Media Training: How to Prepare Your Spokesperson for a Hostile Interview in the Middle of a Crisis
It's 6:40 p.m. on a Tuesday. Since midday, the company has been at the center of a story nobody saw coming: a product batch recall, a workplace accident, a data leak, a former employee's complaint that has gone viral. The statement is already out and the communications line hasn't stopped ringing. Then comes the call every communications director dreads: a live TV show wants someone from the company on air at 9:00 p.m. "If nobody comes, we'll say the company declined to explain itself."
At that point, it's no longer about what the protocol says or what's in the statement. It's about one specific person, sitting under the lights, facing a journalist who has crafted the questions to get a sound bite that will lead the next day's news. An eight-minute interview can stabilize a crisis or make it ten times worse. And the difference, almost always, lies not in what the company did or failed to do, but in how prepared that spokesperson is.
This article isn't about how to build a crisis communication protocol; we cover that in detail in our guide to crisis communication protocols. It's about the person and the moment: how to choose who faces the press, how to train them for a hostile interview and what to do when, despite everything, something goes wrong.
1. Why a single interview can decide the course of a crisis
In a reputational crisis, the official statement is a text: it's written calmly, reviewed with legal and published when it's ready. The interview is the exact opposite. It's real-time improvisation, under pressure, with someone on the other side whose legitimate job is to find the crack in the company's story. And it's also the only moment when the audience sees a flesh-and-blood person answering for what happened.
That's why the interview carries disproportionate power. A flawless statement can be completely undone by a spokesperson who gets defensive, smiles at the wrong moment or utters the sentence nobody on the crisis committee would ever have approved. And the reverse is also true: a calm, empathetic and well-prepared spokesperson can humanize an organization that, on paper, had everything against it.
You don't win the interview: you avoid losing it
In the middle of a crisis, the realistic goal of a hostile interview isn't to "convince" the journalist or "win" the debate. It's to get the key messages across, show responsibility and empathy, and walk away without having created a new headline. If, the next day, the story is still the same as it was before the interview, and not "what the spokesperson said," the interview has done its job.
This ties into something we repeat in every crisis we manage: media coverage takes on a life of its own, and the first hours set the frame for everything that follows. If you want to understand how the press behaves in that opening stretch, we explain it in our article on reputational crises in the media. Here we get down to specifics: preparing the person who sits in front of the microphone.
2. Choosing the right spokesperson (and why it isn't always the CEO)
The instinctive reaction of many organizations is to assume that, if the crisis is serious, the top executive should speak. Sometimes that's right. But putting the CEO in the first hostile interview when it isn't necessary comes at a cost: it burns the company's last reserve of authority, exposes the CEO personally to wear and tear that can last for years and turns the company's crisis into a personal one. The chief executive's reputation is an asset in its own right and should be protected as seriously as the brand's; we cover this in depth in our guide to CEO and executive reputation.
The right question isn't "who's most senior?" but "who is the most credible person for this type of crisis, at this moment, with this audience?"
| Type of crisis | Best-suited spokesperson | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Victims, personal injury or deaths | CEO or top executive | The severity demands that the person with ultimate authority face the public; delegating is read as disrespect toward those affected |
| Technical or operational incident (product failure, cyberattack, outage) | Chief technology, operations or security officer | Brings expert credibility and can explain the "what" and the "how" with a precision a CEO doesn't have |
| Labor dispute or internal complaint | Head of people or HR director | Knows the processes and can talk about concrete measures without making the conflict about senior leadership |
| Local crisis at a plant, store or branch | Local manager | Geographic proximity and knowledge of the ground build more trust than an executive from headquarters |
| Crisis involving the CEO personally | Board chair, independent director or communications director | The person involved can't explain their own situation without every word sounding like self-defense |
2.1. The qualities that matter more than the title
Composure under pressure
Some brilliant executives freeze up or get irritated by an aggressive question. The ability to stay calm is worth more than any title on a business card.
Plain language
The ideal spokesperson explains complex things in simple words. Someone who can only speak in the company's internal jargon comes across as distant and opaque.
Credible empathy
Saying "we deeply regret" isn't enough. People have to sense that the person means it. Fake empathy is spotted instantly and is worse than none at all.
Real command of the facts
A spokesperson who doesn't know the issue inside out will end up speculating or contradicting themselves. They need to sit on the crisis committee, not get a summary ten minutes before going on air.
