How did Starbucks resolve the crisis of rumors in just 24 hours?

The highest level of public relations is to go with the flow, analyze the situation, find out the direction of the flow, and give it a push. On the contrary, the stupidest thing to do is to go against the current. If you insist on going against everyone, there is a possibility that you will capsize. This is the advice that I most want to give to all brand owners through this article. Don’t just be envious, jealous and hateful, but see the essence!

There is one thing that is said to have gone viral, which is that " Starbucks coffee is poisonous." An interesting phenomenon is that after the rumors went viral, the situation reversed and netizens, experts and the media all began to support Starbucks and defend its coffee as being non-toxic. Why is this?

April 1st is April Fool's Day . The marketing attempts of some Internet companies have all failed without exception. A big reason for this is that it is Sunday and everyone is out eating, drinking and having fun. No one cares whether the goose farm actually raises penguins or not. But there is one thing that is said to have gone viral, which is that "Starbucks coffee is poisonous." An interesting phenomenon is that after the rumors went viral, the situation reversed and netizens, experts and the media all began to support Starbucks and defend its coffee as being non-toxic. Why is this? Let’s chat about this today.

Let me first briefly explain how rumors spread across the screen.

The earliest news that "Starbucks coffee causes cancer" was released on the afternoon of March 30 (last Friday), by a self-media called "Australian Mirror". When the article was clicked on the evening of the 31st, it had already received over 100,000 clicks. Over the past two days of last weekend, many self-media outlets began to follow up on this matter, and all emphasized that "Starbucks must label its coffee as carcinogenic." On the evening of March 31, news saying "Starbucks is said to cause cancer" appeared on the blog, claiming that coffee causing cancer was the reason why the Los Angeles Superior Court ruled on Starbucks. The title was also changed to "Shocked, coffee causes cancer?! The court has ruled on Starbucks." At around 9 p.m. that day, some Weibo users began discussing whether coffee causes cancer. On April 1 and today, traditional media began to get involved, with many experts discussing the scientific validity of the claim that drinking coffee causes cancer, and included Starbucks’ response.

Let's focus on the self-media article that spread rumors. This article highlights several key points:

1. There is a court ruling. This is a ruling by a US court, requiring Starbucks to put a standard "toxic" warning on the outer packaging of the coffee it sells;
2. Global media attention. Global media were all reporting on the incident, including the Wall Street Journal , Associated Press, Reuters, etc., with many screenshots attached.
3. Coffee is indeed poisonous. Why is Starbucks coffee poisonous? Because of acrylamide! Xinhua News Agency has also reported that this thing can indeed cause cancer.
4. Starbucks is unethical. For its own benefit, Starbucks concealed this fact from the public for 8 years!

The whole article can be described as "well-reasoned and well-founded", especially the title "Starbucks' biggest scandal exposed, global media are flooding the screen! The coffee we drink is actually this kind of stuff...”, very clickable.

Why did this article go viral?

According to the screen-swiping theory of the editor:

First, the material is popular . This is an article with "pictures and facts". Generally, this kind of health-related articles from self-media are difficult to be popular because the chain of evidence is insufficient. However, this article is relatively solid. In compiling external manuscripts, the "information asymmetry" is magnified to the extreme, that is, only the news that is beneficial to itself is selected.

The second is "emotion" . The "biggest scandal" and "hidden for 8 years" made the public think that Starbucks, a seemingly high-end brand, was actually a "swindler". Although the article also mentioned that it was not only Starbucks coffee that caused cancer, emotions once again defeated the truth.

The third is profit-seeking, proximity and superiority . The "profit" here refers to knowledge. Drinking Starbucks has long become a daily necessity for many white-collar workers. Ah, it turns out that Starbucks causes cancer. I must quickly remind my friends around me. The sense of superiority means that many people clearly know that this article conveys wrong information, but they still forward it because they want to correct the problems magnified in the article and remind everyone to drink less coffee.

