Crisis Longevity in the Digital Age

A Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Analysis of Media Coverage, Organizational Response, and Stock Recovery

by Maximilian J.P. Graef

Abstract

The accelerating pace of digital news and social media has prompted debate over how quickly corporate crises flare up—and whether they fade just as rapidly. This paper presents a mixed-methods examination of major corporate crises from the early 2000s to the mid-2020s, analyzing (1) quantitative stock recovery data as a proxy for market confidence, (2) qualitative assessments of media coverage intensity and framing, and (3) organizational response strategies rooted in crisis communication theories. Cases range from accounting scandals (e.g., Enron, Toshiba) and product-safety disasters (e.g., Boeing 737 MAX, Takata) to data breaches (e.g., Equifax, Yahoo) and cultural crises (e.g., Uber). We categorize each case by its crisis type—drawing on both general business taxonomy and Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)—and demonstrate how the interplay between media discourse and organizational communication measures influences both reputational harm and speed of stock price rebound. Findings suggest that while the 24/7 information environment can truncate the most intense phase of media coverage, reputational damage often endures beyond any near-term market recovery. This study underscores the need for proactive, transparent, and ethically grounded crisis communication to mitigate long-term harm to organizational legitimacy.

1. Introduction

In an era of instant connectivity and round-the-clock news, corporate crises can erupt and spread across the globe in hours—yet public attention also disperses rapidly in an avalanche of competing headlines. Scholars have debated whether the digital age extends crisis “lifespans” or compresses them, highlighting two critical dimensions: market impact (stock price volatility and time to recovery) and reputational impact (stakeholder trust and media narrative). The present research explores how companies’ communicative responses and the intensity of media coverage shape both short- and long-term consequences.

Drawing on a rich set of historical and contemporary crises, we merge quantitative metrics (stock price dips and recovery timelines) with qualitative insights (media framing, sentiment, organizational communication). Our central question is whether crises in the digital era tend to be shorter-lived in market terms, despite pervasive news coverage, and how effectively organizations can manage the reputational aftermath through strategic communication.

2. Theoretical and Scientific Frameworks

2.1 Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)

SCCT, proposed by W. Timothy Coombs, classifies crises based on the degree of responsibility stakeholders ascribe to the organization:

• Victim Crises: The organization is also a victim (e.g., natural disasters, external attacks).

• Accidental Crises: Unintentional, but the organization may bear some responsibility (e.g., a faulty product design discovered late).

• Preventable Crises: Caused by organizational misdeed or negligence (e.g., fraud, deliberate deception).

SCCT prescribes different response strategies—ranging from denial or justification (for low-responsibility scenarios) to apology and compensation (for high-responsibility crises).

2.2 Image Restoration Theory

Benoit’s Image Restoration Theory outlines how organizations can mitigate reputational damage through:

• Denial: Refuting or shifting blame.

• Evading Responsibility: Minimizing fault.

• Reducing Offensiveness: Downplaying the seriousness.

• Corrective Action: Committing to resolving the problem.

• Mortification: Accepting full responsibility and apologizing.

In the cases examined, companies employing corrective action and mortification—particularly in preventable crises—often experienced more positive stakeholder perception over time.

2.3 Discourse of Renewal

The Discourse of Renewal model focuses on forward-looking narratives that emphasize learning, innovation, and stakeholder engagement post-crisis. It suggests that crises can be reframed as opportunities for organizational renewal, provided leadership is transparent, ethical, and committed to meaningful change.

2.4 Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Legitimacy

Crises typically threaten the organization’s standing among various stakeholder groups. According to Stakeholder Theory, balancing diverse interests becomes especially critical under crisis conditions. Organizational Legitimacy is maintained or eroded by public perceptions of the organization’s adherence to social norms and ethics—crucial when scandal or misconduct is revealed.

3. Methodology

3.1 Data Collection

Data were drawn from:

1. Publicly available financial records and reputable news sources to identify:

• Exact or approximate crisis onset dates.

• Stock price movements (percentage drop, time to recovery).

• Market outcomes (bankruptcy, acquisition, partial recovery).

2. Media coverage: Major global outlets (e.g., Reuters, Bloomberg, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal) and specialized industry publications for each crisis, supplemented by interviews and statements from corporate executives.

3. Organizational response: Official press releases, CEO statements, annual reports, and public filings that indicate corporate strategies (apology, denial, compensation, structural reforms).

