When Should A Company Apologise Following A PR Scandal?
There is an art to apologising, but successfully admitting fault is one of the most difficult parts of PR in the digital age.
Elton John once sang that the word sorry seemed to be the hardest word, and in situations where the reputation of a company depends on their response to a controversy, it could have major implications for their bottom line if not their very existence.
Choosing your next words carefully is key in the wake of a scandal.
The recent examples of Target, Tesla and Disney highlight the importance of careful words followed by decisive action, as the former lost over £15bn in value as its actions and leaked corporate memos have led to one of the largest consumer boycotts in decades.
With such high stakes, should a company ever apologise and admit fault (and possible liability)? If so, when should they?
No Apologies: Good Or Bad?
Some corporate executives live by a principle of never apologising, which, whilst it may have some psychological benefits, is not necessarily all that effective for quelling a controversy.
There are a few reasons why business leaders believe in never apologising as a rule rather than a considered course of action; besides validation and not having to take the often-difficult course of admitting fault and taking accountability, apologising and admitting fault is seen as a sign of weakness, despite often being the opposite.
With all of that said, you should never apologise for actions that you did not take, as this will only serve to escalate any issues or pressure put upon you.
Monitored silence can be a strategic tactic in PR if a situation has little weight.
Acknowledge First, Apologise Last
An apology should not be your first public statement on a controversy. In fact, it is often the last one you take before you let your actions and any recompense speak for themselves.
If there is an ongoing concern, make a statement that you are investigating to ascertain what is true and what is not. Apologising quickly and insincerely for something you are not sure even merits an apology can be worse than saying nothing at all.
You often cannot say too much in the immediate wake of a PR scandal, but making sure that your customers are aware that you are aware of a problem will not only buy time to prepare a full statement and apology if required, but also help to retain some trust whilst working on a plan to make amends.
The Apology Should Be Proportionate
Marshall McCluhan wrote that the medium is the message, and the place where the controversy originated is where your apology should start.
If the inciting incident was a social media post, then your apology should start there and only escalate to other sources if it is necessary.
Any Apology Should Be Personal And Paired With Action
It likely goes without saying, but an apology you do not mean is worse than useless, as is an apology that is not accompanied by action.
A relatively low-stakes but amusing example of an impersonal apology can be seen with a 2005 press conference following a fight between two Newcastle United players.
Between the insincere delivery of Lee Bowyer and Kieron Dyer’s apology statements, manager Graeme Souness taking a cup of tea mid-statement and then blaming the referee for an unrelated incident, the apology did not convince anyone.
Similarly, an apology should include a statement including steps that have already been taken as well as steps that will be taken to start rebuilding trust, and an apology should not be published until this plan has been arranged.
