PR News
<span id="hs_cos_wrapper_name" class="hs_cos_wrapper hs_cos_wrapper_meta_field hs_cos_wrapper_type_text" style="" data-hs-cos-general-type="meta_field" data-hs-cos-type="text" >Perspectives: How to rebuild reputation after a crisis</span>

Perspectives: How to rebuild reputation after a crisis

'Perspectives' is a Telum Media submitted article series, where diverse viewpoints spark thought-provoking conversations about the role of PR and communications in today's world. This Perspectives piece was submitted by Nicole Reaney, CEO & Founder of InsideOut Public Relations.

No matter how big or small, no brand is immune to a crisis. In today’s digital era, AI can accelerate the spreading of news to unorthodox 'news sites', creating narratives based on misinformation. The immediate first step in recovering from a crisis is assessing all the facts together with evaluating the situation's impact.

How a company handles the aftermath of a crisis is what truly defines its reputation. Here is how brands can gradually rebuild their reputation:

Acknowledgement of the issue
The worst thing a brand can do after a crisis is to move on like nothing has happened. After taking accountability, whether it's through a media release or social media statement, brands must consciously employ the proper measures in their next steps forward. Consumers appreciate genuine effort, so it's important to take responsibility and address any misunderstandings.

Tip: Avoid vague, defensive or dismissive responses. A sincere acknowledgement builds the foundation for trust restoration.

Apologise with authenticity
A well-crafted apology is powerful, but only if it's genuine. Avoid corporate jargon and excuses - or even sounding like a statement is AI-generated, as consumers would call it out nowadays.

Instead, focus on empathy and a commitment to making things right. A strong apology includes:
  • A clear acknowledgement of the issue
  • Taking responsibility without shifting blame
  • A commitment to corrective action
Take immediate corrective action
Brands must have an effective solution after a crisis, otherwise, their words mean nothing. For example, stricter company guidelines and testing ensure the issue is avoided in the future.

Leadership accountability is also necessary. Companies may issue public statements and conduct internal investigations to demonstrate their commitment to resolving the issue. Additionally, if financial issues were involved, providing compensation such as refunds or other benefits can help rebuild trust.

Taking meaningful action reassures stakeholders that the brand is serious about change and committed to preventing future mistakes.

Communicate transparently and consistently
Consumers want to see progress, not just promises. Regular updates after an issue are needed to ensure that transparency remains at the core of the brand's response. One way to go about this is either to create a dedicated page or media release where ongoing updates are shared, of course in compliance with internal legalities and processes.

Furthermore, public appearances, whether that is hosting Q&A sessions or interviews with leadership, can also be beneficial, as it allows company representatives to address concerns directly. A media-trained spokesperson is key to confidently communicating the proper messages.

Engage and rebuild relationships
Brands should be active after the crisis, acknowledging customers' concerns and responding to feedback. This can be shown via behind-the-scenes efforts to highlight protocols, ethical sourcing or employee training. Another way could be partnering with trusted voices, such as influencers or industry experts who align with the brand's values.

Monitor brand sentiment and adjust strategies
Trust isn't rebuilt overnight. After all actions have been taken, brands should still continuously monitor public response. If certain strategies are not working, they should be adjusted accordingly to better engage both internally and externally.

Remember, rebuilding trust is an ongoing process - not a one-time fix. Companies that remain adaptable and responsive to their audience will be more successful in regaining and maintaining long-term credibility.

Nicole Reaney is the CEO & Founder of InsideOut Public Relations (IOPR), a full-service PR agency with specialist consumer and corporate experience, and comprehensive capability in different sectors. She has over 20 years of experience in corporate and consumer PR and communications, with her career being fast-tracked when she became Colgate-Palmolive's Corporate Affairs Manager and Media Spokesperson for the South Pacific at just 23 years old.

Today, she is a prominent Australian brand and personal reputation commentator, regularly appearing on mainstream TV, newspapers, online and radio. She has been actively involved in the Public Relations Institute of Australia from 2001 to 2014 at both board and council positions, giving her access to a wide range of industry networks.
Previous story

Telum Spotlight on... Lu Jin, Managing Consultant of PRConnect

Next story

Perspectives: Doing the write thing with AI

You might also enjoy

Study
Research

Study Highlight: Beyond ESG: Global perspectives on communicating impact

PROI has released their latest report, "Beyond ESG: Global perspectives on communicating impact". With insights from 11 global communications agencies, the report highlights key trends shaping how ESG and purpose will be communicated in 2026.

