When a crisis has already gone viral: how to respond when your organisation is at the heart of a social media storm
In a world where information seemingly goes viral in a matter of minutes, a sensationalised, or altogether fictitious, narrative can quickly outpace the truth. The recent death of a man after he entered the tiger enclosure at Yorkshire Wildlife Park illustrates this challenge starkly: national media reported the incident as it unfolded, witness footage rapidly began circulating online and speculation spiralled, all while the authorities and the Park were still establishing the facts.
Navigating a crisis while social media speculation runs wild is one of the most difficult communications environments an organisation can find itself in. Knowing what to say when stakeholders are putting rumours to you before you have even begun to establish the facts, let alone fulfil your crisis response protocol, can be incredibly challenging. Responding in a timely fashion matters, but so too do accuracy and diligence. Balancing these responsibilities in the midst of a social media storm is not easy, but it is essential if your organisation is to maintain stakeholder confidence and trust.
Keep the people most affected at the heart of the response
A viral crisis can create pressure to respond at pace. Even if those on social media are making the most noise, they are rarely the most important stakeholder. Those that are most directly affected must guide your crisis response and communications. In the case of the incident at Yorkshire Wildlife Park, it was vital that the Park recognised the fact that the family of the man who died may not yet have been informed of the incident, even though videos of the incident had been uploaded to social media. Compassion, as well as your internal protocol and the guidance of the authorities, must guide your crisis response, even if this means simply acknowledging the fact that you are unable to comment for the time being.
Be transparent without creating hostages to fortune
Transparency does not mean publishing everything you know about the crisis; it means being clear about what is appropriate to share and acknowledging the limitations on what you are able to communicate.
In particular, where you are unable to communicate core information, potentially due to legal restrictions or out of respect for impacted relatives and friends, it is important you do not mistakenly create hostages to fortune. Phrases such as “we will update you over the coming days” can seem reassuring in the moment but can quickly complicate the situation at hand if they lead to stakeholder demands for information that you are not able to fulfil.
Know when to speak – and when not to fan the flames
Not every hostile or speculative post requires an answer. If an online conversation is confined to a small corner of the internet, direct engagement may simply extend its reach or legitimise its content. There should be a very high threshold for engaging with social media speculation as fanning the flames of the online rumour mill could prove upsetting to those impacted by them, drag your organisation into an unnecessary online debate and complicate ongoing internal and legal processes.
That threshold still applies when the attention comes from the very top. Three days after the incident at Yorkshire Wildlife Park, US President Donald Trump shared footage of the attack with his followers on Truth Social. No organisation can control amplification on that scale. The Park’s job is to keep its focus on the family, its staff and the investigation, and stay out of a debate that helps none of them.
Frequently asked questions
Who should I prioritise in crisis communications?
The core stakeholders are always those that are most directly or most personally affected by a crisis, such as the loved ones of anyone who was injured. Prioritising them in all your communications, even if they are not the direct recipients, will ensure you maintain an appropriately sensitive and compassionate approach throughout.
What is the biggest reputational threat in a media crisis?
It is often not the original incident but the perception that the organisation is not responding to the crisis appropriately that causes the biggest reputational issues. A response that is considerate, clear and candid can preserve trust even if difficult questions remain unanswered.
How do I balance transparency with privacy?
Be transparent about the limits on what you can say. Acknowledging that an incident is subject to an ongoing investigation or that you are simply not in a position to provide further information at this stage can alleviate pressure on your organisation to disclose core facts and prevent you from creating hostages to fortune.
At Alder, we help organisations prepare for, manage and recover from reputational crises, including those that go viral before the facts are known. To arrange a discreet, no-obligation conversation about your organisation’s preparedness, call us on 020 7692 5675 or email [email protected].
