Is your crisis strategy one meme away from disaster?

Natalee Gibson:

There was a time when crisis communications followed a relatively predictable structure. A company gathered the facts, aligned with legal counsel, prepared a statement, and delivered a carefully controlled response through traditional media channels. The timeline could stretch across days, sometimes longer. But that world no longer exists.

Today, a reputational issue can become a global conversation within minutes. Audiences react before facts are confirmed and memes spread faster than official statements. A single clip or screenshot can redefine a narrative before a company has even assembled its first internal meeting.

Alongside the speed of communication, what’s changed most is the expectation that brands behave like people in public. Consumers expect companies to have personalities and perspectives. On top of that, silence is often interpreted as indifference and overly polished corporate language can feel evasive. Audiences also want to see leadership react in real time, particularly when conversations are unfolding publicly across social platforms. In fact, nearly three-quarters of consumers now expect brands to respond on social media within 24 hours.

That creates a very different communications environment than the one most organizations are comfortable navigating.

Harmless fun, until it’s not

Let’s look at the recent “Great KitKat Heist.” Twelve tons of KitKat bars were stolen while being transported between Italy and Poland, and what began as a legitimate supply chain issue quickly became internet entertainment.

Brands piled into the conversation almost immediately. Del Taco joked about its innocence. Outback Steakhouse created a fake “Bloomin’ KitKat.” Even airports joined in on the jokes.  In this case, the internet largely treated the story as harmless fun. Nestlé leaned into the moment without escalating it further, and the memes generated positive engagement across platforms.

However, the outcome could easily have gone another direction. Had the stolen vehicle later been connected to a more serious crime, those same jokes may have appeared tone deaf. Brands participating in the trend would have faced questions about timing and opportunism. That’s the reality of modern crisis communications.

Humor itself is not necessarily the issue. In many cases, quick-wittedness can humanize organizations and diffuse tension effectively. The challenge is that internet culture moves faster than risk assessment processes inside most companies. Recent crises, including the Marks & Spencer cyberattack, demonstrate how quickly online speculation and commentary can begin shaping public perception before verified information is fully available.

Communications teams are now expected to evaluate tone, cultural context, sentiment, timing, and potential escalation simultaneously. They must do it while understanding that audiences often bring very different perspectives to the same event.

That complexity is why diversity of perspective inside communications teams matters far more than many organizations realize. People from different backgrounds and generations can identify reputational risks others miss entirely. I believe some of the most important crisis conversations happen when someone in the room says, “I don’t think audiences will interpret this the way we expect.”

The challenge is that even when organizations get the response right, they don’t start with a blank slate. Every statement, social post, and leadership appearance is being filtered through perceptions that already exist. By the time a crisis emerges, audiences have usually made up their minds about whether a company deserves the benefit of the doubt.

You can’t build trust during a crisis

Ultimately, if audiences trust an organization, they are more likely to view a response as transparent and human. If trust is already weak, the exact same statement may be interpreted as defensive or opportunistic.

Trust is built through consistency. Over time, audiences learn what a company stands for, how its leaders communicate, and whether words are backed up by actions. Internally, organizations become faster and more confident because responsibilities are clear and decision-making processes have already been established.

The same principle applies to monitoring, which requires far more than tracking media coverage. Organizations need to understand how conversations are evolving across social platforms, online communities, and industry circles before a narrative hardens into accepted truth.

Most crises do not arrive with a warning label. Sometimes they begin with a product issue. Sometimes they start with a screenshot, a rumor, or a moment captured on video. Indeed, sometimes they arrive as a meme.

Audiences are already forming opinions long before that moment arrives. They are paying attention to how companies communicate, how executives show up, and whether words match actions. If and when it hits the fan, that history comes with you.

+++

Natalee Gibson is CEO at Songue PR