Always have a trained backup spokesperson
Crises don't respect schedules: the lead spokesperson may be traveling, sick or simply exhausted after eighteen hours of crisis management. Designate and train at least one backup to the same level, and decide in advance which topics each one covers. And set a strict rule: nobody else in the organization talks to the press during the crisis, however well-intentioned.
3. Key messages: the backbone of the interview
A spokesperson who walks into an interview without defined key messages is at the journalist's mercy: they'll answer everything they're asked, in the order they're asked, and when it's over they won't have said what the company needed to say. Key messages are the two or three ideas that, whatever happens in the interview, the audience must take home.
The practical rule is blunt: three messages at most. More than three get diluted, the spokesperson can't remember them under pressure and the audience retains none of them. In a crisis, they almost always fit a very recognizable pattern:
- Acknowledgment and empathy
What happened is serious and we care about the people affected. This always comes first, because until the audience senses that the company understands how serious it is, they won't listen to anything else. - Concrete action
What we're already doing: measures taken, resources deployed, timelines. Verifiable facts, not vague intentions. - Commitment to the future
What we're going to change so it doesn't happen again, and how we'll report on progress. This is the message that lets you close the interview looking ahead.
3.1. How to turn a message into something you can actually say
A key message written in an internal document ("The company remains firmly committed to the highest quality standards") is useless in an interview. It has to be translated into something one person would say to another, backed by concrete proof and, ideally, by an example or a figure people will remember.
The MPE formula: Message, Proof, Example
Each key message is prepared in three layers. Message: "We've pulled all the affected product." Proof: "Since eight o'clock this morning, one hundred percent of the batch has been off store shelves." Example: "More than two hundred people on our team worked through the night checking every point of sale, one by one." The proof provides credibility; the example makes the message human and memorable.
The interview's key messages must line up precisely with the official statement and with what's said on social media and to employees. Any contradiction between the spokesperson and the published text immediately becomes a second story. If the company's strategy includes a formal apology, the spokesperson must know its exact wording and scope in advance; in our article on how to apologize in a corporate crisis we explain how to build one that's neither inadequate nor legally reckless.
4. The bridging technique, without sounding evasive
The journalist is under no obligation to ask about your key messages. In fact, in a hostile interview, most questions will be designed to pull you away from them: speculation, personal responsibility, comparisons with other cases, rumors. Bridging is the tool that lets you answer the question and then steer your answer toward your key messages.
The key lies in the first words of that definition: answer the question. The most common mistake of poorly trained spokespeople is using the bridge to avoid answering, jumping straight to their message. The result is the opposite of what they want: it sounds evasive, the journalist repeats the question (or worse, points it out on air) and the spokesperson looks like someone hiding something.
The right structure for a bridge: A + B + C
A — Acknowledge: answer what was asked briefly and honestly, even if it's to say something isn't known yet. B — Bridge: a natural transition sentence. C — Communicate: take the answer to one of your key messages. Example: "No, we don't know the exact cause yet (A). What I can tell you is that (B) we've commissioned an independent investigation and we'll make its findings public (C)."
4.1. Bridging phrases that work (and when to use them)
| Bridging phrase | When it works best |
|---|---|
| "What I can confirm is…" | When the question asks for information that hasn't been verified yet |
| "I understand the concern, and that's why the first thing we did was…" | With emotionally charged or accusatory questions |
| "The most important thing right now for the families affected is…" | When the journalist tries to steer toward blame or internal controversy |
| "That's a fair question; let me explain what has changed since then…" | With questions about past mistakes or track record |
| "I'm not going to speculate on that, but I'll tell you what we know for certain…" | With hypotheticals, scenarios or "what if…?" questions |
The limit of bridging: you can't use it twice in a row on the same question
If the journalist repeats the question, it's a sign the first answer wasn't enough. Pushing another bridge is the fastest way to look evasive on live TV. On the second pass, give more substance to part A: expand on what you know, explain why you can't say more (a court investigation, protecting the privacy of those affected, unverified information) and commit to sharing more as soon as possible.
5. The 20 toughest questions you need to rehearse
No hostile interview should contain a question the spokesperson is hearing for the first time. That's achievable because, however much the facts change from one crisis to another, tough questions follow highly repetitive patterns. The exercise is to write down, for each specific crisis, the twenty questions you fear most and prepare an answer to each one.
