Level of crisis responsibility and crisis response strategies of the media

Purpose - This paper aims to identify how the news media cover organizational crisis responsibility and crisis response strategies and, if at all, how they differ by crisis types. Design/methodology/approach - The approach takes the form of a content analysis of level of responsibility major crisis events during 2006 in three newspapers. Findings - Significant differences were found between preventable crises and accidental crises: most preventable crises news coverage focused more on the individual level of responsibility, while accidental crises news used the organizational level of responsibility. The significant differences of organizational response strategies indicated that preventable crises news coverage frequently reported denial strategies, while accidental crisis news covered deal with strategies more. Research limitations/implications - The study is limited to the samples of the three newspapers and the period 2006. Practical implications - This study suggests that crisis managers should always check the crisis news coverage, and media bias and orientation, and try to have good relations with the media to deliver the right message to the public during a crisis. Originality/value - Despite the importance of the media's role in the public's perception of crisis responsibility, there is a lack of systematic analysis of level of crisis responsibility.