3.2 Analysis Approach

• Quantitative Stock Analysis: Measured percentage drops from pre-crisis to trough, and then estimated the time required to return to baseline or near-baseline levels (if any).

• Qualitative Media and Response Analysis: Examined how crises were framed, the tone of coverage, duration of headlines, and organizational communication tactics. Cross-referenced with SCCT to see how blame attribution correlated with the type of organizational response.

3.3 Selection of Case Studies

The study includes a diverse set of crises spanning financial collapses, product safety incidents, data breaches, and cultural/ethical misconduct—providing insight across industries and crisis typologies. Below is a structured overview of each, integrating factual details, crisis categorization, media coverage, organizational response, and theoretical interpretation.

4. Structured Analysis of Corporate Crises

Each case analysis follows this format:

1. Key Factual Details

2. Crisis Type (General + SCCT)

3. Media Coverage & Organizational Response

4. Theoretical Application

5. Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

4.1 Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy (2008)

Key Details

• Date: Bankruptcy filed on September 15, 2008

• Stock Price Impact: From over $60 in 2007 to under $1 by September 2008; worthless post-bankruptcy

• Recovery: No recovery—liquidation ensued

Crisis Type

• General: Financial collapse

• SCCT: Preventable (risky practices, high leverage)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Extremely high-intensity coverage, framed Lehman as the watershed event of the global financial crisis.

• Response: Largely legalistic and procedural; leadership offered no substantial crisis communications to save the firm.

Theoretical Application

• SCCT: High attribution of blame, but the company had no chance to employ typical image restoration due to its collapse.

4.2 FTX Cryptocurrency Exchange Collapse (2022)

Key Details

• Date: Bankruptcy filed on November 11, 2022

• Stock Impact: No public stock; related crypto assets fell 20–30%

• Recovery: Mixed; crypto markets rebounded partially in 3–6 months

Crisis Type

• General: Financial fraud/mismanagement

• SCCT: Preventable

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Intense global focus on founder Sam Bankman-Fried, “fraud” allegations.

• Response: Initially confused statements by SBF, eventually replaced by interim management focusing on bankruptcy restructuring.

Theoretical Application

• Image Restoration: Minimal chance; partial denial, shifting blame.

• Stakeholder Theory: Highlighted systemic vulnerabilities in unregulated crypto markets.

4.3 Volkswagen Emissions Scandal (2015)

Key Details

• Date: Public revelation on September 18, 2015

• Stock Price Impact: Dropped ~40% from €160 to ~€95–€100

• Recovery: ~Two years to return to pre-crisis stock levels

Crisis Type

• General: Product/ethical scandal

• SCCT: Preventable (deliberate deception)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: “Dieselgate” labeling, intense coverage for months; framed around environmental harm and cheating devices.

• Response: Apology, CEO resignation, recalls, pivot to electric vehicles. Billion-dollar marketing and remedial campaigns.

Theoretical Application

• SCCT: Mortification (apology) and corrective action needed due to high responsibility.

• Image Restoration: “We’re sorry” campaigns, compensation strategies.

4.4 Wells Fargo Fake Accounts Scandal (2016)

Key Details

• Date: Broke publicly in September 2016

• Stock Price Impact: ~10% drop (from $50 to $45)

• Recovery: ~One year to rebound, though reputational issues linger

Crisis Type

• General: Ethical/financial misconduct

• SCCT: Preventable

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Headlines about “toxic sales culture,” “breach of customer trust.”

• Response: CEO resigned; bank apologized and eliminated high-pressure sales targets.

Theoretical Application

• SCCT: Stakeholders demanded apologies, compensation.

• Corporate Apologia: Board changes, repeated public commitments to cultural reform.

4.5 Boeing 737 MAX Grounding (2019)

Key Details

• Date: Second crash on March 10, 2019; global grounding ensued

• Stock Price Impact: ~25% decline (from $440 to $330)

• Recovery: Prolonged; not near pre-crisis levels for two+ years, complicated by COVID-19

Crisis Type

• General: Product safety scandal

• SCCT: Accidental-turned-preventable (design/oversight issues)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Worldwide condemnation focusing on passenger safety, internal design flaws.

• Response: Leadership changes, public apologies, technological fixes, close regulator collaboration.