This is the base list we use as a starting point in our sessions. Adapt it to the facts of your case:
Responsibility
1. Who is responsible for what happened? 2. Is anyone going to resign? 3. Do you personally accept the blame? 4. Will people be fired over this? 5. Why should we believe you now?
Prior knowledge
6. How long have you known? 7. Why did it take you so long to say anything? 8. Were there earlier warnings you ignored? 9. Is this the first time something like this has happened?
Money and priorities
10. Did you cut back on safety or quality to save money? 11. How much is this going to cost you? 12. Are you going to compensate those affected? 13. Do you care more about profits than people?
Speculation and traps
14. Can you guarantee this won't happen again? 15. Are there more cases we don't know about? 16. A former employee says this was common practice. Are they lying? 17. What do you think about what your competitor / the minister / the victims' association has said?
Personal and emotional
18. What would you say to the victim's family if they were sitting here? 19. Would you sleep soundly if your child used this product? 20. Are you ashamed?
Notice that some of these questions can't be "won." There's no perfect answer to "Are you ashamed?" What does exist is a human, brief, non-arrogant answer that avoids the headline. And that answer only comes out naturally if it's been rehearsed out loud beforehand, not improvised under the lights.
"In almost every crisis interview that went badly, the spokesperson told me the same thing afterward: 'I didn't see that question coming.' The question was almost never unpredictable. It's just that nobody had dared to ask it out loud during preparation."
6. A worked example: trap questions and model answers
To bring all of this down to earth, let's look at an illustrative case. A food company has recalled a batch of a children's product after detecting possible contamination. Several children have been treated in the ER with mild symptoms, none serious. The cause is still under investigation. Its quality director is going to be interviewed on a radio talk show by a journalist known for an incisive style.
The three key messages prepared
1. The children and their families come first: we're in touch with every one of them and we're covering any related expenses. 2. We pulled the entire batch as soon as we had the first sign of a problem, before it was confirmed. 3. We've commissioned an external audit and we'll publish its findings, whatever they are.
| Trap question | Answer that creates a headline (avoid) | Model answer |
|---|---|---|
| "Can you guarantee parents that the rest of your products are safe?" | "Yes, I guarantee it one hundred percent." (If another case turns up, that sentence becomes the headline) | "I understand that's what any parent wants to hear. What I can tell you is that we've stepped up testing on all our lines and that, as a precaution, only the affected batch has been taken off the market. If we detected any other problem, we'd announce it immediately." |
| "Isn't it true that you cut back on quality controls last year?" | "That's completely false, it's a lie someone is spreading." (Repeats the accusation and sounds like an attack) | "No, we haven't reduced our controls. But I understand the question, and that's exactly why the external audit will also review our processes over the last few years. Its findings will be made public." |
| "So whose fault is it? The supplier's?" | "Everything points to the problem coming from an outside supplier." (Speculation and shifting blame) | "We don't know yet and I'm not going to speculate. The product carries our brand, so the responsibility to these families is ours. When the investigation is complete, we'll explain what went wrong and where." |
| "A worker at your plant says on social media that this was bound to happen. Is he lying?" | "I'm not going to comment on what a disgruntled employee says." (Dismisses a person and opens a new front) | "I haven't seen that post, but any information that helps us understand what happened is welcome, and we'll pass it on to the audit team. Our plant team is the first that wants to know what happened." |
| "If it were your child, would you give them this product tomorrow?" | "Of course, without hesitation." (Sounds flippant with children in the ER) | "I'm a mother and I completely understand that question. That's why we pulled the batch without waiting for confirmation. Today, what matters to me is that those children recover and that their families get all the answers." |
Notice the pattern across all the model answers: they acknowledge the concern behind the question, answer without lying or promising what can't be guaranteed, never repeat the journalist's negative word verbatim ("lie," "cutbacks," "fault") and finish by connecting to one of the three key messages. None runs longer than twenty or twenty-five seconds when spoken.
Never repeat the accusation when denying it
"We haven't hidden anything" or "we're not irresponsible" turns the very word you wanted to avoid into the headline. In editing, a clip that says "…we're irresponsible" is perfectly possible. Deny with positive facts ("we notified the authorities within two hours of the first sign of a problem") instead of with denials that repeat the journalist's framing.
