongs to.

The two other factors are intensifying factors. Thus, in step two, the manager should
assess crisis history and prior relational reputation. If either of those two are nega tive,
the manager should then act in accordance with the next more severe cluster. Coombs
(2007 : 169 ) concludes this by saying that “the more negative the reputation, the less
likely stakeholders are to report behavioral intentions that are supportive of a n
organization. ”

13
2.2.3. Crisis Response Strategies Based on SCCT
According to Coombs (2007), crisis response strategies have three goals: (1) shape
attributions of the crisis, (2) change perceptions of the organization in crisi s, and (3)
reduce the negative e ffect generated by the crisis. To achieve these goals, Coombs
(2007) provides organizations with three primary crisis response strategy types and
one secondary response strategy.

The first main class of primary crisis response strategies is the deny strate gies.
These strategies try to detach the organization from the crisis or argue that there is no
crisis. Normally, these are only useful if the crisis belongs to the victim cluster or if there
is no crisis. Using a deny strategy with a more severe crisis mi ght lead to adverse
reactions from the stakeholders (Coombs, 2007) .

The next class of primary response strateg ies is the diminish strategies. These try
to diminish the seriousness of the crisis or argue that the organization had no control
over what has happened. To use these strategies, the managers need strong evidence
or otherwise the strategy could backfire and lead to negative publicity and stakeholder
reactions. The diminish strategies aim to reinforce the frame that the crisis is
accidental, becaus e intentional crises are often more expensive and more difficult to
manage than accidental ones (Coombs, 2007).

The last, and most accommodative, category of primary crisis response strategies
is the rebuild strategies. These normally include claiming res ponsibility for the crisis
and apologizing. Organizations might also provide symbolic or material forms of aid to
the victims and remind people of past good works of the organization. Reacting well to
a crisis with a well -executed rebuild strategy may even work in the organization ’s favor
as it might generate new reputational assets. Because rebuild strategies usually
involve more substantial corrective actions than other strategies, they are typically also
the most expensive strategies to execute (Coombs, 2007).

In addition to the three primary strategies, there is a secondary crisis response
strategy called bolstering. Bolstering is based on either reminders of past good work
to counter the negatives or reminding stakeholders that the organization is als o a

14
victim. More specific information about different crisis response strategies can be found
from table 2 (Coombs, 2007).

Table 2: SCCT crisis response strategies

Primary crisis response strategies
Deny crisis response strategies
Attack the accuser : Crisis manager confronts the person or group claiming
something is wrong with the organization.
Denial : Crisis manager asserts that there is no crisis.
Scapegoat : Crisis manager blames some person or group outside of the
organization for the crisis.
Diminish crisis response strategies
Excuse : Crisis manager minimizes organizational responsibility by denying
intent to do harm and/or claiming inability to control the events that triggered
the crisis.
Justification : Crisis manager minimizes the perceived damage caused by the
crisis.
Rebuild crisis response strategies
Compensation : Crisis manager offers money or other gifts to victims.
Apology : Crisis manager indicates the organization takes full responsibility for
the crisis and asks stakeholders for forgiveness.

Secondary crisis response strategies
Bolstering crisis response strategies
Reminder : Tell stakeholders about the past good works of the organization.
Ingratiation : Crisis manager praises stakeholders and/or reminds them of past
good works by the organization.
Victimage : Crisis managers remind stakeholders that the organization is a
victim of the crisis too.

Table 2: SCCT crisis response strategies (Coombs, 2007)

Although SCCT is one of the key frameworks in the field of crisis communica tion, it
has also attracted some critique from other authors. In a 2010 study, Claeys et al. found
that the crisis type does not make a significant difference in determining the best crisis
response strategy, but rather, the rebuild strategy always leads t o the most positive
reputational restoration. This is in contrast with Coombs (2007), who suggests that the
strategy should be selected in accordance with the crisis responsibility. However, it
could be that even though rebuild strategy may always lead to the most positive results,
it can be beneficial for organizations to use less accommodative strategies with
accidental and victim crises because the more accommodative the strategy is, the
more expensive it will be for the organization.

15
In addition, there is the personality trait called locus of control that could also affect
people ’s responses to different crisis response strategies even though it has not been
taken into account in Coombs ’ study (2007). According to Duffy, Downey and Shiflett
(1977, cited in Claeys et al., 2010: 256 -257), locus of control is “a personality trait that
refers to the attributions that people make for behavioral consequences and
reinforcements. ”

Interestingly, the locus of control seems to affect people ’s reactions to differ ent
types of crisis response strategies. In a research paper by Claeys et al. (2010), the
respondents with an external locus of control reacted more positively to the deny
strategy than those with an internal locus of control. In other words, people who be lieve
that they are responsible for the consequences of their actions themselves , react more
negatively to the deny strategy than those who tend to look elsewhere for a reason
when they fail. However, according to Claeys et al. (2010), there is no differen ce
between people with external or internal locus of control with the other two primary
response strategies.

2.3. Social -Mediated Crisis Communication Model
The social -mediated crisis communication model is a more recent crisis
communication model published by Liu et al. in 2012. Whereas the two theories
introduced earlier are generic theories related to crisis communication, this model
focuses specifically on social media and different channels and therefore , is important
for this paper.

Liu et al. (2012) provide organizations with five key considerations for a crisis
situation. Some of these are adap ted from other theories. The first consideration is
crisis origin. This ask s if the crisis is an internal or external crisis. An example of an
internal crisis could be an accident at the company factory which raises questions
about security at the plant. An external crisis could for example be an emission scandal
where the company gets caught for manipulating their emission figures.

16
The next consideration is th e crisis type. The crisis types suggested in this model
are adapted from Coombs ’ (2007) work. Therefore, they are victim cluster, accidental
cluster, and intentional cluster (Liu et al, 2012) .

The third consideration is the infrastructure. This considers whether the crisis
should be handled on the local level or needs to be addressed centrally. In the
centralized approach, the company headquarters handle the crisis communication
whereas in the localized approach it is handled by the local department involv ed in the
crisis (Liu et al., 2012) .

The penultimate consideration is the message strategy (Liu et al., 2012) . Again,
Coombs ’ (2007) work can be very useful when considering this issue . In addition to
Coombs ’ work, the image restoration theory by Benoit (1997 ) could also be consulted.

