To the point: crisis communication
It is legitimate for companies to use celebrities as brand ambassadors or advertising media. It is hoped that the image transfer will have a positive effect on the company's own brand.
It is legitimate for companies to use celebrities as brand ambassadors or advertising media. It is hoped that the image transfer will have a positive effect on the company's own brand. But one thing should be clear to every company: With every celebrity, whether he or she is an actor, singer or athlete, something can happen that disturbs the hoped-for positive effect of the celebrity on one's own brand or even turns it into the opposite. The sponsored celebrity can take drugs, dope or misbehave. So there is always a residual risk.
Red Bull has been involved in sponsoring extreme sports events for years. In addition, the brand also relies on extreme athletes as advertising media. It is therefore completely incomprehensible that a company that lives very much from this world of adrenaline junkies and daredevils has not thought out a communication plan for possible crisis communication beforehand. On almost any of these occasions, disaster could strike. But last week's tragic incident, which ended with the death of base jumper Ueli Gegenschatz as he attempted a promotional jump for Red Bull from the Sunrise Towers in Zurich, is unfortunately clear evidence that no such emergency scenario existed. Or - even worse - that such a scenario started from false premises.
Beatrice Tschanz, who has been an expert in crisis communication since the crash of a Swissair plane near Halifax, told the News newspaper: "Anyone who believes that in such a situation they can take a dive and that everything will pass by itself is massively mistaken. (...) The person in charge should have expressed his regret and stood by what happened. But in this case, Red Bull missed the right moment. Now the company is in a defensive posture. Explaining oneself afterwards in a crisis is not an option. You have to stand your ground at the moment."
Red Bull, however, took too long to react to the tragic accident, reacting only late and even then with little sensitivity. An immediate stop to the ongoing advertising campaign would have been the least that could have been done, along with clear words of apology from the top boss. Only when the criticism of Red Bull's communication became stronger and stronger did the company take the liberty of publishing a few personal and appreciative lines about the extreme sportsman who had died in the accident. Even the fact that the family of the injured athlete has come to Red Bull's defense cannot prevent the reputation of the Red Bull brand from suffering greatly as a result of bungling communication.
Pierre C. Meier, Editor-in-Chief
[email protected]
Red Bull has been involved in sponsoring extreme sports events for years. In addition, the brand also relies on extreme athletes as advertising media. It is therefore completely incomprehensible that a company that lives very much from this world of adrenaline junkies and daredevils has not thought out a communication plan for possible crisis communication beforehand. On almost any of these occasions, disaster could strike. But last week's tragic incident, which ended with the death of base jumper Ueli Gegenschatz as he attempted a promotional jump for Red Bull from the Sunrise Towers in Zurich, is unfortunately clear evidence that no such emergency scenario existed. Or - even worse - that such a scenario started from false premises.
Beatrice Tschanz, who has been an expert in crisis communication since the crash of a Swissair plane near Halifax, told the News newspaper: "Anyone who believes that in such a situation they can take a dive and that everything will pass by itself is massively mistaken. (...) The person in charge should have expressed his regret and stood by what happened. But in this case, Red Bull missed the right moment. Now the company is in a defensive posture. Explaining oneself afterwards in a crisis is not an option. You have to stand your ground at the moment."
Red Bull, however, took too long to react to the tragic accident, reacting only late and even then with little sensitivity. An immediate stop to the ongoing advertising campaign would have been the least that could have been done, along with clear words of apology from the top boss. Only when the criticism of Red Bull's communication became stronger and stronger did the company take the liberty of publishing a few personal and appreciative lines about the extreme sportsman who had died in the accident. Even the fact that the family of the injured athlete has come to Red Bull's defense cannot prevent the reputation of the Red Bull brand from suffering greatly as a result of bungling communication.
Pierre C. Meier, Editor-in-Chief
[email protected]