Is your spokesperson ready for the question you fear most?
We prepare spokespeople and leadership teams with tailored media training sessions, mock interviews with professional journalists and a review of key messages before every media appearance.
Request a free analysis7. The mistakes that turn an interview into a headline
After years of preparing spokespeople, the list of mistakes that do real damage is surprisingly short. Almost every crisis interview that ends badly falls into one of these five patterns.
"No comment"
To the audience, "no comment" means "it's true and I don't want to admit it." If you can't talk about something, explain why: "There's an ongoing court investigation and I can't go into that detail, but what I can tell you is…"
Speculating
Ballpark figures, likely causes, optimistic timelines. Anything unconfirmed that's said on air will be treated as official, and any later deviation will become a new story.
Trusting "off the record"
In the middle of a crisis, it doesn't exist. The mic that's live before you start, the comment in the hallway or the "just between us" are all publishable. If you don't want to see it in print, don't say it.
Losing your temper
A flash of irritation, a curt answer or a "that's a loaded question" gets clipped and circulates for weeks. The journalist can afford to be aggressive; the spokesperson never can.
Speaking in jargon
"Supply chain incident," "parameter deviation," "workforce adjustment." Jargon sounds like you're hiding something and dehumanizes the company. Talk the way you'd talk to a neighbor.
7.1. The less obvious mistakes
- Lying or dressing up a figure: in a crisis, everything eventually comes out, and an exposed lie turns an operational crisis into an integrity crisis, which is much harder to close.
- Attacking those affected or whoever blew the whistle: even if they're partly to blame, questioning them in public is always perceived as an abuse of power.
- Using humor: any joke, even one meant to ease the tension, is brutally easy to take out of context.
- Talking about what it has cost the company: "it's been a very tough week for us" sounds like self-pity while others are suffering the consequences.
- Reading your answers: messages are memorized as ideas, not as scripts; reading them comes across as cold and shows a lack of command of the subject.
- Answering questions outside your remit: if you're asked about politics, other companies or topics that aren't yours, redirect without offering an opinion.
8. Body language: what people see before they hear
In audiovisual formats, the audience forms an impression of the spokesperson before processing their words. A hunched posture, an evasive glance or a nervous half-smile can contradict the most carefully prepared message. And when verbal and nonverbal signals contradict each other, people tend to believe the nonverbal ones.
| Element | What builds trust | What destroys it |
|---|---|---|
| Eye contact | At the interviewer in the studio; at the lens only if told to (remote interview) | Looking at the floor, the ceiling or at advisers off camera before answering |
| Posture | Sitting upright, leaning slightly forward, shoulders relaxed | Leaning back, crossing your arms, swiveling in the chair |
| Hands | Visible, open and moderate gestures that support your ideas | Touching your face, fiddling with a pen, hiding them under the table |
| Facial expression | Serious and attentive, consistent with the gravity of the subject | A nervous smile when talking about those affected, signs of annoyance at the questions |
| Voice | Measured pace, short sentences, pauses before difficult answers | Talking very fast, raising your voice, constant filler words ("um," "like," "obviously") |
| Clothing | Understated, suited to the context and the role; no prominent logos | Clothing that's too casual or, conversely, flashy (watches, jewelry) in a crisis with victims |
The spokesperson is "on air" from the moment they walk in until they leave
Cameras shoot B-roll before and after the interview. Lavalier mics get switched on earlier than you think. A sigh of relief at the end, a remark to the technician or a knowing look at your adviser can end up in the final cut. The rule is simple: the interview starts when you walk through the outlet's door and ends when you leave the building.
9. Every format has its own rules: TV, radio, press, video and podcasts
The key messages are the same in every medium, but how you defend them varies a lot depending on the format. A spokesperson prepared for live TV isn't automatically prepared for a press conference or a long podcast conversation.