The final consideration for an organization is the message form (Liu et al., 2012) .
As suggested by Schultz et al. (2010), the medium can sometimes be even more
important than the message, thus it should be carefully cons idered. Different forms can
be used to effectively reach different target audiences and multiple different channels
may support each other with each one being ideal for different types of messages.

Other aspects to consider include whether the relationsh ip between different parties
interpreting and sharing information is direct or indirect. Liu et al. (2012), suggest that
during the era of social media, third -party influence can be significant in a crisis and
thus it can be beneficial to cooperate with in fluential social media creators. This is in
line with the suggestion of Veil et al. (2011), that companies should cooperate with
opinion leaders to have them act as allies in a crisis.

2.4. National Center for Food Protection and Defense (NCFPD)
Guidelines fo r Crisis Communication
2.4.1. Introduction to NCFPD Guidelines
In addition to general guidelines based on the frameworks and models introduced
earlier in this paper, there are the guidelines created by National Center for Food
Protection and Defense (NCFPD) . The se are introduced and further analyzed by Veil

17
et al. (2011) in their article. Although the guidelines were created by the public sector,
they also apply well for corporations. These guidelines will next be examined.

2.4.2. Establish Plans in Advance
The first point of these guidelines is to establish risk and crisis management policies
and process approaches. Veil et al. (2011) state that this should be done in advance
in order to be ready for crises when they hit the organization. This is supported by
numerous other authors (e.g. Coombs, 2007; Austin et al., 2012; Freberg et al., 2013).

2.4.3. Plan Pre -event Logistics
The next step is to plan pre -event logistics. Veil et al. (2011) suggest that
organizations should have hidden websites with crisis information ready to be
published and share d on social media. Of course, this is not always possible but certain
types of crises can be predicted. Crisis communicators should also identify employees
skilled in graphic design, video, and audio in order to be ready to create multimedia
information for social media (ibid). This applies mostly to smaller organizations as large
corporations have specified departments for producing this kind of information.
Companies should also develop an online contact list to be ready to distr ibute
information to key stakeholders as fast as possible (ibid).

Part of pre -event logistics is monitoring the environment for warning signs. This is
suggested by several crisis communication researchers (Veil et al., 2011; Austin et al.,
2012; Freberg et al., 2013). This allows organizations to quickly learn what consumers
are discussing and whether potential issues are arising (Veil et al., 2011). Social media
is an excellent tool for this because organizations can almost limitlessly follow the
conver sations about them on platforms such as Twitter and online forums. Jacques
(2009: 31) goes as far as to suggest that if companies do not monitor and engage
social media they are basically thinking: “It’s OK. We ’re going to outsource our
reputation, and we ’re comfortable with our customers defining it for us. ”

2.4.4. Partner with the Public
The third guideline introduced by Veil et al. (2011) is to partner with the public. Their
research claims that the public has the right to know about the risks they face. Thu s,

18
organizations should giv e them as much information as necessary. In addition to this,
organizations should also listen to the public because they can also provide essential
information during a crisis. For example, photos and videos taken by consumers c an
be used by organizations to assess the situation. Therefore, the public can also be
seen as a resource and not just a burden in a crisis situation.

2.4.5. Understand the Audience
The next step states that organizations should listen to the public ’s concerns and
understand the audience. This resonates with the Seeger (2006: 239) quotation earlier
in this paper stating that “the public ’s perception is its reality. ” Therefore, organizations
should not ignore the public ’s perception even if it was not accurate, b ecause it is the
perception based on which the public needs to be addressed. In addition, that
perception reflects the public ’s concerns (Benoit, 1997). This is another reason why
organizations should monitor social media and comments on news websites.

It is important that the organization speaks the same language as the audience on
social media. T herefore, to understand the audience and their way of communication,
organizations should use social networks also before a potential crisis (Veil et al.,
2011). It could be suggested that organizations should use a conversational voice on
social media instead of just releasing official corporate statements.

2.4.6. Communicate with Honesty, Candor, and Openness
The guidelines introduced by Veil et al. (2011) suggest t hat crisis communicators
should communicate with honesty, candor, and openness. According to both them and
Stephens and Malone (2009), communicating with those qualities makes the public
less likely to turn to less -credible, third -party sources for informa tion. However,
companies should also be honest if they do not have information about something,
rather than coming up with false information (Veil et al., 2011).

In add ition, Veil et al. (2011) claim that in an effort to seek information about a crisis,
people often speak to each other on social media rather than navigate directly to a
corporate website. Due to this, companies should also be present on social media as
their stakeholders are using these platforms too.

19

Sweetser and Metzgar (2007) suggest that having a blog assures the public that
an organization is not trying to avoid conversation about a crisis. Ten years later, the
same could also apply to social networking channels in which many organizations act
these days.

2.4.7. Collaborate and Cooperate with Credible Sources
This guideline was already covered in the earlier parts of this paper. Several authors
(e.g. Veil et al., 2011 ; Liu et al., 2012 ) suggest that organizations should identify social
media opinion leaders that could act as allies in a c risis situation and cooperate with
them.

2.4.8. Meet the Needs of the Media and Remain Accessible
There i s still a significant number of people who either do not actively use social
networking channels or consider traditional media more reliable. Therefore, it is
important that crisis communication uses both channels (Veil et al., 2011; Austin et al.,
2012). That means that organizations should have a spokesperson and be always
available to journalists who are covering the crisis in traditional media.

2.4.9. Communic ate with Compassion, Concern, and Empathy
Not only should organizations communicate with honesty and openness, but it is
suggested that they should also include compassion, concern, and empathy in their
crisis communication. According to Veil et al. (2011) , in addition to the need for
information, crises also create a need for human conversation and compassion.
Because social media connects people to others in a personal manner, it creates
opportunities also for organizations to be more “human ”. Several aut hors suggest that
companies should communicate with empathy, passion, proficiency, and knowledge in
the new media (e.g. Sweetser & Metzgar, 2007; Solis, 2009; Veil et al., 2011).

