The article “Towards a Networked Crisis Communication Theory: Analyzing the effects of social media, media credibility, crisis type and emotions” builds up a new theory of Networked Crisis Communication Theory (NCCT) on the basis of Situational Communication Crisis Theory (SCCT). NCCT continues there where can be seen the shortages and limitations of SCCT.

What are the differences between SCCT and NCCT?

SCCT has minimal focus to the medium. Situational Communication Crisis Theory has not taken account in the emerge of social media. Unlike SCCT, NCCT takes social media and it´s characteristics into account in Crisis Communication. Social media has became an important platform for audience to participate and produce contents. Journalists are no longer the gatekeepers of information because public can share, create, publish and follow each others posts on their own.

Social media posts connects people directly to information source leaving such mediators like journalists in a less important role as they used to. Even though journalists have still a role as a provider of reliable and objective information. The demand for reliablility/credibility and objectivity of news may have diminished when the speed of news is highlighted.

Social media is part of our everyday life and it makes corporate communication actions more transparent and visible without the mediator. Every badly thought and expressed sentence and outburst of emotions can be found in social media for years to come. That is why social media is so volatile for brewing a crisis situation.

According to resent research medium matters more than message. An organization signals by choosing social media as communication channel that it cares about the stakeholders and wants to inform them quickly and directly. I have read somewhere that emerging issues or crisis should be responded to in the same channel than the original messages was sent to.  This is reasonable because so the same audience can see the response and make their own minds about the case.

Crisis communication via social media leads to higher reputation and less secondary crisis reactions (i.e. Negative messages are less shared/forwarded). That is why it is important to take social media into account in Crisis Communication Plans as a one significant channel and make policies for it too. The NCCT can be utilized in creating Crisis Communication Plans – especially the part that talks about social media.

NCCT is a network-centered theory while SCCT focuses on organization itself. Instead of only focusing on the crisis type and effects on reputation, NCCT is also interested in behavioral intentions like purchase intentions and secondary crisis reactions like negative word-of-mouth. It differentiates medium and source. NCC reflects on the interplay of actors, media and content on different levels and in time and space.

SCCT doesn´t take the interplay between PR and media or between media and publics into account. NCCT enlarges the focus to the macro, micro and meso levels. NCCT takes into account different social networks such as networks of social relations and communication networks like world wide web and e-mail and the interplay between organizations, traditional and new media. According to Friedland et al. this network structure of new media “erodes the authority and agenda-setting power of the traditional media” which I already agreed earlier when I wrote about the lessening power of mediators.

In NCCT also the different micro level variables matter. Networked Crisis Communication Theory values cognitive, affective and behavioral variables. In the context of crisis communication, the perceived reputation is a cognitive variable, emotions are affective variables and reactions are behavioral variables.

Different emotions have different behavioral outcome. Crisis responsibility causes negative feelings such as anger and schadenfreude towards the organization. Anger is related to punitiveness, negative purchase intentions and negative word of mouth. Also sadness and fear evokes emotional response into action. Sad human yarns for support and positive thoughts while fearful one needs an opportunity to vent his feelings or avoid the source of fear.

The expressions of these feelings can be harmful to a corporate reputation or even end the relationship between the organization and a member of their audience/stakeholder. The effects does not end only losing a customer or member but in new media the messages spread and the outcome can be more severe. There can be even a buying boycott or massive losses of members (for instance tv program gay night and www.eroakirkosta.fi led many people to separate from church: http://yle.fi/uutiset/homoilta_lahes_kaksinkertaisti_kirkosta_eronneiden_maaran/5300245, http://yle.fi/uutiset/vaki_palailee_seurakuntiin_homoilta-kohun_jalkeen/6547558)

People have a right to their emotions - even negative ones - and that is why it is important to acknoledge the feelings and show some sympathy.