How to Approach Messaging in a Crisis
Sometimes companies go through down cycles in terms of public opinion, valuation, or both. I’m not talking about acute crises like your CEO being caught cheating at a Coldplay concert. I’m talking about cycles of 3–12 months where it feels like a company can’t catch a break — the press is bad, the stock is down, and employees are leaving.
These are the most important adverse moments from a communications perspective. A CEO scandal can often be contained to the individual and transcended. But if a company is facing broad criticism from the press, customers, and partners, its reputation is truly on the line. How it communicates (about the criticism, its value, and the future of the industry) becomes critical.
Here are three guidelines a company and its leadership can follow in those moments.
1. Address good-faith criticism from reputable actors
The default posture of most seasoned executives is to ignore criticism. They believe addressing it will only amplify negative talking points. That makes sense if the criticism is genuinely bad-faith, coming from low-credibility actors, or isolated.
But if the criticism is substantive (even if debatable), coming from credible actors, and gaining traction, you are usually better off addressing it. If you don’t, you’re ceding the narrative to your detractors, and their narrative will win.
How you address the critiques matters.
It’s never a good idea to resort to ad hominem attacks, especially against critics below you in the industry hierarchy. And of course, don’t engage in obvious denial (e.g., claiming a company isn’t a competitor when everyone knows it is). Lastly, don’t offer a laundry list of rebuttals. If your argument is unfocused, people won’t remember it.
Instead, focus on the substance. Engage with the strongest version of the argument. If you can beat it on logic, do so clearly. And most importantly, land on one key counterpoint that both undermines the criticism and reinforces why you’re positioned to win.
A focused, honest, intuitive argument wins.
2. Focus your argument on one overwhelming reason to believe
A common failure of corporate communications is verbosity. Companies ask too much of the public, advancing complicated arguments about why they’re positioned to win.
No one remembers a 10-point argument. You have to simplify it. Give people one overwhelming reason to believe.
Tech insiders now widely praise Google’s Gemini. There was a time when it was mocked as trailing ChatGPT and Claude. To the extent Google had a compelling rebuttal, it was simple: we’re Google; we already have distribution everywhere.
That’s a powerful narrative. It’s simple and undeniable.
Of course, Google still had to improve the product. But from a communications standpoint, that one idea — distribution — could’ve anchored the story.
The same applies in adtech. You will not overcome a negative cycle with disjointed rebuttals or long-winded explanations. Keep it simple. Even your critics should be able to articulate your strongest point.
3. Tell a story about the future
If your argument is limited to your own strengths, few people will care.
The way to emerge from a down cycle stronger is to tell a story about the future of the industry and your role in shaping it.
The narrative competition among AI companies is instructive. OpenAI positions itself as the gold standard for accessible AI. Anthropic leans into a more safety-oriented, socially conscious vision.
Both are credible. They extend beyond the companies themselves and describe different futures. That’s what makes them powerful.
When you’re under pressure, it’s natural to look inward. Resist that impulse. Instead, look outward and forward.
Rise above the fray not by ignoring criticism, but by:
Addressing valid criticism directly
Anchoring your message in one clear strength
Telling a story about the future and your ability to lead it
This is how companies come out of down cycles stronger. And every major company faces that moment.