Ted Deutsch, Executive Managing Director of RF|Binder and Chair of PROI's ESG Working Group, said: "While certain markets are shying away from acronyms and terms that are seen as overly political, this PROI report confirms that companies are still focused on driving change through sustainability, corporate culture and good governance. The challenge now lies in communicating this with authenticity."

ESG across the regions
ESG maturity differs widely by region. Markets such as Australia, Switzerland, and the Middle East operate in relatively advanced regulatory environments. In Australia especially, Paula Cowan, Managing Director at ImpactInstitute, described ESG as no longer a "nice to have," but rather a licence to operate.

Meanwhile, countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic are experiencing signs of ESG fatigue. As Dirk Aarts, CEO of 24/7 Communication, observed in Poland: "...enthusiasm has cooled. Many businesses now treat ESG chiefly as a regulatory requirement rather than a reputational advantage."

In Thailand, ESG is viewed as central to long-term competitiveness, economic resilience, and access to global markets. Whereas in Ukraine, ESG is shaped by wartime realities and EU integration, with social impact and resilience taking precedence.

Despite their differences, one thing stays consistent: stakeholder expectations are converging. The report highlights how companies are increasingly expected to demonstrate real progress and credible outcomes rather than just showing intent.

Global pressures driving change
It was reported that every region, in one way or another, was being impacted by global forces reshaping their ESG communications. Regulatory alignment stood out as a major driver, particularly around mandates by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), and other international disclosure frameworks.

Trade-related mechanisms, such as the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, have resulted in a push for ESG adoption in export-oriented economies like Thailand. Chelsea King, Head of PR Operations and Editorial Director Midas PR, explained: "This creates direct financial pressure and has spurred Thailand’s domestic carbon tax and mandatory reporting efforts."

Political dynamics also play a significant role, with the U.S. becoming the focal point of ESG politicisation, influencing corporate behaviour across multiple markets. This has contributed to more cautious language globally. For example, in Canada, "...U.S. discourse has influenced Canadian corporate leaders to reconsider how explicitly they use the 'ESG' label," said Kimberly Cohen, CEO of Brown & Cohen.

At the same time, global enforcement action against greenwashing is increasing in Canada, as well as other markets such as Australia, Switzerland, and the UK, reinforcing a shift toward proof-based communication.

Language and framing
The report outlined a clear global trend: the declining use of the acronyms "ESG" and "DEI" in public-facing communications. While these terms remain common in investor, regulatory, and technical contexts, organisations are shifting toward simpler and less politicised language, such as "sustainability," "responsible business," "resilience," and "impact."

Kimberly noted that in Canada, these acronyms are increasingly being broken down into their component parts, whereas in Poland, Dirk explained that the narrative now focuses on health, quality of life, and local community impact - moving away from war language, such as "fighting climate change," toward tangible well-being. This shift doesn't reflect a divergence from ESG principles, but rather as an effort to improve clarity, reduce political risk, and connect more directly with local audiences.

Across several regions, including Canada, the UK, the U.S., Thailand, and the Middle East, an increase in social initiatives continues, but under different labels, such as workforce development, inclusion and belonging, human capital management, and community impact.

Communications challenges
Across all regions, communications leaders are reported to have been facing similar challenges, particularly in balancing ambition with credibility. Stakeholders expect companies to act, but are increasingly rejecting vague or exaggerated claims. Greenwashing, social-washing, and "greenhushing" - deliberately under-communicating progress, which is reported to be rising in Australia - are recurring risks.

Another challenge is internal alignment. ESG data and narratives often sit across multiple functions at an organisation, and when teams are not aligned, messaging can become inconsistent or fragmented, resulting in a lack of trust. In sensitive contexts, such as in Ukraine or politically polarised markets like the U.S. and UK, audiences are sceptical and quick to point out inauthenticity.

