Crisis Communication DF4 Comments Literature & Language Essay

Comment on these two post as if you were me and put there names back on top so I can identify who is who. 100 WORDS and DO NOT COMPARE THE POSTS:
Leah Batisse
Modern Media and Crisis Response
Social media and the 24-hour, 7-day news cycle is both helpful and harmful to crisis communications. Firstly, social media allows an organization to reach a much broader audience than sticking to traditional media outlets would allow for. Additionally, utilizing social media enables an organization to track the public’s response to the communications and make adjustments to key messaged much more quickly. As well, organizations can speak directly to the audience, thus adding a more human element during a time of crisis. On the flip side, social media can also be a pit of misinformation, false reports and withering criticism. One wrong step in a communication plan can result in a maelstrom of vicious commentary from the public that can be hard for an organization to recover from. It is important that the crisis communicator knows how to use the technology appropriately. As Kevin Kawamoto suggested in Fearn-Banks (2017), “Social media skills are not just technical, but also involve intellectual, ethical, legal, strategic, and other components (p. 74). Social networking sites are necessary for crisis communication in the digital world we live in, but it must also be used with a degree of mindfulness and strategy to be effective.
The 24-hours news cycle too, can be beneficial and harmful. One the one hand, the media spot light can be intense, as media outlets focus on everything that has happened, every message disseminated from the organization in great detail. Discussion panels are common place on many news outlets these days and the pundits can easily influence the opinions of the audience, which may very well be divergent from the communication intention of the organization. However, while the media focus can be intense and issues discussed to death, the media is also easily distracted. In a 24-hour news world, scandals come and go quickly – what was headline news on Monday, is barley mentioned by Wednesday. If a crisis communication plan is not working out as well as hoped, this distraction could be a blessing. However, it also means that the organization has a very brief window to disseminate key messages to the audience.
A good example of how social media and the 24-hour news cycle can both benefit and damage an organization lies with Google. In 2017 a software engineer at Google released a controversial open letter stating that there were more men in the technology field due to biological differences, not gender bias (Wakabayashi, 2018). He also went on to accuse the company of discriminating against white men in favour of over-promoting workplace diversity (Wakabayashi, 2018). The response online was swift, but the discussion was not really about Google. The extension beyond what actually happened, shows that even though Google promptly fired Danmore, the narrative online was no longer about what diversity policies Google had in place, or whether the corporate culture was toxic, or the underrepresentation of women in tech. Rather, the issue became about Danmore – whether he was a misogynist or if he was simply stating ‘accepted’ science (Singal, 2017). With the focus on Danmore, Google itself really escaped any scrutiny – for better or worse. Additionally, the story generally faded from the public consciousness, as new scandals arose.

Margaret Stanton
Modern Media and Crisis Response
Today's 24-hour/7-day news cycle is harmful in terms of crisis communication. A crisis hits the news immediately and if it is even remotely interesting, it will spread like wildfire. It is more important than ever to have a crisis communications plan in place, ready to handle each and every worst-case scenario.
One example of a recent crisis in the news is Lori Loughlin and her involvement in the college admissions scandal. The celebrity has been heavily criticized for her handling of the situation, specifically her nonchalant (arrogant) attitude. An undisclosed informant stated, "While waiting for this to come to some conclusion, she’s trying to keep a somewhat regular schedule—going to yoga and pilates and seeing friends for lunch."
If this was a planned crisis strategy, it backfired. "It hasn't created any sympathy for her... It's actually reinforced everything people think about celebrities, that they have money and don’t have to play by the same rules as everyone else," longtime Hollywood crisis manager Howard Bragman told Elle.com. "If you're possibly going to jail, I think your posture should parallel that," he says. "The optics didn't help, you have to look like it's the worst day of your life. I don’t think there’s sympathy for her."
In hindsight, maybe Lori Loughlin should have played the scandal differently. Maybe she should have apologized or at least shown some remorse or regret. But given how fast the news broke and was plastered all over the headlines, Lori and her husband had to pick an approach and stick with it.