Theoretical Application

• Discourse of Renewal: Boeing emphasized a renewed commitment to safety, though overshadowed by extended groundings.

• SCCT: High blame once oversight failures were revealed.

4.6 Facebook-Cambridge Analytica (2018)

Key Details

• Date: March 2018 revelations

• Stock Price Impact: ~20% drop (from $185 to $150)

• Recovery: ~Six months to regain previous levels

Crisis Type

• General: Data privacy/ethical scandal

• SCCT: Preventable (inadequate data safeguards)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Amplified by congressional hearings, “Big Tech” scrutiny.

• Response: Apologies from Mark Zuckerberg, policy changes, privacy reforms.

Theoretical Application

• Image Restoration: Denial at first, then partial mortification and corrective steps.

• Stakeholder Theory: Impetus for reevaluating data practices globally.

4.7 Equifax Data Breach (2017)

Key Details

• Date: Announced September 7, 2017

• Stock Price Impact: 35% drop (from $142 to $92)

• Recovery: ~Two years to surpass $140 again

Crisis Type

• General: Data breach/cybersecurity

• SCCT: Preventable (weak security measures)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Harsh criticism for poor handling, major consumer breach.

• Response: Confusing initial website, subsequent CEO resignation, identity protection offers.

Theoretical Application

• SCCT: High responsibility, requiring transparency and compensation.

• Image Restoration: Attempted corrective action, but reputational trust took longer to recover than stock price.

4.8 BP Deepwater Horizon (2010)

Key Details

• Date: Explosion on April 20, 2010

• Stock Price Impact: Halved (from $60 to ~$27–$30)

• Recovery: Never fully regained pre-crisis levels; overshadowed by oil price fluctuations

Crisis Type

• General: Environmental disaster

• SCCT: Accidental turned partly preventable (negligence)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Global outrage; powerful images of environmental damage.

• Response: $20B compensation fund, “We will make this right” ad campaign, CEO’s infamous gaffe.

Theoretical Application

• Discourse of Renewal: Attempted but undermined by the magnitude of ecological and social harm.

• SCCT: High blame among many stakeholders.

(For brevity, the paper continues in similar format for all remaining crises—Toshiba, Uber, Knight Capital, CrowdStrike, John Wood Group, 2010 Flash Crash, Wachovia, Olympus, Enron, GE (2019), Kangmei Pharmaceutical, Steinhoff, GM Ignition Switch, Takata, Yahoo Data Breaches, Valeant.)

See Appendix for full tabular breakdown of each crisis, including approximate stock prices, type classification, media/organizational response summary, and theoretical application.

5. Categorizing Crises and Observed Patterns

5.1 Crisis Type Categorization

Drawing from the general/business standpoint and SCCT, the crises cluster as follows:

1. Financial Meltdown / Bankruptcy

• Lehman Brothers, Wachovia, Enron, FTX, Takata (eventually), etc.

2. Accounting / Financial Fraud

• Toshiba, Olympus, Kangmei Pharmaceutical, Steinhoff, GE allegations

3. Product Safety / Environmental

• Volkswagen, Boeing 737 MAX, BP Deepwater Horizon, GM Ignition Switch, Takata (defective airbags)

4. Data Breach / Cybersecurity

• Equifax, Yahoo, Facebook-Cambridge Analytica

5. Leadership / Cultural / Ethical Misconduct

• Wells Fargo, Uber, Valeant

6. Technical / Market Anomalies

• Knight Capital, 2010 Flash Crash, CrowdStrike, John Wood Group (ongoing)

5.2 Theoretical and Scientific Frameworks Recap

• SCCT remains a core lens, especially for attributing blame (accidental vs. preventable).

• Image Restoration theory’s five strategies can be mapped across cases; most successes used mortification + corrective action.

• Discourse of Renewal emerges in crises where organizations pivot to structural reforms and transparent engagement (e.g., Boeing post-grounding, some cultural overhauls at Uber).

• Stakeholder Theory underscores how sustained trust depends on perceived sincerity in addressing stakeholder concerns.

5.3 Integrated Analysis: Stock Recovery and Media/Organizational Response

Combining quantitative and qualitative elements reveals:

• Speed of Market Recovery:

  • Crises with persistent negative media coverage and high organizational culpability (e.g., Equifax, Wells Fargo) often see longer recovery times. However, Wells Fargo rebounded in a year financially but continued to suffer reputational damage.

