Reducing reputational damage with litigation PR
The relationship between public relations and the judiciary is ambivalent: On the one hand, the right to information applies; on the other hand, independent judgment is demonstrably made more difficult by the sharp increase in media coverage from the courtroom in recent years. Media coverage has massive consequences, not least for the person concerned: defendants are increasingly exposed to violations of their personal rights in the media. Active litigation PR, i.e. communication during legal disputes, is particularly useful for those who have to fear a loss of reputation with personal and economic consequences. After all, while in the courtroom decisions are always made in favor of the defendant, the public is mercilessly suspicious in criminal proceedings, true to the motto: there will be something to it. Yet studies have shown that refusing to give an interview in the public eye is tantamount to an admission of guilt. So how can defendants in criminal proceedings put a stop to the threat of reputational damage?
Five theses on litigation PR in legal disputes
1. Prevention is better than aftercare
After the crisis is before the crisis: that's why prevention and issues management are the be-all and end-all. Online and offline media channels must be constantly monitored in order to identify issues with crisis potential at an early stage. In this way, crises can sometimes be avoided from the outset and countermeasures can be taken at an early stage through targeted communication measures. Ideally, a crisis communication manual should also be drawn up during peaceful times. This anticipates possible scenarios with corresponding measures so that it can be used in the event of a crisis. Contact persons, communication channels, specialized distribution lists, important stakeholders and shareholders as well as key messages and language rules are defined in advance. This saves time in a crisis and frees up resources for those involved in a crisis so that they can respond to the situation with greater calm. In addition, a so-called “dark site” can be prepared: a website with initial information on the situation that can go online quickly in the event of a crisis. It is also helpful to establish and maintain media contacts and allies who can be approached in crisis communication while the situation is still calm.
2. Collect facts, set goals, proceed strategically
A strategic approach is necessary in the event of a critical media response to a crisis. First of all, all available facts about the situation should be compiled and recorded in writing. This also includes gaining a comprehensive overview of previous media coverage: What media inquiries have been received and what has already been reported online and offline, by whom and in what tone? Those affected should also develop a strategy under time pressure, anticipate possible scenarios with targeted measures, positions, key messages and language rules, prepare fact sheets on specific specialist topics and clearly define responsibilities, such as the spokesperson function. The target groups must also be analyzed: Who should be reached with the messages and what is the appropriate form of address? The objective of all measures is clear: to avert reputational damage and protect and, if necessary, rebuild the company's image. In addition, the measures should support the legal objectives, create trust and convey knowledge of the facts.
Possible instruments of litigation PR are:
- A well-placed exclusive interview
- Confidential background discussions with media representatives
- Press conferences
- A website set up specifically for the crisis issue
- Press releases
- Social media posts in written form or as a video message, accompanied by carefully selected photos and graphics
- Employee mailings and intranet posts for internal communication
3. Crisis communication rules when dealing with the media
Litigation PR enables affected parties to direct the focus of public reporting by setting specific topics. This can also put topics on the media agenda that can minimize long-term reputational damage. It is advisable to deal with the crisis immediately and maintain trusting relationships between all stakeholders. This requires convincingly prepared arguments and reliable contacts with the relevant multipliers. Communicators should always consider the target group they are addressing: For example, press material does not have to contain all the legal facts and may also provide exaggerated, albeit always legally robust, statements. Comprehensible wording should be chosen that matches the reporting and tone of the respective medium.
When reporting on suspicions, journalists are obliged to carry out careful research: There must first be a minimum amount of reliable evidence, reporting must not be one-sided and the statement of the person concerned must be obtained before publishing a suspicion. In the case of media inquiries, it is advisable to always request questions in writing and to answer them promptly in writing within one or a few days, as the media have an interest in short-term reporting. Only in written form are the statements reliable. In any case, it makes sense to accept media inquiries and respond to them as soon as possible, as this is the only way for the affected party to be prepared in advance for the media storm and its specific content and to be able to consider its own measures at an early stage. In addition, the obligation of the media to include statements from the affected parties in the suspicious activity report does not apply if any comment is rejected as a matter of principle. This means that those affected lose the opportunity to turn the media tide in their favor from the outset.
It is not advisable for those personally affected to make statements in front of the camera: A spokesperson can be used here, who should have the questions presented in advance and then briefly respond to them in sentences that can be quoted in isolation. When preparing the content of the communication measures, those affected must be aware that their legally correct arguments may be met with a strong headwind in public discourse: the target groups' sense of morality and justice should therefore always be taken into account in crisis communication.
Further rules for dealing with the media in a crisis:
- Those who don't speak are spoken about.
- Journalists should always feel that they are taken seriously: Interpersonally, the tone makes the music.
- Editorial processes, such as daily editorial conferences or editorial deadlines, should be taken into account when planning communication measures.
- Targeted untruths always come to light.
- Freedom of the press is a valuable asset that journalists want to be treated with respect.
4. Evaluation, follow-up and adjustment of the litigation PR strategy
Constant media monitoring is central to strategic litigation PR: all channels must be kept under constant review in order to make timely adjustments to the strategy and, where necessary, to focus on specific topics. If misrepresentations are identified in the media, this can have a major impact on those directly affected by the legal dispute. The task of litigation PR is then to present journalists with a factual correction, if possible without the threat of legal consequences. Online editorial teams in particular have the opportunity to ensure a correct presentation at short notice. Once the crisis has been overcome, it's time to follow up: the lessons learned must be documented and integrated into the crisis manual. In the aftermath of the crisis, it is also determined to what extent targeted measures need to be initiated to repair the reputational damage caused.
5. Plea for a synthesis of communication and legal science in litigation PR
The public discourse on legal communication and litigation PR is dominated by fully qualified lawyers. However, the practice of public relations for various industries shows that mixed communication teams made up of experts in the respective field on the one hand and communication scientists on the other hand can plan, carry out and evaluate more effective reputation management campaigns together.
As in most areas, it makes sense in legal communication to bring together the strengths of different people and specialist areas and to cumulate them in the spirit of effective reputation management in a crisis. The task of lawyers in litigation PR can be to contribute the urgently needed legal aspects of the communication strategy: for example, to check the correct content of legal facts, to control the implementation of legally secure communication measures or to initiate any media law steps.
The task of communication scientists, on the other hand, lies in the content design of the core messages and strategic action planning as well as in the creation and placement of communication material that meets the requirements of media representatives and specific media channels. All steps are always carried out in close communication between the two disciplines.
Conclusion
Litigation PR is a relatively new communications discipline. With the increasing media coverage of courtrooms that has been observed in recent years, it is experiencing increasing demand. It is still at the beginning of an interdisciplinary debate about effective strategic communications campaigns. Its contribution to defendants threatened by reputational loss is already vital.