Veil et al. (2011) suggest that companies can speak directly without filteri ng to their
stakeholders through blogs or other direct -to-audience social platforms. This also
applies to newer and more current social networking channels such as Facebook,

20
Twitter, and Instagram. On the other hand, traditional media usually filters out t he
human voice and turns it into hard news (Veil et al., 2011).

2.4.10. Accept Uncertainty and Ambiguity
It is important for companies to accept a certain level of uncertainty which is always
present in a crisis situation, and publish small and cautious, but at t he same time
truthful statements regularly as they get more information (Veil et al., 2011). This is
something that Twitter is very useful for as it is based on short messages or “tweets ”
which consist of a maximum of 140 characters. This is supported by J ohnson (2009:
24) who says that frequent updates provide organizations with “an excellent way to
send out a brief, crisp message that will satiate whoever may be waiting for an answer,
even though it may not illustrate the whole picture ”.

2.4.11. Provide Messages of Self -efficacy
According to Seeger (2006), a sense of control in an uncertain situation can be
restored by messages of self -efficacy. This means that the crisis communicators
should encourage people to help in different ways such as volunteering. Sutton et al.
(2008) found that individual s feel a need to contribute during a crisis and that
contributing helps them to cope with the situation. This, however, is not particularly
useful for corporate crises.

2.4.12. Acknowledge and Account for Cultural Differences
The last point is an addition that Veil et al. (2011) suggest for NCFPD ’s guidelines.
They say that new media such as social networking channels are widely fragmented
and people tend to be connected with people with similar interests and social
backgrounds. This means that organization s should use several different channels to
reach all the different groups of people that they need to reach. However, this does not
require a huge effort on social media because of the digital nature of it and the lack of
middl emen such as journalists (Veil et al., 2011). Despite it being quite easy to reach
these different audiences, it can be recommended that the different channels are
identified already before a crisis (Freberg et al, 2013).

21
2.5. Crisis Communication through Soci al Networking Channels
2.5.1. Introduction to Social Networking Channels
Freberg (2012) claims that the emergence of social media is challenging the
contemporary public relations practice and, particularly, crisis communication. This is
partially due to the insta nt nature of social media and the number of people
participating in it. For example, Facebook currently has over 1.7 billion users, Twitter
over 300 million, and the Chinese equivalent of those two, Sina Weibo, over 280 million
users (Statista, 2016).

Social media itself consists of countless different platforms and changes constantly.
Some forms of social media are blogs, micro -blogs, forums, photo and video sharing
platforms, wikis, social bookmarking, and social networking (Aula, 2010). The most
notabl e services include the above -mentioned services and platforms such as
YouTube, WordPress, Instagram, LinkedIn and Snapchat.

According to Wright and Hinson (2009) cited in Austin et al. (2012: 189), “Social
media are digital tools and applications that fa cilitate interactive communication and
content exchange among and between audiences and organizations ”. It is also
characterized by everyone having the possibility to produce content. Unlike with
traditional media, consumers of information can also simulta neously become sources
of information (Aula, 2010; Veil et al., 2011).

Research conducted by Palen et al. (2007) shows that onsite and online crisis
response activities are becoming increasingly concurrent and intertwined (Schultz et
al., 2010; Veil et al ., 2011). While this was true already in 2007, one can assume the
concurrent and connected nature of crisis communication has become even stronger
within the last ten years due to a growing number and popularity of different social
networking channels such as Facebook and Twitter. For example, back in October
2007, Facebook only had 50 million active users and reached 900 million active users
just five years later in March 2012 (Yahoo Finance, 2012).

A similar argument can also be made about an article by Lenhart et al. (2010) in
which they claimed that these days individuals are increasingly using microblogging

22
and social networking sites instead of traditional blogs. Although this was stated in
2010, it is safe to say that this development has been going further because of the
growing number of people using various social media channels, such as Facebook.

With social media, it is possible for organization to communicate directly with the
audience without the involvement of journalists. This creates an int eresting opportunity
for corporate crisis communicators, because Austin et al. (2012) found out in their
study, that participants were less likely to seek out more information about a crisis when
the initial information came directly from the organization, rather than from a third party.
However, this statement should be researched further, because Austin et al. ’s study
was done with only college students from one university, thus the test group was very
limited and homogenic.

2.5.2. Social Media and Crisis Comm unication
Social media can be used in crisis communication “to educate the public regarding
risks, encourage visible support of an organization or a cause, and establish a venue
for open dialogue online ” (Veil et al., 2011: 113). Social media makes it easi er to
introduce discussion during a crisis, and this could alleviate damages. In addition, it is
often the timeliest platform for crisis communication with a wide reach. (Veil et al., 2011;
Wang, 2016).

Social media allow s organizations to be more immedia te in their responses and
enables them to interact better with their stakeholders both during a crisis, and outside
crisis situations. This can be seen both as an opportunity and a challenge, because
crises have a tendency to evolve faster and take less pr edictable turns online (Schultz
et al., 2010; Austin et al., 2012). However, this cannot be a reason for an organization
to stay away from social media because the crises will continue to develop in social
media, whether or not the organization is present there because that is where many
stakeholders are.

Research suggests that there are a few key reasons why people use social media
during crises. The f irst two reasons, as suggested by Sutton et al. (2008) and Austin et
al. (2012), are that people use soci al media to check in with people they know and to

23
get insider information. Traditional media, on the other hand, is used to find general
information about the situation. Based on this, one could argue that organizations
should aim to provide some additiona l value on their social media accounts compared
to traditional media because by doing that, they can satisfy people ’s want for insider
information and attract them to follow their accounts.

In addition, Austin et al. (2012) suggest that audiences use soc ial media more
during crises because they feel that information on social media is unfiltered and up –
to-date. However, one could make the argument that no information is unfiltered, even
though it may not come from the mass media. Information is always fil tered because it
is produced by people . Therefore, factors , like their personal view of the situation , affect
what they produce, whether conscious ly or not. They also argue that another reason
for increased social media use is that it provides information that cannot be found
elsewhere.

Johnson and Kaye (2010) have made another interesting finding in their research
from crisis communicators ’ point of view. According to them, blog users both list blogs
as their most credible source of information and also p erceive the blog more credible
the more they have been reading it. This is interesting, because the same could be
true for other social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter. Thus, the more
people get exposed to a certain page or author, the more lik ely they are to believe
them. This could be seen as another reason for organizations to be active on social
media also before a crisis. This is also supported by Freberg et al (2013).

