Well, it was certainly short-lived.
In fact, it lasted about 48 hours before it was axed.
But in that time, it caused plenty of reputational damage.
Halo was supposed to be a new TikTok channel to engage more young women in sport.
The account was described as Sky Sports’s “lil sis” (yes, really) and launched as a “channel created specifically for female sports fans”.
It said: “We’re about ALL sports and championing female athletes.
“We’re here for the culture, community and connection. We don’t just watch sports – we live it.”
But the channel’s content did not land well.
It included a clip of Manchester City striker Erling Haaland captioned “How the matcha + hot girl walk combo hits”.
And there were lots of pink hearts, as well as pink font.
The response to Halo’s content and look was furious, with many posts including words like ‘sexist’, ‘degrading’, ‘condescending’, and ‘misogynistic’.
And the reaction was quickly picked up by mainstream media, leading to a series of headlines that no brand would want.
Here are a few examples:
There is a huge number of headlines we could have selected from. The coverage has been endless.
So, how did the broadcaster get this so wrong?
A lot has been written about that already by others who are probably better placed to comment.
But after working on our crisis communication training for the past 10 years, I can add more value to how Sky handled the Halo humiliation
Just 48 hours after launch, Sky made an embarrassing U-turn - Halo was no more.
The channel’s content was deleted and replaced with a statement.
It said: “Our intention for Halo was to create a space alongside our existing channel for new, young, female fans.
"We've listened. We didn't get it right. As a result we're stopping all activity on this account.
“We're learning and remain as committed as ever to creating spaces where fans feel included and inspired."
What do you think?
I’m going to start with a negative.
Considering the scale of the backlash, there is a strong argument that an apology should have been included in the response.
I get that the account was set up with good intentions. But it still got it badly wrong.
And if this scenario had come up during our crisis communication training, I would have advised the client to start with ‘We’re sorry’.
Our CARE framework (Compassion, Action, Reassurance and Examples) doesn’t just start with Compassion to create an easy-to-remember acronym.
But it’s not all bad.
I’m a fan of the “We didn’t get it right” line.
It owns the error. It feels honest and genuine. There’s no attempt to try to spin what had gone wrong.
“We’re learning” adds some reassurance that a similar mistake will be avoided in future,
And, crucially, it is decisive.
Taking the account down 48 hours after launch is certainly unceremonious.
I’ve seen some people argue it pulled the plug too early.
But I think Sky realised how big a misstep the account was and that it had to be bold to manage the impact of the crisis.
During our crisis media management training courses, we stress the importance of organisations showing in their responses that they are taking action to resolve the issue that has put them in the spotlight.
Sky’s decisiveness about Halo probably prevented further fallout and yet more reputation damage. Sticking with the channel and trying to make it work from such a bleak starting point would not have had the same impact.
There’s no doubt that Halo’s quick goodbye was an entirely avoidable PR own goal.
But without solid crisis media management, the damage could have been much worse.
Media First are media and communications training specialists with nearly 40 years of experience.
We have a team of trainers, each with decades of experience working as journalists, presenters, communications coaches and media trainers.
Click here to find out more about our crisis communication training courses.