| Format | Main risk | Preparation essentials |
|---|---|---|
| Live TV | No editing: every mistake airs as is and gets clipped for social media | 15-20 second answers, main message in the first sentence, total control of body language |
| Radio | Your voice is everything; silences feel endless and filler words multiply | Measured pace, warm tone, short sentences; you can keep a card with the three messages at hand (without reading it) |
| Pre-recorded interview | From half an hour of conversation, 10-20 seconds chosen by the outlet will air | Every answer must make complete sense on its own; repeat the key messages several times so the clip chosen is one of them |
| Press conference | Rapid-fire questions from several journalists, a "pack" effect and follow-ups | Short opening statement, a moderator to manage turns, end time agreed in advance, never storm out of the room |
| Video call interview | Technical glitches, amateur framing, distractions in a home or office setting | Camera at eye level, neutral background, front lighting, headset with mic, wired connection and a tech check beforehand |
| Podcast | A long, relaxed conversation that invites you to lower your guard and share confidences | Stick to your messages despite the friendly tone; remember everything gets published, often in full, and stays available for years |
9.1. The pre-recorded interview: the most deceptive of all
Many spokespeople relax when they're told the interview is pre-recorded, as if editing were a safety net. It's exactly the opposite. Live, the spokesperson controls the context of every sentence; in a pre-recorded interview, the outlet decides what airs and what gets left out. A nuanced forty-second answer can be cut down to its six most striking words.
Record it yourself, too
Whenever possible, make your own recording of the interview (audio is enough), letting the journalist know matter-of-factly. It isn't a sign of distrust: it's standard professional practice that will let you prove the full context if a clip is published in a way that distorts what you said.
10. Mock interviews and role-play: how to really train
Reading this article, or any media training manual, doesn't prepare anyone for a hostile interview. What prepares you is repetition under conditions as close to reality as possible: camera, lights, an interviewer with no interest in being nice and a recording reviewed afterward, frame by frame. Training is uncomfortable by design; if the mock session feels comfortable, it isn't working.
- Fact briefing
The spokesperson goes over with the crisis committee what is known, what isn't known and what can't be said. The three key messages and the exact figures to be used are locked in. - Cold interview
An interviewer (ideally an outside professional journalist) conducts a first interview with no warning about the order of questions. It's recorded on video. - Recording review
It's analyzed together with the spokesperson: which messages landed, which didn't, which sentences could become headlines, which gestures contradicted the words. - Working through the 20 questions
The toughest questions are rehearsed out loud, one by one, until the answer comes naturally and in under 25 seconds. - Second interview with more pressure
Interruptions, repeated questions, awkward silences, false data slipped in by the interviewer to see whether the spokesperson corrects it calmly. - Rehearsing the actual format
If the interview will be over video call, rehearse over video call; if it's a press conference, rehearse with several "journalists" at once.
Don't wait for a crisis to run your first mock interview
A media training session thrown together three hours before going on TV is useful for polishing messages, but not for changing habits. The spokespeople designated in the crisis plan should train at least once a year, with realistic scenarios for the company, and do a refresher before every significant appearance. It's the same logic as fire drills: you run them when there's no fire.
These mock interviews are part of something broader: the organization's overall readiness to respond to a crisis, from the committee and approval workflows to internal communication. If you're building that framework from scratch, our guide to corporate reputational crisis management will help you place media training within the bigger picture.
11. How to ask a media outlet for reasonable conditions
Agreeing to an interview doesn't mean agreeing blindly. It's perfectly legitimate, and professional, to ask questions and request certain conditions before confirming. What isn't legitimate, and usually backfires, is trying to control the journalistic content.
What you can ask and request
The topic and angle of the piece; whether it's live or pre-recorded; approximate length; who's conducting the interview; whether there will be other guests (people affected, experts, competitors); where and when; whether it will air in full or edited; when it will be published.
What you shouldn't ask for
Written questions in advance as a condition; reviewing or approving the text or the edit before publication; ruling topics off-limits; choosing the journalist. Asking for these is usually read as an attempt at control and may end up being mentioned in the piece itself.
What you can politely negotiate
Checking the accuracy of technical data or figures before publication; not sharing a live set with an affected person if the matter is before the courts; a time slot that lets the spokesperson arrive with up-to-date information.
Saying no is also an option, but it comes at a price
Not every interview has to be accepted. A panel show where the spokesperson will be one against five, or a program looking for a confrontation as entertainment, may not be the best setting. But declining has a cost: "The company declined to take part in this program." If you decide not to go, offer an alternative (a recorded statement, a written response, another date) and make sure your position reaches the audience some other way.
12. If the interview goes wrong: corrections, clarifications and damage control
Even with the best preparation, sometimes an interview goes wrong. A wrong figure, an unfortunate sentence, an unfairly edited clip. What you do in the following hours determines whether that mistake stays an anecdote or becomes the new center of the crisis.