There are, however, some negative sides and challenges related to socia l media
too. As noted by Aula (2010), the information posted on social media by different
contributors is usually unverified. This can lead to a growing risk of reputation threats.
Even though there is this negative side, added with concerns of hackers, te chnology
failure, and potential to spread misinformation very quickly, organizations should still
utilize social media . This is because the stakeholders will use it regardless of the
organization. Thus, it is better to be there and stay in relative control , than not be there
and not know what people are talking about (Veil et al., 2011). However, Aula (2010)
argues that it is virtually impossible for organizations to control the conversations. Even

24
if this was true, it could be better to at least try to aff ect the conversations and know
what people are discussing about instead of ignoring social media.

Aula (2010) also suggests that social media may grow the expectations towards an
organization related to issues such as ethical business operations and tran sparency.
And when it comes to ethical business operations, he claims that due to the nature of
social media in which stakeholders can interact with each other and the organizations,
it is not enough for organizations to just look good, instead, they have to be good . This,
of course, is not necessarily a negative thing.

Overall, even though social media is a cost -efficient way to find information and to
reach large numbers of stakeholders, it is not a solution to every problem, certainly not
on its own. T he content that is published through social networking channels still needs
to be empathic, truthful, and conversational for it to be effective (Veil et al., 2011). After
all, social is merely a tool that can help organizations and their crisis communicato rs
when they follow the best practices of crisis communication.

25
2.6. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework given in Figure 1 illustrates the relationships between
key stakeholders and the main points covered in this paper.

Figure 1. Conceptual fra mework

As the figure shows, a crisis – or a potential crisis is always needed for crisis
communication. Crisis communication, on the other hand, is related to many different
factors. This paper will focus particularly on the relationship between existing crisis
communication theories and social media to find out if these theories are useful also
when c ommunicating via social media platforms. Furthermore, the audience is an
important factor as the communication is aimed towards them to affect their reaction s
and perceptions.

26
3. DATA & METHODOLOGY
3.1. Qualitative Method: Interviews
The method chosen for this study was qualitative interviews. This method was
selected because the study aims to find out, how, if in any way, the current views of
corporate communication professionals differ from the existing research and the key
theories of crisis communication.

Three interviews with corporate communication professionals were conducted for
this study in February and March 2017 . All three interviews were conducted face to
face in Finnish due to it being the mother tongue and primary working language of all
respondents. The interviews were recorded and lasted for 37, 47, and 64 minutes.

The topic of the interviews was given to the interviewees when requesting an
intervie w, but the pre -planned interview questions were not revealed to them before
the interview. In addition to the pre -planned questions, the interviewees were
encouraged to elaborate on the themes of the interview and, in the end, to add anything
that they fou nd important to the topic that was missing from the initial questions.

3.1.1. How and why the interviewees were chosen
The interviewees were chosen by searching for communications offices in Finland
on Google. After finding relevant offices, LinkedIn was used t o determine, which
employee in the office has the most relevant experience for the theme of the study.
After that, emails were sent to the potential respondents and interviews were
scheduled. In one case, the initially requested person suggested that anoth er
employee in his office is more suitable for this topic. This person was then approached
and agreed to an interview.

Communications offices were chosen to act as the target audience for the interview
requests for two main reasons. Firstly, employees of communications offices work as
consultants and therefore , have worked for multiple organizations and in numerous
different cases. That leads to them having a diverse experience that has accumulated
from different situations.

27
Secondly, corporate communica tion is a relatively small field in Finland and thus,
only the biggest companies have dedicated communications departments. Contacting
small communications offices and identifying the right persons in them is significantly
easier than trying to find the ri ght people from big corporations.

3.1.2. Background of the interview ees
The respondents were promised anonymity and thus, they will be referred to as the
Interviewee A, Interviewee B, and Interviewee C in the paper. Moreover, only basic
background information w ill be provided in the paper, to both protect their anonymity
and because it is not relevant for the study. To protect their anonymity further, they will
not be individualized in the following background description .

All interviewees work as corporate communication consultants in Finnish
communications offices. Two work in a national office , whereas one works in an office
that is part of an international corporation. All of them have extensive experience of
crisis communication working for numerous client s. One has worked most of their
career as a consultant, one has background as a journalist, and one has previously
worked for international Finnish corporations that are listed in the Helsinki stock
exchange. All interviewees have more than 10 years of cor porate communication
experience.

28
4. FINDINGS & ANALYSIS
4.1. The Effect of Social Media on Crisis Communication
The interviewees were asked, how they think the emergence of social media has
changed crisis communication, if at all. In addition, they were asked if they see the
change as an opportunity or as a threat. The answers of the interviewees varied
significantly for this question.

Interviewee A said that the emergence of social media has affected openness which
is these days one of the biggest consumer tr ends. Due to social media, she claimed
that companies get caught for lying easily and therefore , it is more important than ever
for them to be honest. This can be brought back to what Aula (2010) suggested, that
companies need to actually be good instead o f just looking good in the era of Web 2.0.
Interviewee A also said that consumers will monitor if the company improves their
actions after a crisis and will react more negatively if a similar crisis occurs again. This
is in line with the Situational Crisis Communication Theory and relates to the crisis
history part of it where crisis history can act as an intensifying factor.

Interviewee B thought that social media has not changed crisis communication very
much. He said that it has brought some crises that are specific for social media, but
mostly affects only the need for monitoring and speed. According to him, social media
acts as an intensifying factor in crises because it allows them to develop much faster .
It could be argued that just the changes to mo nitoring and the intensifying nature of
social media could be considered as significant changes to crisis communication.

Interviewee C focused mostly on the opportunities and challenges that social media
provides crisis communicators with but she did men tion the increase of openness that
also interviewee A mentioned.

All respondents saw social media as both an opportunity and a threat for crisis
communication. Both interviewee A and C mentioned the increased openness as a
mostly positive change. Intervie wee C highlighted the opportunity of communicating
directly with stakeholders , without the filtering of traditional media , that social media
provides crisis communicators with. This is supported by earlier research conducted

29
by Veil et al. (2011). Intervie wees B and C also mentioned that frequent posts on Twitter
during a crisis may decrease the amount of phone calls from journalists and other
stakeholders during the situation and consequently allow crisis communicators to focus
more on the crisis itself.

