Effective crisis communication: Social media versus traditional media

A fellow communication science student, Tyler Pilgrim, recently wrote an interesting blog post: ‘Twitter can be a lifesaver if used correctly’. This blog explains the power of Twitter during times of crisis, such as natural disasters. But maybe even more interesting, at least for PR professionals, is the power of Twitter, or more general social media, for organizations in times of crisis.

In the past decade, the development of information and communication technologies has turned our world, and the world of PR practitioners, upside down. Especially the rise of social media has changed the flow of information, which also affected crisis communication (Sung & Hwang, 2014). This blog describes how PR practitioners should use social media in times of crisis in order to improve the effectiveness of crisis communication, but also why they should not forget the traditional media.

  

The importance of social media

The first, and maybe most important, thing that PR practitioners need to do, is constantly monitor what is happening online in order to recognize possible crisis signals as early as possible. Subsequently, a quick response is essential because the dissemination of information on social media is faster than the speed of light, and than traditional media (Sung & Hwang, 2014). Public frames regarding a crisis, that are built on social media, play an important role in defining a crisis and, subsequently, affect the evolution and impact of that crisis (Van der Meer, 2016). Even though those online frames may not always be accurate; they can have far-reaching consequences, making a quick response crucial. If interested, an example of how far these consequences can reach, read a previous blog of mine.

 The importance of traditional media

Despite the fact that social media gained significant importance for crisis communication, traditional media should not be forgotten.  A study of Sung and Hwang (2014) showed that social media mainly play a role in the initial stage of a crisis. However, once reports regarding a crisis appear in the traditional news media, these are more important than social media and ‘set the agenda’. The traditional news media are still powerful agenda-setters and opinion leaders (Sung & Hwang, 2014).

PR practitioners should take into account that traditional media are considered to be more credible information sources than social media are, at least in times of a crisis. Traditional media are (still) proven to be more effective crisis communication tools than social media (Eriksson, 2018).

So, for all PR practitioners: use social media to scan and monitor what is happening online in order to recognize crisis signals as early as possible, but don’t neglect traditional media in the crisis response. Regarding the crisis response and crisis communication, social media should be used as a complement to the traditional media, since the public perceives traditional media as more credible and as the preferred source of information during a crisis (Eriksson, 2018; Van der Meer, 2016).

About the author:

Kim van Loon is a Corporate Communication master’s student at the University of Amsterdam. She works at her own company ‘Van Loon Communicatie’ as a Dutch linguistic, corrector and translator. Topics of interest are: Dutch language, PR, crisis communication. 

Academic sources for this article:

Eriksson, M. (2018). Lessons for Crisis Communication on Social Media: A Systematic Review of What Research Tells the Practice. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 1-26.

Sung, M., & Hwang, J. S. (2014). Who drives a crisis? The diffusion of an issue through social networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 246-257.

Van der Meer, T. G. (2016). Public frame building: the role of source usage in times of crisis. Communication Research, 45(6), 956-981.