In response to the rumors, Starbucks launched crisis public relations , and we can see that it took the following two steps:

(1) Report a WeChat account that spreads rumors

This is very critical because it is the source of rumors. The uncle discovered that this article was defined as a rumor on the evening of April 1 (the exact time is unknown) because Ding Xiang Doctor refuted the rumor.

(2) Statement to the media

Starbucks China issued a statement to all media on April 1, and attached a picture of the relevant announcement of the National Coffee Industry Association, as follows:

Starbucks always provides customers with high-quality, safe and reliable food and beverages, and is committed to giving customers a high-quality Starbucks experience.

Regarding the legal action in California, you can refer to the Chinese translation of the relevant announcement of the National Coffee Industry Association below:

National Coffee Association’s announcement on California Proposition 65 (March 29, 2018)

Today, the outcome of this long-running legal battle was announced in California, Proposition 65, which may require all coffee products to have a cancer warning label. The entire coffee industry is currently considering various responses, including further appeals and further legal action.

Putting a cancer warning label on coffee products would be misleading to consumers. Nutrition guidelines issued by the US government point out that coffee is part of a healthy lifestyle. The World Health Organization (WHO) also clearly states that coffee does not cause cancer. Countless academic studies have documented the health benefits of drinking coffee, and coffee drinkers tend to live longer.

William Murray, president and CEO of the National Coffee Association, said: "Coffee has long been proven to be a healthy beverage. This lawsuit has produced a ridiculous result. The 65th decision confuses consumers and does not contribute to the public's understanding of health."

Starbucks' approach is to refrain from expressing its own position, but to rely on statements from industry associations to prove its innocence. This approach is obviously effective and can avoid the suspicion that brands always speak out of their own interests. Of course, this statement also clearly conveys several messages:

1. This is not just a matter for Starbucks, it’s for the entire coffee industry, and the association will file an appeal;
2. Do you have no idea whether coffee is healthy or not? This verdict is a joke!

Based on this strategy, Starbucks did not release this statement on its official WeChat and Weibo. On the contrary, before Starbucks made its statement, many traditional media outlets had already begun to intervene and interviewed relevant experts, all reporting from the perspective of refuting rumors and popularizing common knowledge about coffee drinking. Some netizens even started to make sarcastic comments: "I was shocked to see that Starbucks was poisonous, so I quickly bought a cup to calm myself down!" In addition, some media people stood up and criticized the self-media for their shameless pursuit of traffic , saying that this was the self-media's "dirty business of exchanging anxiety for traffic."

In just 24 hours, Starbucks' crisis was basically resolved.

I guess many people will have the same idea when reading this: The main reason why this crisis PR was so successful is because Starbucks has a good brand! You see, everyone forgave Starbucks very quickly!

Forehead……

I also thought so at first, but after the above investigation, I have changed my mind. Starbucks' brand reputation has undoubtedly played a role in the reversal of this incident. If you are a coffee brand that has repeatedly encountered food safety issues, you certainly won't be able to deal with it as easily as Starbucks this time. However, the editor believes that the key to the success of this crisis public relations is: the popularization and correction of common sense about whether coffee is healthy or not by the public and the media. Once this deadlock is solved, other problems, such as the "knot" at the brand reputation level of "concealed for 8 years", will be automatically solved.

Therefore, the highest level of public relations is to go with the flow, analyze the situation, find out the direction of the flow, and give it a push. On the contrary, the stupidest thing to do is to go against the current. If you insist on going against everyone, there is a possibility that you will capsize. This is the advice the editor most wants to give to all brand owners through this article. Don’t just be envious, jealous and hateful, but see the essence!

Finally, I personally think that it is necessary for Starbucks to formally respond to this matter through its official channels . After all, this is related to food safety issues, and the official needs to give the public a channel to directly see its attitude and situation explanation, rather than just relying on the media.

The author of this article is @万能大叔 and it is compiled and published by (Qinggua Media). Please indicate the author information and source when reprinting!

Product promotion services: APP promotion services, advertising platform, Longyou Games