On the other hand , interviewee C said that openness and the interactive nature of
social media can also be a challenge for companies. According to her, the reason for
this could be that people ’s mentality has not changed enough for social media yet. That
means that people are not ready to accept feedback and sometimes negative
comments which are inevitable in different social media channels.

Another challenge which was highlighted by interviewee A is that it is easier than
ever to create untruthful news a nd spread them effectively. As interviewee C
mentioned, individual social media users are not affected by basic principles of
journalism such as objectivity. Therefore, social media provides individuals with a
platform for spreading negative rumors about c ompanies which especially people who
do not like that company may believe and share. Organizations need to allocate
resources to find out if the rumors are true and then convince the consumers with facts
to believe them rather than the people spreading tho se rumors.

4.2. General Guidelines for Crisis Communication on Social
Media
Regarding the general guidelines for crisis communication, the interviewees were
asked if they have some general guidelines that they would give a client regardless of
the exact type of the crisis. The answers varied for this question as well, but some
similarities could be found.

All of the interviewees recommended to start with analyzing the situation, what has
happened and also, how the situation might develop. All of them also m entioned that
when the situation arises, the first thing to do is to take a deep breath and to try to push
emotions to the side. Interviewees B and C said that, for various reason s, the issue is
often that the company representatives are annoyed by the sit uation itself; they may
think that the audience is wrong about the situation and they usually have to rearrange

30
their calendar because of it. Therefore, they may make hasty decisions influenced by
their emotions. This is one reason for why it is often good to use a consultant in a crisis
situation because that person does not have a personal relationship with the situation.

In addition, all interviewees had some other ideas. Interviewee A emphasized the
importance of company representatives not commenting on the situation anonymously
in social media. Sometimes there could be a temptation to comment on it as a normal
consumer, but doing this, companies face both an ethical dilemma and a risk of it
backfiring if they get caught for doing that. She also said, that companies should not
react to every minor social media crisis but rather monitor them and see if they catch
attention of the press. They could prepare a holding statement in advance in case the
crisis does develop into a serious one.

Interviewees B and C both highlighted the importance of speed. Interviewee B said
that many crises can be blocked quickly before they gather major attention if they are
properly monitored. Interviewee C added that in the era of Internet and social media,
crisis communic ators cannot afford to wait for the evening news or next morning ’s
newspapers because situations develop much faster in social media channels.
Therefore, crisis communicators do not have traditional office hours anymore but
rather, they have to be ready to react to situations around the clock and also on
weekends.

Interviewee B said that many communicators and managers underestimate the
importance of Twitter in crisis communication because in Finland, there are relatively
few active users compared to for example Facebook. However, he said that almost all
Finnish journalists are on Twitter and therefore, it should not be underestimated in crisis
communication.

4.3. Different Social Media Channels in Crisis Communication
For this theme, the interviewees were fi rst asked how they perceive the role of
different social media channels such as Facebook, Twitter, and blogs in crisis
communication. In addition, they were asked if they think that the crisis type affects the
choice of channels used. For this question, cr isis types were adopted from Coombs

31
(2007) Situational Crisis Communication Theory and were therefore victim crises,
accidental crises, and intentional crises.

The channels mentioned by the interviewees were Twitter, Facebook, blogs,
Snapchat, Facebook L ive, Periscope, and WhatsApp. All interviewees mentioned
Twitter and Facebook, whereas the others were mentioned by one or two of them.

Regarding Twitter, interviewees B and C said that it is a suitable tool for crisis
communication and interviewee C als o listed it as the number one crisis
communication platform on social media. According to them, Twitter excels in quick
and frequent sharing of information. Interviewee B also mentioned that social media
crises often start from Twitter and therefore, it is important to monitor Twitter constantly.
Interviewee A highlighted that monitoring is different on Twitter compared to Facebook
and it is important for companies to identify the key hashtags for their company and
industry. Although interviewees B and C said that Twitter is an excellent tool,
interviewee C noted that it is not the best tool for reaching big masses due to the limited
number of users there.

Facebook was described by interviewee C as the one channel that has stabilized
its position as the pl atform for the masses. Almost everyone is there and therefore, it
is the channel for reaching a big and diverse audience. Interviewee A mentioned that
monitoring Facebook can be easier than monitoring Twitter because the discussions
often happen on the com pany ’s Facebook page. However, there is also a possibility
that a discussion leading to a crisis develops in a closed Facebook group which the
company does not know about and most likely does not have access to. Interviewee
C also mentioned the potential o f a crisis leading to negative public reviews on
Facebook. She also said that Facebook can be a merciless platform because everyone
can comment there and sometimes discussions can escalate among unsatisfied
consumers. On the other hand, she said that it al so encourages openness which is a
positive factor.

Company blogs were another major platform mentioned by interviewees B and C.
They both said that they can be an effective method for communicating with the
stakeholders and they allow companies to communi cate in a more relaxed way than

32
through the traditional media. Interviewee B said that it is sometimes difficult to write
about crisis situations as a whole on Twitter because each Twitter update or “tweet ” is
limited to only 140 characters. Therefore, it can be useful for a company representative
to write a blog post on the company website and then share it on social media. He
suggested that a relaxed blog post by the CEO can be much more effective than an
official company statement.

The last platform ca tegory mentioned by both interviewee B and C was live
streaming services such as Periscope and Facebook Live. According to interviewee B,
in some cases, streaming a live video from the crisis site can help shoot down false
rumors. Interviewee C also said t hat press conferences are these days often live
streamed either by the journalists or the company itself. Therefore, it could be argued
that company representatives need to think about the target audience more than
before because they are not only speaking to the journalists who filter the information,
but also directly to a bigger audience. In addition, interviewee B likened Snapchat to
live streaming services because it could also be used similarly to shoot down false
rumors in real time.

Regarding the crisis type and its effect on the channels used, all interviewees
thought that it is not very important in that regard. They said that the most important
factor defining the channels that are used, is identifying the channels where the
audience is present. If, for example the audience is discussing the situation only on
Twitter, there is no point to address it on Facebook, but rather only on Twitter.

