Do corporate execs and legal counsel truly understand the role news media plays in establishing the narrative about fault and consequences when a scandal arises? Michael Toebe offers guidance on responding well.
How significant a crisis may become with all stakeholders may have more to do with how it’s interpreted by the media and presented by it than what actually has transpired, according to two different studies.
Those findings are vital to gain an understanding of in regard to ethics, governance, compliance and, when necessary, responsive communications.
“What we find are the traditionally objective characteristics of a scandal, including the evidence of wrongdoing, in isolation, are less influential than the meanings offered by the media. This finding highlights the powerful role that meaning construction plays in determining the allocation of blame and consequences in a scandal.”
— “The Social Construction of Scandal,” Timothy R. Hannigan, Jonathan Bundy, Scott Graffin, James B. Wade, Joseph F. Porac
Translating that statement, objective characteristics of a scandal prove to be less convincing to stakeholders than what the media decides to communicate as the story.
The media decides the angle, and how it frames the story proves highly persuasive in the blame and consequences that likely will…
