The implied accusation was that Johnson & Johnson prioritized profits over safety.
Introduction: The Necessary Marriage of Theory and Practice In the high-stakes arena of crisis communication, the gap between academic theory and operational reality is often where reputations go to die. While many consultants offer checklists and many scholars offer abstract models, Keith M. Hearit stands out as a critical voice who insists that theory must be tested against the messy, emotional, and irrational nature of real crises. The implied accusation was that Johnson & Johnson
The organizations that survive are not necessarily the wealthiest or most powerful. They are the ones that understand the grammar of accusation and apology. They know when to fight (denial, provocation) and when to yield (mortification). They know that a crisis is not a problem to be solved but a narrative to be navigated. Hearit stands out as a critical voice who
The crisis defined Exxon as a villain for a generation. The company paid billions in cleanup and fines, but the reputational wound never fully healed. Hearit uses this case to teach a crucial lesson: When the accusation is about values, a legalistic defense is the worst possible response. Case Study 3: United Airlines’ “Dragging” Incident (2017) – The Social Media Apocalypse The Crisis: Dr. David Dao was violently dragged off a United Express flight to make room for crew members. Video of the bloodied, incoherent passenger went viral. They know when to fight (denial, provocation) and
Exxon chairman Lawrence Rawl engaged primarily in defeasibility (blaming the ship captain, Joseph Hazelwood, who had been drinking) and denial of intent (“It was an accident”). Rawl refused to apologize publicly for weeks, hid from the media, and minimized the spill’s impact.