Interviewee B elaborated on the question more than other respondents and also
briefly discussed the effect of crisis types. According to him, if the crisis belongs to the
victim cluster, the company has to evaluate if they need to or should react to it at all.
Moreover, he said that if the crisis belongs to the preventable or accidental cluster,
then the compa ny must act on it and communicate about it. In accidental crisis, he
suggested that companies should always apologize and admit the mistake. This is in
line with what Claeys et al. (2010) found out in their study. Interviewee B also said
about the importan ce of proper apology:

33
No crisis is that bad, that it could not be made even worse with bad
communication (translated from Finnish by the author).

Mikään kriisi ei ole niin huono tai paha, ettei sitä huonolla viestinnällä voisi vielä
huonontaa tai pahenta a (original quot ation in Finnish ).

4.4. Communicating Uncertainty
Regarding uncertainty that is often present in crisis situations and communicating
it to the audience, the interviewees were asked, how they would communicate
uncertainty to the stakeholders.

All interviewees agreed that uncertainty should be communicated to the
stakeholders during a crisis. Interviewee A said that an organization should always
issue a holding statement about the situation as soon as possible and tell the
stakeholders what they know, what they do not know, what actions they are taking to
clarify the situation, and when they will inform them again. She also said that one has
to be careful in communicating uncertainty, so that the organization does not make
false accusations due t o the lack of knowledge.

Interviewee B said that it is fair towards the stakeholders and acceptable to tell the
stakeholders that the company does not know yet. He also said that it is hardly possible
to build a reputation that the organization knows eve rything. This is because if the
organization claims to know everything, then the question will b e, why do you not tell
us. This can be brought back to Aula ’s (2010) research and statement that in the era
of Web 2.0, it is not enough for companies to look g ood, but instead, they need to be
good.

Interviewee C mentioned that:

Even silence is a message (translated from Finnish by the author).

Hiljaisuuskinhan on viesti (original quotation in Finnish).

34
She also said that the empty space for messages is a lways filled with something,
whether it is rumors posted by others or the company messaging uncertainty.
Therefore, it can be argued that it is much better for a company to message uncertainty
rather than other contributors filling the space with rumors.

4.5. The Relationship Between Social and Traditional Media
For this theme, the interviewees were asked, how they think that companies should
combine social and traditional media, if at all. The answers varied significantly and it
seems that either they had not thought about the issue between those two from the
same perspective as Veil et al. (2011 ) and Austin et al . (2012 ), or they just did not find
the same things important.

Interviewee A said that it depends both on the size of the organization and the size
of the crisis. She argued that if the crisis is just a minor social media based crisis, then
it can be addressed solely on social media. This makes sense because not all social
media crises make it to the traditional media, especially if they are addresse d early.

Interviewee B on the other hand, said that an emphasis on communication on
Twitter also serves the traditional media. As mentioned before, he said that almost all
reporters are on Twitter and many of them are likely to follow the situation also there.
Therefore, the organization can decrease the amount of phone calls from journalists
significantly by communicating effectively on social media, and indeed on Twitter.

Interviewee C commented mostly on the role and importance of traditional media
these days. She suggested that as anyone can say anything on social media
nowadays, journalists should be seen as an ally of the organization. This is because
they follow the key principles of journalism such as objectivity, and are often seen as
credible s ources by the attendance. Therefore, good cooperation with the traditional
media can lead to large benefits for both the company and the reporter . This is
supported by Veil et al. (2011) and Austin et al. (2012) who suggest that some people
trust the tradi tional media more than what they read on social media.

35
4.6. Utilizing Social Media Opinion Leaders in Crisis
Communication
Both Veil et al. (2011) and Liu et al. (2012) suggest that social media opinion leaders
could act as allies in a crisis situation. There fore, this was also asked from each of the
interviewees to find out the opinions of professionals on this rather interesting
possibility. Interestingly, all three professionals that were interviewed for this paper
considered it unfeasible.

All of the int erviewees raised the ethical issue of using somebody who is paid by
the company as an ally. Interviewee A said that, depending on the crisis, it could maybe
be possible if there had been cooperation between the two parties in the past.
However, she said th at there is always the possibility that the opinion leader tells in
social media that this company tried to get them to tell this. This would of course be a
public relations catastrophe for the organization in a crisis.

Interviewee B considered it unconv incing because effectively, it is a paid opinion.
He suggested in the event of a reputation crisis, a social media opinion leader who has
a good relationship with the company, might even say something without direct
instruction. However, he highlighted tha t at that point that person will have to make
clear that they are linked with the company. He said that the best situation is, if the fans
of the brand defend the company in a crisis situation because those are the most
credible people. He also said that t hose people could be encouraged to do that as long
as money does not change hands.

Interviewee C also highlighted the importance of money not changing hands. She
admitted that the idea sounded interesting, but ultimately turned it down due to ethical
concerns. She said that brand ambassadors can be important outside a crisis situation
though, because they can be used to build a so -called reputation buffer, which can
protect the company from the negative effects of a crisis.

Alongside the ethical issue, the interviewees mentioned the risk of getting caught
for using a social media opinion leader to affect the public opinion. If this was to

36
happen, it could lead to a much bigger crisis than the original crisis that the organization
faced.

4.7. Other Thoughts from the Interviewees
As mentioned earlier, the interviewees were also encouraged to add anything that
they considered important regarding social media and crisis communication. Every
interviewee had something to add and these additions are discussed below .

Interviewee A made suggestions regarding the overall management of a crisis . She
said that when the situation arises, if the company has communication professionals,
they should be invited to think about the situation immediately. If this is not the ca se,
then the company should contact consultants for help. This is important because, a
crisis that is managed well, can also improve the organization ’s reputation. She also
said that when preparing a crisis communication guide for a company, social media
has to be mentioned separately because of its growing importance.

Interviewee B said that, when used correctly, social media can be a useful tool for
protecting organizations from a crisis. He mentioned the example of Helsinki Public
Works Department. The y have nearly 20,000 Twitter followers and they anticipate
crises for example in the event of a heavy snow fall by tweeting about potential traffic
issues in a relaxed way in advance. By doing this, they are already preparing people
for possible problems an d reduce the likelihood of people complaining about the
situation by reassuring them that they are aware of the issues and are working on
them.

