Phrasing Crisis Communication: How are Distinct Crisis Response Strategies Put Into Words?

This study employs a quantitative content analysis to investigate how reputation-restoring crisis responses (i.e., denial, diminishment, and apology) from organizations and public figures are verbalized. In addition, this study examines if distinct crisis response strategies are systematically associated with particular language categories (i.e., language abstraction, uncertain language, passive voice, and emotional language). By analyzing 179 audiovisual crisis messages (e.g., press conference broadcasts, television interviews, social media videos), this study shows that denials are generally expressed in the most concrete way (i.e., precise numbers), diminish strategies in the most uncertain way (i.e., hedges), and apologies are the most emotionally charged, primarily referring to the emotions of sadness and shame. These findings highlight the significant role of language in crisis communication and help practitioners in the field to become aware of key linguistic features that could influence the effectiveness of a crisis message.