Following our blog Thomas Cook – a textbook case of how not to handle a crisis, we wanted to explore how a Comms Team can manage the media when its legal team advises that it stay schtum?
It’s not known why Thomas Cook were so slow to comment when the tragic story of the Shepherd children broke and why it originally refused to offer an apology but usually companies behave in this way because their Legal team has advised them not to say anything.
“If you say something now you’ll make yourself a hostage to fortune, especially with any legal proceedings that we might get involved in,” they will often advise. “And if we apologise we might be seen as accepting liability.” Therefore “No comment,” is all that the Comms team are allowed to say to journalists. It might sound like a safe option since it’s so minimal but in reality it can cause an organisation almost as much reputational – and commercial - damage as saying too much.
It should be said that whether an apology does mean that you accept liability is legally a moot point. Certainly those who take this approach will often find themselves convicted in the court of public opinion. Being forced to pay compensation or even suffering criminal sanctions are both serious for an organisation but bad headlines, damning references turning up on Google searches for years afterwards and a barrage of angry comment on social media platforms only pile on the agony.
In many situations an organisation might escape as far as the law is concerned – but it’ll find its reputation shredded. And a reputation isn’t just a touchy-feely issue. Crises can also have a serious affect on the company’s finances - Thomas Cook’s share price fell by eight per cent last week.
IoD director general Simon Walker said in the group’s in-house magazine; “There is so much our big companies get wrong – often because they are rigid and inflexible, and because they follow the letter rather than spirit of the law,”
So what, if anything, can an organisation do when its legal team advises that it stay schtum?
There are essentially three things that it can say that will not make it a hostage to fortune and should not damage it in any subsequent legal proceedings.
The first is that it can express sympathy. This doesn’t mean an apology, which can, as has been said, imply culpability. It simply means acknowledging a sad state of affairs and a human being’s pain. “We’re sorry to hear that…” or “This is a very upsetting situation...” sounds human and considerate but doesn’t accept responsibility.
The second thing that an organisation can say is that it is carrying out an investigation. Not only is this almost certainly true and completely understandable under the circumstances but it also shows that the organisation regards the situation as serious and is taking some action. It also provides a great escape clause for the Comms team since almost any journalist’s enquiry can honestly be met with the response “We’ll have to wait until the enquiry is completed.”
Third, any organisation can put the event into context, in other words pointing out that such an incident is very unusual. This, of course, has to be done carefully and should include some sympathy. For example, in the case of Thomas Cook it would be no good for the company to say: “We provide holidays for hundreds of thousands of people and the odd death is inevitable,” although to be completely brutally honest it’s probably true.
However, it could say that it doesn’t want holidaymakers to be unduly worried about the safety of its accommodation. “This is a tragic situation and the death of two small children has hugely upset staff and customers - many of whom are parents themselves,” Thomas Cook could have said. “All our thoughts and prayers have been with Mrs Wood and Mr Shepherd ever since the terrible news was announced but it’s important to reassure anyone who is currently on holiday with Thomas Cook or is thinking of booking a holiday with us that this incident is mercifully very rare. X thousand people book with us every year and they have relaxing, enjoyable holidays. We’re working with the authorities and doing everything we can to ensure that nothing like this tragic incident ever happens again.”
The precise wording is something that any Comms team could develop with senior management and their legal colleagues. It doesn’t have to be long and detailed but including at least one or two or these important three messages will do an organisation more good in a crisis than simply saying, “No Comment.”