Looking ahead
Contributors generally predict that over the next two to three years, ESG communications are expected to become more integrated with financial reporting and core business strategy. Many regions anticipate stricter disclosure requirements, greater use of assurance, and increased focus on governance as the foundation for environmental and social credibility.

Media scrutiny is also intensifying. Investigative reporting on ESG claims is growing, while routine sustainability announcements receive less attention unless backed by data or clear outcomes. At the same time, there is continued demand for accessible explanations, case studies, and stories that demonstrate how ESG efforts deliver tangible benefits to communities, employees, and economies.

Practical guidance for communications professionals
Based on insights across all 11 markets, some common practical guidance include:

  • Lead with evidence: Anchor claims in data, defined methodologies, and disclosures, with assurance.
  • Adapt language and be precise: Localise messaging and ensure clear messaging that resonates with target audiences, while avoiding unnecessary jargon.
  • Show progress over time: Share interim milestones and regular updates to demonstrate momentum and avoid greenwashing or greenhushing.
  • Integrate ESG into the business narrative: Position environmental, social, and governance efforts as part of core strategy and operations, rather than a standalone initiative globally.

Find the full report, including in-depth insights for each region, here.

Study
Research

Study Highlight: Cyber risk is stakeholder risk

Penta’s latest white paper, "Cyber risk is stakeholder risk", explores the growing reputational impact of cybersecurity incidents across industries and stakeholder groups. The analysis leverages Penta’s media intelligence and stakeholder sentiment modelling, covering more than 4.8 million global mentions from January 2024 to August 2025.

Key trends shaping the cyber risk landscape
The study finds that overall stakeholder trust is eroding, reflected in strongly negative sentiment around customer privacy, data security, and incident response across all stakeholder groups - particularly regulators and investors.

Cyber risk is also emerging as a geopolitical concern. State-linked attacks are increasingly viewed as potential national security issues, exposing organisations operating in sensitive sectors to heightened geopolitical risk.

At the same time, reputation recovery is no longer just about containment. The research suggests that a brand’s ability to rebound from a cybersecurity incident is closely tied to the effectiveness of its response, with fast and visible executive action outperforming opaque or delayed communications.

Cyber risk breakdown by industries
  • Retail: The most negative sentiment overall, driven by the direct consumer impact of breaches, sensitive customer data, and operational disruption.
  • Technology: The most visible sector in cybersecurity discourse, where recurring attacks and regulatory fallout continue to erode trust in digital infrastructure.
  • Telecommunications: Among the hardest-hit sectors, affected by repeated attacks and legacy breaches resurfacing on the dark web, raising national security concerns.
  • Financial services: Sustained negative sentiment linked to high-profile breaches, customer data exposure, and significant crypto-related losses.
  • Healthcare: Persistent distrust driven by repeated breaches involving patient and billing data, alongside heightened scrutiny of AI-related data risks.
  • Automotive: Negative sentiment following ransomware attacks that disrupted dealer operations and raised concerns about digital resilience in increasingly connected vehicles.
Overall, the study notes that industries with the most direct consumer interfaces tend to experience the steepest reputational declines following cybersecurity incidents.

Key takeaways for communications and public affairs leaders
  • Cyber risk is board-level risk: It must be managed as a cross-functional priority, not solely as a technical or compliance issue.
  • Integrated response drives resilience: Organisations that align IT, legal, communications, and executive leadership with clear escalation protocols and stakeholder-specific strategies are better positioned to protect trust and reputation.
  • Proactive oversight is essential: Scenario planning, continuous monitoring, and treating incidents as reputational challenges enable faster, more effective responses.
  • Leadership visibility matters: Transparent, decisive, and timely action by executives is the most critical factor in stabilising stakeholder confidence and reinforcing organisational credibility.
Mike
Moves

Mike Lane swaps agency for new in-house role

Mike Lane has started as Associate Director, Corporate Affairs, JAPAC & New Markets at BeOne Medicines. Based in Sydney, he joined the team after a decade at Ogilvy PR ANZ across two separate stints, most recently as Senior Business Director - Pharmaceutical Communications.

A specialist healthcare and pharmaceutical communications professional, Mike has also held roles at AstraZeneca and within Ruder Finn UK’s healthcare team.