Crisis Communication Strategies in Digital Public Relations: An Analysis Specific to X

Abstract

Purpose – Crisis communication and management, a significant application area of public relations, has become even more critical for organizations, especially with the advent of digitalization. Strategic communication aimed at crisis management with target audiences through online platforms, within the framework of digital public relations, has emerged as one of the key topics of recent times. Therefore, the aim of this research is to explore how the Köfteci Yusuf crisis regarding contamination with pork meat, which has been widely discussed in recent times, was addressed in terms of crisis communication strategies by the relevant organization on its official X platform. Design/methodology/approach – In this study, content analysis technique, one of the qualitative research methods, was used. This research, which examines both the organization and target audience perspectives, utilizes data from six posts shared on Köfteci Yusuf’s X account between 10.10.2024 and 12.10.2024, as well as 1062 comments made by the account’s followers on these posts. The research data were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis technique. Findings – In the research dataset, there are six posts shared by the organization and 1062 comments made by followers on these posts. According to the findings, the crisis communication strategies used by Köfteci Yusuf on its X account to mitigate the pork contamination crisis were identified as "denial", "scapegoating", "attack on the accuser", "excuse", "justification", and "praise". Another finding of the research revealed that comments made by target audiences on posts shared by the organization, within the context of crisis communication strategies, were mostly positive, followed by negative and other categories. Discussion – There are various studies in the field regarding digital public relations and crisis communication strategies. The crisis communication strategies used in other studies show similarities with those identified in this research. However, there are also differences in some areas compared to other studies.