There’s a difference between a PR crisis and a legal crisis.
When PR crap hits the fan, you get out in front of it, quash rumors, blame those at fault and try to move past it.
However, when legal proceedings are involved, things take a slightly more dramatic turn. A company really can’t open their collective mouth about what’s happening, so as to not impede the impair the investigation. You know the drill: silence is golden.
PR is an art, not a science, and Exhibit A right now is JetBlue.
You know the story: flight attendant allegedly got into a possibly physical altercation with a passenger, showed a potty mouth and dangerously (yet hilariously), stole some beer for the drink cart, and used the inflatable escape slide to de-plane. He was arrested at his residence a short time later (allegedly in the midst of intercourse), and charged with crimes that could add up to seven years in jail. One of them being “criminal mischief,” which, if not illegal, would sound kind of fun.
JetBlue suspended him and has since gone relatively silent. Wherein lies the problem.
Let’s go one-by-one at how they are doing the right things, but the wrong way.
Right Thing: Suspend the Accused Good move! Get him off the schedule while this matter is sorted out.
Wrong Way: Why did they wait until the NEXT DAY to suspend him? Isn’t that something they should have done…I don’t know…immediately? Let’s get this down so everyone understands. If an employee allegedly fights with a customer, curses out hundreds more, steals from you and uses illegal procedures to exit, you do NOT need to wait to suspend them. Got it?
Right Thing: Reimburse the Affected JetBlue is giving everyone on that flight a $100 travel voucher.
Wrong Way: In the statement their spokesman gave to CNN, he said:
“This is consistent with our long standing policies,” spokesman Steve Stampley told CNN. “JetBlue often provides vouchers to our customers when they experience a disruption or otherwise abnormal circumstance. This event falls into that category.”
Wow…way to make this generous “we’re sorry” sound as cold and robotic as possible. How about something like, “This type of service is not representative of JetBlue’s industry-leading standards. We invite everyone who was on that flight to give us another try, using a $100 voucher we are sending to them this week, with no blackout dates or restrictions. Again, we deeply apologize and assure everyone this is not how JetBlue operates.”
See? That wasn’t so hard.
Right Thing: Don’t comment. If a legal investigation is on-going, an agency can not discuss it. Good on JetBlue for keeping everything quiet.
Wrong Way: In a tweet to a CNN reporter asking about the situation, JetBlue responded: “@brookebcnn We will not comment further on ongoing investigations.” I know that inflection is hard to get across in text, but…really?
Try this: “@brookebcnn Since there is a legal investigation, we can’t comment now, but will when we are legally able.” See how that comes off as nicer and warmer? It accomplished the exact same goal, but leaves readers with a better feeling of your brand.
Another example is how they engaged comedian Andy Borowitz, who was needling them online. Don’t give a comedian extra bullets to hit you with. That’s just bad business. Let him make his joke about you and let the 24-hour news cycle wash everything away.
Several days in, how do YOU think JetBlue is handling this from a PR perspective?
[...] right now– Jet Blue is also being looked at for how it’s handling this PR crisis. In a recent blog post, Mike Schaffer lists some of the things that Jet Blue did right in this situation and some that [...]