12.1. Pinpoint what went wrong
| What happened | How to respond |
|---|---|
| The spokesperson gave a wrong figure | Correct it as soon as possible, proactively: contact the outlet, publish the correct figure on your own channels and explain it matter-of-factly. A mistake corrected quickly shows rigor; one discovered by others raises suspicion. |
| The spokesperson said something unfortunate | A brief, sincere clarification without over-justifying: "I misspoke; what I meant was…" If the sentence offended those affected, a personal and direct apology. |
| The outlet took the sentence out of context | Contact the newsroom politely, provide your own recording and ask them to add the missing context. Publish the full answer on your own channels. |
| The outlet published false information about the facts | Consider exercising the right of correction, which in Spain is governed by Organic Law 2/1984: the request is addressed to the outlet's editor within seven calendar days of publication and is limited to facts, not opinions. |
What you should never do after a bad interview
- Publicly attack the journalist or the outlet on social media
- Deny having said something that's on the record
- Pull the spokesperson abruptly and without explanation, as if the company were blaming them
- Let the days go by hoping it'll be forgotten: the clip will keep circulating without your side of the story
12.2. Summary: the preparation plan on one page
- Choose the spokesperson for credibility in that particular crisis, not just for rank, and have a trained backup
- Set three key messages at most, consistent with the official statement
- Prepare each message with the Message, Proof, Example formula
- Practice bridging by answering the question first, never to dodge it
- Rehearse the 20 toughest questions out loud before any appearance
- Eliminate "no comment," speculation, "off the record" and jargon
- Watch your body language from the moment you enter the outlet until you leave
- Tailor your preparation to the specific interview format
- Ask for reasonable conditions, without trying to control the journalistic content
- If something goes wrong, correct it early, clarify simply and back yourself up with your own recording
A crisis isn't won in an interview, but it can be lost in one. The difference between those two scenarios is rarely the spokesperson's natural talent: it's preparation. And preparation, unlike the crisis, can be done calmly and with time to spare.
13. Frequently asked questions
It's specific training for spokespeople on dealing with the media: defining key messages, answering difficult questions, mastering techniques such as bridging, managing body language and adapting to each format. In a crisis, it focuses on hostile interviews and relies on recorded mock interviews with professional interviewers.
No. The CEO should face the public in crises involving victims or of the utmost severity, but in technical, labor or local incidents a specialist director or the head of the relevant area is often more credible. Holding the CEO in reserve also protects their reputation and leaves the company a final level of authority if the crisis escalates.
A complete foundational training program usually takes one or two days with recorded mock interviews. For a specific interview in the middle of a crisis, it's wise to set aside at least two or three hours of intensive preparation: fact briefing, key messages, rehearsal of the tough questions and a mock interview.
You can ask about the topic and the angle, and many journalists will share them. What's not advisable is demanding a fixed list of questions as a condition, because it comes across as an attempt at control. Besides, in a hostile interview the important questions usually arise from your answers, so the useful thing is to prepare the 20 toughest ones yourself.
Say so honestly and commit to finding out: "I don't have that figure confirmed and I don't want to give you a number that turns out to be wrong; I'll get it to you as soon as we have it." Then follow through on that commitment. Making up or ballparking an answer is far riskier than admitting you don't have it.
Total silence rarely works: the media will tell the story anyway, just without your side of it. What does make sense is choosing the formats and the timing. Sometimes a recorded statement or an interview with a leading outlet is preferable to a live panel show. What matters is that your position reaches the audience in a controlled way.
Regular media training prepares you for profile interviews, product launches or earnings, where the journalist is usually neutral or favorable. Crisis media training prepares you for a hostile environment: questions about blame, victims and responsibility, emotional pressure, interruptions and the very real chance that any sentence becomes a negative headline.
If the mistake is yours (a wrong figure, a poorly worded sentence), the right move is a proactive correction or clarification. If the outlet has published false facts, in Spain you can exercise the right of correction by contacting the outlet's editor within seven calendar days. The journalist's opinions, however, can't be corrected through this route.
Don't wait until you're under the lights to find out whether your spokesperson is ready
We analyze your media exposure, identify the most likely crisis scenarios and prepare your spokespeople with key messages and realistic mock interviews. Free, no-obligation analysis.
Request a free analysis