Interviewee C thought that the borderline between advertisers and communication
professionals is becoming less perceptible. She said that while communication
professionals have always needed to think about how the message will be understood
and potential misunderstandings, this is becoming increasingly important for
advertisers as well. This is because in the case of someone being upset by an ad or
considering it insulting, there now exists a platform for sharing those feeling effectively
with the whole world. She also mentioned that social media provides crisis

37
communicators with a good platform for past -crisis com munication and rebuilding of
reputation.

38
5. CONCLUSIONS
5.1. Main Findings
Summarizing the whole paper and the key findings, it is good to first come back to
the research questions for this paper. They were:

1. How has the introduction of different social netwo rking channels changed
corporate crisis communication?
2. How should companies utilize social networking channels in their crisis
communication?
3. How do general guidelines of crisis communication apply to communication
through social networking channels?

Both the research for the literature review and the interview questions to the
interviewees were based around these three questions. Regarding the first question,
which asks how the emergence of social media has changed corporate crisis
communication, there we re three key points that were highlighted by multiple
interviewees and existing research. These three key factors were the growths in speed
and openness , and the increasing monitoring possibilities brought to the industry by
social media.

Social media ha s changed the speed at which crises sometimes develop and
therefore, it demands that crisis communicators monitor social media channels
constantly and are always ready to respond quickly. On the other hand, social media
itself and numerous tools developed by analytics companies provide communicators
and managers with excellent opportunities for constantly monitoring the discussion.
Because of social media, people are more connected with each other than ever before,
and therefore , it is crucial that companie s are open and honest about their actions,
because there is always someone who will discover the truth, one way or another.

The second question asked, how companies should utilize social media in their
crisis communication. This was covered in depth in t he literature review with National
Center for Food Protection and Defense (NCFPD) guidelines providing useful insight

39
to this. In addition, it was also asked from the interviewees who each are
communication consultants.

To summarize this, a few key point s arose from the research. These were using
social media already before a crisis arises , using Twitter to communicate quickly and
to help reporters, and addressing crises in the channel that the audience is discussing
them in. It was highlighted in the res earch that companies must be active in social
media before a crisis in order to be effective there during one. Otherwise, they will not
be able to reach their audience through different social media channels because they
will not have any followers.

Twitter was mentioned by all interviewees as a good tool for crisis communication
because it allows the communicator to send short and frequent messages as the
situation develops, and because almost all reporters are using it. One of the
interviewees said that the importance of it should not be underestimated even though
the number of users is not as high as for services like Facebook and Instagram.

The interviewees mentioned that the channel for crisis communication should be
picked based on where the audien ce is discussing it. All of them thought that this
consideration is more important than the type of the crisis when choosing the channels.

The third research question asked, how well do the general guidelines of crisis
communication work on social media. This question is important at the moment,
because crisis communication on social media is a relatively new phenomenon and it
has not yet been extensively researched. Based on the research for this paper, the
guidelines that have been published in key theor ies such as the Situation Crisis
Communication Theory (Coombs, 2007), can often be adapted to social media as well.
Therefore, guidelines such as , having a crisis communication plan in advance, using
strategies such as rebuild strategies, and dividing cris es into crisis clusters, are still
relevant. Nevertheless , communicators must be aware of the special characteristics of
social media, e.g. the growing demand for openness and honesty, and the faster nature
of it.

40
5.2. Implications for International Business
Although the study was based around interviews of Finnish corporate
communication professionals, it has some implications for international business. The
majority of the literature that was consulted for this study was published outside Finland
and therefo re was relevant for many markets. Due to globalization and Finland being
a relatively similar market to other western countries, this study can be useful for
communicators and managers at least in the western world. Of course, the
recommendations about the use of different channels should be adapted to the popular
social media platforms in each country because these may vary from country to
country, especially outside the western world.

5.3. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
There are certain li mitations to this study. Firstly, the number of expert interviews
conducted for the study was only three and therefore, the results cannot be
generalized . In addition, all interviewees work in Finland and hence, the results could
be very different elsewher e, especially outside the western business world.

At the moment, apart from case studies, there is a very limited amount of research
available on social media ’s effect on corporate crisis communication. Therefore, further
research should be conducted on the topic to create theories and frameworks for crisis
communication in social media channels. The need for this is further supported by the
growing popularity of different social media channels around the world and their
constant evolution.

In addition, most crisis communication research seems to assume that the crisis is
related to only one market. However, many crises especially in big multinational
corporations, are situations that need to be addressed around the world. Therefore,
further research cou ld be conducted on how to effectively manage a crisis that affects
several markets that the company is present at.

41
6. References

Aula, P. (2010). Social media, reputation risk and ambient publicity management.
Strategy & Leadership , 38(6), pp.43 -49.

Austin, L., Fisher Liu, B. and Jin, Y. (2012). How Audiences Seek Out Crisis
Information: Exploring the Social -Mediated Crisis Communication Model. Journal of
Applied Communication Research , 40(2), pp.188 -207.

Benoit, W. (1997). Image repair discourse and cri sis communication. Public Relations
Review , 23(2), pp.177 -186.

Claeys, A., Cauberghe, V. and Vyncke, P. (2010). Restoring reputations in times of
crisis: An experimental study of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory and the
moderating effects of lo cus of control. Public Relations Review , 36(3), pp.256 -262.

Coombs, W. (2007). Protecting Organization Reputations During a Crisis: The
Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate
Reputation Review , 10(3), pp.163 -176.

Cooper, A. (2002). Media framing and social movement mobilization: German peace
protest against INF missiles, the Gulf War, and NATO peace enforcement in Bosnia.
European Journal of Political Research , 41(1), pp.37 -80.

Druckman, J. (2001). The implicati ons of framing effects for citizen competence.
Political Behavior , 23(3), pp.225 -256.

Duffy, P., Shiflett, S. and Downey, R. (1977). Locus of control: Dimensionality and
predictability using Likert scales. Journal of Applied Psychology , 62(2), pp.214 -219.

