We have all seen the shocking stories about Married at First Sight.
The popular reality programme - commonly referred to as MAFS - has been firmly in the spotlight following a BBC Panorama investigation.
It alleged that three female cast members had reported being the victims of sexual assault or rape by their on-screen husbands.
And the story has been covered extensively by other media.
Additionally, the Metropolitan Police has encouraged anyone who believes they have been a victim of sexual assault after taking part in the programme to come forward.
Politicians have said that Channel 4 has “serious questions to answer” and TUI has paused its sponsorship of the popular programme.
The key part of its crisis communication response, and the aspect that gained my attention, was the statement read out by Priya Dogra, Channel 4’s chief executive.
Standing outside the broadcaster’s building, she said: “I’ve seen the accounts of the women presented in the Panorama programme and the distress is obvious.
“I have huge sympathy for them.
“The welfare of our contributors is always of paramount importance.”
She went on to say that she could not comment on the specific allegations but denied BBC claims the channel had failed in its duty of care to contributors.
She added that she had commissioned an external review and said that while it was ongoing, all previous episodes of the programme had been removed from the channel’s platforms.
Now, opinions vary on the merits of reading out a statement to the media rather than answering questions from journalists as a crisis communications strategy. Or just issuing a statement.
Reading the statement, on the face of it, offers more control than facing questions.
But it can also leave spokespeople and their organisation’s brand appearing cold, emotionless and robotic, which was the impression from watching this response.
And it does not create the impression of transparency, authority or care. Or offer any real reassurance.
But the worst part of this example was that little thought appeared to be given to how to handle questions from the media.
Ms Dogra didn’t want to answer them. But there was no clear exit strategy.
So, viewers see the boss initially say that she has said everything she can in the statement and walk away along a long walkway leading to an impressive looking set of lifts
Then, as the journalist asked whether she would like to apologise to the women involved, she stops walking, turns around again and says: “I’ve said everything I can in the statement.”
As she walks away again, the journalist can be heard saying “no apology”.
It is messy and not a good look.
We should say that better effort was made the following day. At a briefing, where questions were taken from journalists, Ms Dogra said: “I have watched the programme, and heard the women's accounts, which are very troubling.
"Their distress is clear, and for that, I am of course deeply sorry."
It is a significant improvement, but when a crisis strikes, you must be able to get your communication right first time.
Well, it is the latest example of broadcasters making the news and effectively reporting on each other.
But while we are again discussing a TV station, the crisis communication lessons are the same for all organisations, no matter how big or small. Or what sector they work in.
Because what is being scrutinised is not just the allegations.
It is how the organisation has dealt with them, the decisions that have been made and the governance and leadership.
We have worked with hundreds of clients to improve their crisis communication and readiness.
And within this blog we have analysed countless crisis comms events over the last ten years.
A crisis can strike any organisation at any time.
And the key to navigating one successfully is preparation.
In Channel 4’s first statement, it said that it had been made aware of the allegations in April.
That is some time before the story broke, and there appears to have been plenty of time to get its crisis communication response together, including ensuring its spokespeople had the skill and confidence to face the media in challenging circumstances.
Yet, you can’t help but feel its crisis communication and decision-making under the spotlight has been flatfooted – a spokesperson initially unwilling to answer questions or apologise. A response lacking compassion.
Responses like this show the value of third-party strategic crisis support that can show not only whether your crisis plans will land but also if they might land badly.
One of the high-profile organisations we recently advised said: “What working with Media First gave us wasn’t just crisis consultancy and media training - it was confidence and clarity long before issues escalated.
“The support felt like a proper adult relationship - practical, calm and grounded in real experience. It strengthened our internal decision-making and helped ensure our communications team were supported by senior leadership, not slowed down by it.”
Watching Channel 4’s initial statement in front of the cameras made me think of the famous Maya Angelou quote: “People will forget what you said. People will forget what you did. But people will never forget how you made them feel.”
Because watching that media appearance would not leave you feeling reassured. I think you would be thinking about how badly the crisis is being handled.
We often come across crisis communication responses where the focus is on procedures rather than people.
It is a familiar failing as organisations want to show they have the right policies and plans in place.
And that appears to have happened with Channel 4.
Instead of focusing on the victims and their ordeals and showing compassion, the emphasis was on procedures being followed correctly.
That leaves it feeling cold.
A crisis with people and a devastating and highly sensitive issue at its heart needs a response that shows emotion and care.
This is a topic we’ve previously covered in our crisis communication blog because it is a significant problem.
The Channel 4 response feels like one that has been heavily influenced by the legal team rather than one that truly considers how the story makes the public think and feel about the channel and the MAFS franchise.
PR and legal departments typically approach crises from different angles, and the result can be a response that resembles a legal defence rather than one that will win in the court of public opinion.
The most memorable example of this was arguably to how Thomas Cook handled the tragic case of two young children killed by fumes from a gas boiler during one of its holidays in Corfu.
Nothing the company could have said or done would have brought the children back.
Under advice from lawyers, the company refused to apologise for the deaths until it was forced to do so - nine years later - by the weight of public anger, after an inquest found it 'breached its duty of care'.
The timeframe for this Channel 4 crisis is completely different. But you can see similarities in its initial response.
Don’t get me wrong, legal advice is imperative. But negative narratives quickly form, travel fast, and stick, especially when they are met with more procedural responses that don’t provide the necessary transparency, reassurance or compassion.
Legal teams advise on legal exposure. Communications teams advise on reputational exposure. Both are, in different ways, assessing risk. The challenge for leaders is to find the strategic position that best protects the organisation and its brand while also recognising the experience of those affected. That means not treating legal and communications advice as competing forces but using both to shape a response that is defensible, human and credible.
We know budgets are tighter.
And organisations are being asked to do more with less.
But external strategic communications advice is not a nice-to-have.
It is essential.
The best crisis responses, the ones where organisations successfully navigate their time in the spotlight, don’t happen during the heat of the crisis. Or the day you learn something has gone badly wrong.
They are the result of effective preparation and planning that takes place well before the worst happens.
Media First are media and communications training specialists with more than 40 years of experience.
We have a team of trainers, each with decades of experience working as journalists, presenters, communications coaches and media trainers.
Find out more about our crisis communication training courses.