A human problem demands a human response
Qantas’ reputation continues to be battered by cyber attack fallout.
In a flurry of media interview when news of the breach hit, I gave the Qantas team props for getting ahead of the initial communication curve.
They proactively announced the breach, set up a dedicated web page and directly contacted those of us caught in the crossfire.
But as the days pass, it feels more and more like it might as well be AI communicating about the next steps in the saga.
CEO Vanessa Hudson has done a couple of hand-picked interviews. But there’s no ongoing human face to the airline’s response.
That’s prompted savage comments like this one on Crikey:
“If Qantas were a person, it’d be that person at the bar who spills your drink, blames the table, and then proceeds to do nothing except make lame excuses and wander off without offering to buy you a fresh one.”
When a brand is beset by a big problem, it’s tempting to hide behind arms-length forms of communication. It can feel like you’re giving the issue less oxygen; the media will have less to latch onto.
But in the process you’re probably doing long-term reputation damage; killing trust between your business and the people most important to your brand’s sustainability.
In a case like Qantas, we don’t just need to be informed – although that’s important. We want to feel acknowledged; that the anxiety caused by this data breach is real and actual people care about what happens to us as a result.
That can only come from consistent, caring communication delivered across media channels by a human.
Give us the facts and – if you must – the carefully-crafted online updates, but balance all that with the empathy that only comes from a person who gets our world.
You can catch some of my interviews on Qantas here:
Channel 7 news: https://vimeo.com/1099061163
Channel 10 news: https://vimeo.com/1099061740
