Page 172 - Crisis Communication Practical PR Strategies

1
5
3
Judgement Days 153
of the legal system; rules of journalism; rules of corporate decision
making when facing litigation (governance role, for example).
There is a need to articulate key messages in the terms and the
tones that are appropriate for each forum: the language of litiga-
tion doesn’t play well in the media – and judges don’t want to see
their cases ‘tried in the press’.
Finally, each of the forums puts unique constraints on the commu-
nication process – and so has consequences for the effectiveness of
messaging overall.

Case study

Situation summary
A United States-based petroleum company operated a large
refinery in a Midwestern suburban community, and had invested
years in developing trusted relationships with neighbourhood
groups and public safety officials. On a spring day in 1997, an
explosion in a sewer line ignited a massive fire; five employees
were injured, one of them severely enough to later certify him as
permanently and fully disabled. Fire crews from numerous adja-
cent communities were involved in bringing the fire under
control; the subsequent regulatory review cited five safety viola-
tions as a result of the investigation after the incident.
Even as the company worked diligently in the succeeding
months and years to rebuild the trust of neighbours, public offi-
cials and employees about the safety and integrity of its opera-
tions, litigation associated with the injuries to the employees was
making its way through the federal legal system. Because US
labour laws limited the potential for an injured employee to
pursue awards for damages beyond the relevant insurance cov-
erage, the most seriously injured employee encouraged the gov-
ernment to investigate the need for additional safety measures
at the plant. After extensive investigation by the US attorney’s
office, the company was charged with violation of the Clear Air
Act, and with making false statements to state regulators about
the safety of its sewer system.
Prior to initiation of a court trial five years later, which would have
brought back dramatic and emotional coverage about the incident
for the company and the affected employees, the company settled
its legal issues with the US government, the injured employees and
the public safety officials in their community. It paid more than US