  • Rapid rebounds occur when (a) the market deems the financial impact “contained,” or (b) new crises overshadow the story. The Flash Crash (2010) corrected within minutes, illustrating an extreme case of a short-lived market anomaly.

• Media Framing and Organizational Strategy:

  • High-intensity, scandal-focused coverage (e.g., “Dieselgate,” “Fake Accounts”) can maintain public attention longer, especially if fueled by regulatory or legal actions.

  • Organizations that respond with immediate, transparent communication can shorten the acute phase of negative coverage and facilitate stock recovery. Delayed or evasive strategies (e.g., initial Equifax confusion, Yahoo’s late disclosure) exacerbate negativity.

• Reputation vs. Stock Price:

  • Rapid stock price rebounds (Facebook) do not always indicate full reputational recovery. Stakeholders may remain wary, press coverage can remain skeptical, and regulatory scrutiny may persist.

6. Discussion and Observations

1. Digital News Overload and Crisis Ephemerality

The 24/7 news cycle fosters rapid dissemination of crisis information, but also dilutes long-term attention. Consequently, market-impact phases may be compressed, with stocks rebounding as newer headlines displace the crisis from front pages. Yet deep-seated reputational harm can linger off the trading floor.

2. Preventable vs. Accidental Crises

Consistent with SCCT, preventable crises see harsher and more sustained media backlash, requiring more robust apology and reparations. Accidental crises might allow for a quicker shift to corrective narratives, provided the organization is transparent.

3. Role of Leadership

CEO resignations or reappointments (Uber, Wells Fargo, Toshiba) often become symbolic turning points in media coverage—either positively (new leadership signals renewal) or negatively (belated admission of culpability).

4. Importance of Apology and Corrective Action

Most recoveries—whether partial or full—hinge on tangible steps (e.g., recalls, compensation funds, policy overhauls) alongside sincere communication. Image Restoration Theory highlights that a shallow or purely rhetorical apology can be counterproductive if the public perceives no real changes.

5. External Regulatory Influence

In many crises (Boeing, GM, Facebook, Equifax), ongoing regulatory inquiries kept stories alive, reinforcing the need for strategic stakeholder engagement. This underscores that crisis duration partly depends on external legal processes outside a company’s direct control.

7. Conclusion

This study synthesized stock price data, media coverage, and organizational responses across a wide spectrum of corporate crises in the digital era. Key findings indicate that while headline-driven media cycles may be shorter, reputational recovery demands sustained communication efforts—particularly in preventable crisis scenarios where public blame is highest. Companies that execute swift, transparent, and ethically grounded crisis management often see faster market recoveries, yet the intangible cost to trust and reputation may endure long after stock values rebound.

From a theoretical standpoint, Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) effectively classifies crisis types and calibrates recommended response strategies. Image Restoration Theory and Discourse of Renewal also offer valuable frameworks for understanding how organizations navigate the critical post-crisis communication landscape. Practitioners should prioritize immediate, transparent disclosures, genuine apologies where appropriate, and corrective actions that directly address stakeholder concerns—recognizing that even in a 24/7 “noise” environment, deeply significant crises can continue to shape brand perception and organizational legitimacy for years.

Future research can employ sentiment analysis of social media data to quantify changes in public perception in real time, and compare these with longitudinal stock performance for a more granular measure of crisis longevity and reputational impact. This multi-faceted approach underscores the evolving complexity of crisis management in an information-rich world—where crises may spark suddenly, but the path to genuine recovery remains rooted in transparent, accountable communication.

Further Reading

Benoit, W. L. (1995). Accounts, excuses, and apologies: A theory of image restoration strategies. State University of New York Press.

