Controlling the Crisis Narrative: J&J 1982 vs United 2017

Taking control of the narrative in a crisis means giving the public a verifiable action and a named responsible party before anyone else defines the story for you. Johnson & Johnson did this in 1982 by recalling about 31 million bottles of Tylenol after seven deaths. United Airlines failed in 2017 by issuing three statements in two days before it apologized without qualification.

What does it mean to control the narrative in a crisis?

Controlling the narrative means that your account of the facts is the one journalists, regulators, and customers quote first. In every crisis, the public and the media discuss the company whether it speaks or not. A company that stays silent or hedges leaves the first account to video footage, social posts, and critics.

Narrative control is not message spin. It rests on two things the audience can check: what the company did, and who said so on the record.

How did Johnson & Johnson control the Tylenol narrative in 1982?

Johnson & Johnson controlled the Tylenol narrative by making the recall the message. In late September 1982, seven people in the Chicago area died after taking Extra-Strength Tylenol capsules laced with cyanide. The company recalled roughly 31 million bottles nationwide at an estimated cost of $100 million, according to EPR's Tylenol case study, even though the tampering happened after the product left its factories.

The public could verify the recall by looking at store shelves. No spokesperson's wording was needed to make the point.

How did United Airlines lose control of its story in 2017?

United Airlines lost control of its story because its first two statements contradicted the video millions had already seen. After a passenger was removed from United Express Flight 3411 in Chicago on April 9, 2017, CEO Oscar Munoz's first statement said he apologized "for having to re-accommodate these customers," as reported by Fortune on April 10.

His second statement, sent to employees, described the passenger as "disruptive and belligerent," according to CNN. Only on April 11 did Munoz say the company took "full responsibility." By then, the company had spent two days defending itself against its own footage. EPR's United Airlines crisis teardown covers the full timeline.

What is the difference between the two responses?

The difference is whether the first public act matched what the audience could already see. The table compares the two cases on the points that decide narrative control.

What should a company do in the first 24 hours of a crisis?

A company should do four things in the first 24 hours of a crisis: confirm the facts it can verify, take one visible action, name one accountable spokesperson, and set a date for the next update. Each step gives journalists something concrete to report.

1. State only what has been confirmed, and say what is still unknown.
2. Take an action that can be seen, such as a recall, a suspension, or an independent review. United's April 11 statement promised a review by April 30, which gave reporters a date to track.
3. Put one named executive on the record, so statements cannot contradict each other.
4. Publish the time of your next update and meet it.

How does narrative control reduce legal and stakeholder risk?

Narrative control reduces risk when statements are accurate and consistent, because inconsistent public statements can be quoted against a company later. Legal counsel should review every statement before release. A statement that is accurate, specific, and limited to confirmed facts protects the company in court and with customers. For the planning side, see EPR's guides to building a crisis communications plan and managing a PR crisis.