Freberg, K. (2012). Intention to comply with crisis messages communicated via social
media. Public Relations Review , 38(3), pp.416 -421.

42
Freberg, K., Saling, K., Vidoloff, K. and Eosco, G. (2013). Using value modeling to
evaluate social media messages: T he case of Hurricane Irene. Public Relations
Review , 39(3), pp.185 -192.

Greyser, S. (2009). Corporate brand reputation and brand crisis management.
Management Decision , 47(4), pp.590 -602.

Heath, D. and Palenchar, D. (2009). Strategic Issues Management: O rganizations
and public policy changes . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Jacques, A. (2009). Blog Council Leaders Discuss the Importance of Social Media in
Corporate Communications. Public Relations Strategist , pp.30 -31.

Jin, Y. and Liu, B. (201 0). The Blog -Mediated Crisis Communication Model:
Recommendations for Responding to Influential External Blogs. Journal of Public
Relations Research , 22(4), pp.429 -455.

Johnson, C. (2009). Social Media in a Crisis: Blog and Tweet Your Way Back to
Success. Public Relations Strategist , pp.23 -24.

Johnson, T. and Kaye, B. (2010). Choosing Is Believing? How Web Gratifications and
Reliance Affect Internet Credibility Among Politically Interested Users. Atlantic
Journal of Communication , 18(1), pp.1 -21.

Lenhart , A., Purcell, K., Smith, A. and Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social Media and Young
Adults . [online] Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Available at:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/02/03/social -media -and-young -adults/ [Accessed 16
Dec. 2016].

Liu, B. , Jin, Y., Briones, R. and Kuch, B. (2012). Managing Turbulence in the
Blogosphere: Evaluating the Blog -Mediated Crisis Communication Model with the
American Red Cross. Journal of Public Relations Research , 24(4), pp.353 -370.

43
Reynolds, B. and W. Seeger, M . (2005). Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication
as an Integrative Model. Journal of Health Communication , 10(1), pp.43 -55.

Schultz, F., Utz, S. and Göritz, A. (2011). Is the medium the message? Perceptions of
and reactions to crisis communication via tw itter, blogs and traditional media. Public
Relations Review , 37(1), pp.20 -27.

Seeger, M. (2006). Best Practices in Crisis Communication: An Expert Panel
Process. Journal of Applied Communication Research , 34(3), pp.232 -244.

Solis, B. (2009). The State of PR, Marketing, and Communications: You are the
Future – Brian Solis . [online] Brian Solis. Available at:
http://www.briansolis.com/2009/06/state -of-pr-marketing -and/ [Accessed 16 Dec.
2016].

Sutton, J., Palen, L. and Shklovski, I. (2008). Backchannels on the Front Lines:
Emergent Uses of Social Media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires. In: 5th
International ISCRAM Conference . pp.1 -9.

Stephens, K. and Malone, P. (2009). If the Organizations Won't Give Us
Information …: The Use of Multiple New Media for Crisis Technical Translation and
Dialogue. Journal of Public Relations Research , 21(2), pp.229 -239.

Statista. (2016). Global social media ranking 2016 | Statistic . [online] Available at:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global -social -network s-ranked -by-number –
of-users/ [Accessed 15 Dec. 2016].

Sturges, D. (1994). Communicating through Crisis: A Strategy for Organizational
Survival. Management Communication Quarterly , 7(3), pp.297 -316.

Veil, S., Buehner, T. and Palenchar, M. (2011). A Work -In-Process Literature Review:
Incorporating Social Media in Risk and Crisis Communication. Journal of
Contingencies and Crisis Management , 19(2), pp.110 -122.

44
Wang, Y. (2016). Brand crisis communication through social media. Corporate
Communications: An Int ernational Journal , 21(1), pp.56 -72.

Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.
Psychological Review , 92(4), pp.548 -573.

Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions . Mahwah, N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Yahoo Finance. (2012). Number of active users at Facebook over the years . [online]
Available at: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/number -active -users -facebook -over-
years -214600186 –finance.html [Accessed 15 Dec. 2016].

45
7. Appendix
7.1. Intervi ew Questions
The following questions were asked from all interviewees. The interviews were
conducted in Finnish; thus, the questions are presented both in English and Finnish.

1. Tilanteet tulevat oletettavasti nopeasti, onko sinulla jotain selkeitä ohje ita
valmiina tilanteen varalle? Muokkaatko ne asiakkaan mukaan?
a. Onko osa ohjeista spesifejä sosiaalista mediaa varten?
b. Millaisia ohjeita?
2. Miten sinun mielestäsi sosiaalinen media on vaikuttanut yritysten
kriisiviestintään? Onko kriisiviestinnän l uonne muuttunut? Näetkö muutoksen
uhkana vai mahdollisuutena?
3. Miten vertailisit eri kanavia kriisiviestinnän näkökulmasta? Erot esimerkiksi
Facebookin, Twitterin, blogien, Instagramin tms . välillä?
4. Miten (jos jotenkin) yritysten pitäisi yhdistää sosi aalista ja perinteistä mediaa
kriisiviestinnässään? Riittääkö vain toisen hallinta nykyään?
5. Vaikuttaako kriisityyppi eri kanavien käyttämiseen (tahallinen/tahaton/muun
tahon aiheuttama)?
6. Suosittujen sosiaalisen median persoonien hyödyntäminen kriisiv iestinnässä
ns. liittolaisena?
7. Epävarmuuden viestintä tilanteen eläessä?

The following part has been translated by the author.

1. As the situations usually arise quickly, do you have some guidelines ready in
case something comes up? Do you customize them for each customer?
a. Are some of the guidelines specifically for social media?
b. What kind of guidelines do you have?
2. How has social media affected corporate crisis communication in your opinion?
Has the nature of crisis communication changed? Do you perceive this change
as a threat or an opportunity?

46
3. How would you compare different social media channels from crisis
communicators perspective? What are the differences between for example
Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and Instagram?
4. How (if in some way) should a com pany combine social and traditional media
in their crisis communication? Is it enough these days to know or use only one
of those two?
5. Does the crisis type (intentional, accidental, victim) affect what channels are
used?
6. Can popular social media persons be used as a so -called ally in a crisis?
7. How should uncertainty be communicated during a crisis?

47