Benoit, W. L. (1997). Image repair discourse and crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 23(2), 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(97)90023-0

Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049

Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2007). Post-crisis communication and renewal: Expanding the parameters of post-crisis discourse. Public Relations Review, 33(2), 130–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.015

Appendix: Crisis-by-Crisis Summary

9. Toshiba Accounting Scandal (2015)

Key Factual Details

• Public admission on July 21, 2015, of overstating profits by $1.2 billion over seven years

• Top executives resigned

Crisis Type

• General: Accounting/financial misconduct

• SCCT: Preventable (deliberate overstatement of profits)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Prominent in Japan; moderate global attention as a major corporate governance failure

• Response: Leadership overhaul, public apologies, governance reforms

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Fell about 20% (from ~¥400 to ~¥320) immediately

• Recovered to near ¥400 in roughly one year, although reputational issues persisted

10. Uber’s Leadership & Culture Crisis (2017)

Key Factual Details

• Multiple allegations of sexual harassment and a “bro culture” surfaced in early 2017

• CEO Travis Kalanick resigned under pressure

Crisis Type

• General: Organizational culture/ethical misconduct

• SCCT: Preventable (leadership failings, toxic environment)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Viral social media campaigns (#DeleteUber), continuous revelations of misconduct

• Response: Corporate apology, new executive hires, “cultural reboot” to address systemic issues

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• As a private company then, valuations reportedly dipped ~15%

• Public IPO in 2019 with mixed performance; cultural reforms continue

11. Knight Capital Group (2012)

Key Factual Details

• Software glitch on August 1, 2012, causing $440 million in losses within an hour

• Nearly bankrupted the firm

Crisis Type

• General: Technical/operational failure

• SCCT: Accidental (though inadequate controls raise questions about preventability)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Intense but short-lived coverage, highlighting volatility risks of high-frequency trading

• Response: Emergency $400 million infusion from investors; limited public relations beyond technical disclosures

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Stock plunged ~70% (from $10–$11 to ~$3)

• Never truly recovered independently; firm was acquired by Getco in 2013

12. CrowdStrike Holdings (2024)

Key Factual Details

• Faulty software update in July 2024 caused widespread IT outages for clients

• Estimated $10 billion in damages

Crisis Type

• General: Tech outage/product failure

• SCCT: Accidental (software error)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Tech press emphasized the irony of a cybersecurity company causing outages

• Response: Immediate patch, refunds/compensation, public apology, client communication

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Shares fell by ~one-third initially (e.g., $150 to $100)

• Rebounded to pre-crisis levels in about two months

13. John Wood Group PLC (2025, Ongoing)

Key Factual Details

• In early 2025, announced a $200 million cashflow crisis and governance issues

• Stock plunged to a historic low of 29p

Crisis Type

• General: Financial distress/governance lapses

• SCCT: Potentially preventable (internal oversight failures), though external market factors may contribute

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Negative coverage in financial press emphasizing mismanagement and urgent need for restructuring

• Response: Cost-saving measures, asset sales, leadership addressing governance failings

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Fell over 55% to 29p

• Ongoing crisis; full recovery not yet observed as of March 2025

14. 2010 Flash Crash

Key Factual Details

• Occurred on May 6, 2010

• Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped ~1,000 points in minutes, then rebounded

Crisis Type

• General: Market anomaly/technical glitch

• SCCT: Accidental (systemic factors in high-frequency trading)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Intense but short-lived, focusing on “algorithmic meltdown”

• Response: Regulatory investigations (SEC, CFTC), introduction of circuit breakers and stricter HFT rules

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Temporary loss of $1 trillion in market value; major indices recovered within minutes

• Larger market fully stabilized within a week

15. Wachovia Corporation (2008)

Key Factual Details

• Faced a liquidity crisis in late September 2008, triggering a “silent bank run”

• Acquired by Wells Fargo in October 2008

Crisis Type

• General: Financial meltdown

• SCCT: Preventable (risky mortgage exposure)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Covered amid the broader 2008 financial crisis; overshadowed by Lehman Brothers’ collapse

• Response: Emergency negotiations, eventual government-facilitated acquisition

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Fell 27% on September 26, 2008, and continued to plunge

• No independent recovery; ceased to exist post-acquisition

16. Olympus Corporation (2011)

Key Factual Details

• CEO Michael Woodford exposed $1.7 billion in concealed investment losses in October 2011

• One of Japan’s largest corporate scandals

Crisis Type

• General: Accounting fraud

• SCCT: Preventable (deliberate concealment)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Focus on whistleblower CEO, prolonged coverage of internal corruption

• Response: Leadership upheaval, partial apologies, drawn-out legal processes

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Market cap fell from ¥673B to ¥422B (~30–40% share price drop)

• Partial recovery by 2013–2014, reputation harmed long-term

17. Enron Corporation (2001)

Key Factual Details

• Filed for bankruptcy on December 2, 2001

• Accounting fraud unveiled, eroding investor and public trust

Crisis Type

• General: Accounting fraud

• SCCT: Preventable (systemic corporate deception)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Global symbol of corporate greed; coverage extended through criminal trials of top executives

• Response: Executives denied wrongdoing, no attempt at corporate revival once bankruptcy hit

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Fell from over $90 in 2000 to under $1 by November 2001

• No recovery, complete dissolution

18. General Electric (2019, Markopolos Allegations)

Key Factual Details

• Whistleblower Harry Markopolos published a report on August 15, 2019

• Labeled GE “a bigger fraud than Enron,” though GE disputed these claims

Crisis Type

• General: Financial misconduct allegations

• SCCT: Potentially preventable if proven true; GE framed it as unfounded (victim scenario if false)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Mixed coverage; some outlets stressed Markopolos’s credibility, others questioned his short-selling connections

• Response: GE refuted allegations with counter-evidence, insisted on transparency

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Shares dropped ~10% (from $9.03 to ~$8.10) on the day the report was released

• Rebounded almost 44% within three months, reflecting partial investor confidence in GE’s rebuttals

19. Kangmei Pharmaceutical (2019)

Key Factual Details

• Overstated its cash holdings by 88.7 billion RMB

• One of China’s largest financial frauds

Crisis Type

• General: Accounting/financial fraud

• SCCT: Preventable (systemic misstatement of finances)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Major negative coverage in Chinese financial press; signaled weak auditing standards

• Response: Claimed “accounting errors,” faced lawsuits and regulatory crackdowns

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Shares hit the 10% daily limit drop on the Shanghai Stock Exchange immediately

• Continued declines; prolonged legal/financial struggles made recovery uncertain

20. Steinhoff International (2017)

Key Factual Details

• CEO Markus Jooste resigned on December 5, 2017, following revelations of accounting irregularities

• A major global retailer faced a massive loss in market value

Crisis Type

• General: Accounting fraud

• SCCT: Preventable (misstated financials)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Prominent in Europe and South Africa; likened to major corporate collapses

• Response: Ongoing restructuring, asset sales, board changes

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Stock plummeted from R46.25 to ~R10 in days (~75% drop)

• Remained severely depressed, with multiyear turnaround efforts ongoing

21. General Motors Ignition Switch (2014)

Key Factual Details

• Recalls began in early 2014 due to defective ignition switches linked to fatalities

• Led to extensive legal and congressional scrutiny

Crisis Type

• General: Product safety crisis

• SCCT: Preventable (evidence surfaced GM knew about defects for years)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Criticism emphasized delayed recall, victim fatalities, and corporate negligence

• Response: CEO Mary Barra apologized, created a compensation fund, overhauled safety oversight

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Fell ~15% (from $40 to $34–$35) in initial phase

• Partial rebound by late 2014, ongoing lawsuits continued for years

22. Takata Airbag Recall (2013–2017)

Key Factual Details

• Defective airbags caused deaths and injuries worldwide

• Largest automotive recall in history

Crisis Type

• General: Product safety crisis

• SCCT: Preventable (concealed defect data)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Repeated negative publicity as recalls expanded; numerous automakers affected

• Response: Apology, partial compensation, eventual bankruptcy in 2017

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Dropped from ~¥1,819 to below ¥400 (over 75% decrease)

• No recovery, ended in bankruptcy

23. Yahoo Data Breaches (2013–2014)

Key Factual Details

• Disclosed in late 2016 that over 1 billion user accounts were compromised

• Led to a reduced acquisition price by Verizon

Crisis Type

• General: Data breach/cybersecurity

• SCCT: Preventable (security negligence, delayed disclosures)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Widely criticized Yahoo’s delayed reporting; overshadowed final brand identity

• Response: Marissa Mayer forfeited bonuses, user prompts to change passwords, partial apologies

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Verizon deal price dropped by $350 million

• Yahoo merged into Oath (Verizon Media), effectively ending its standalone recovery

24. Valeant Pharmaceuticals (2015–2016)

Key Factual Details

• At its peak stock price near $260, plummeted below $25 by mid-2016

• Investigated over drug-pricing practices and accounting irregularities

Crisis Type

• General: Financial/ethical misconduct

• SCCT: Preventable (unscrupulous pricing strategies, questionable accounting)

Media Coverage & Organizational Response

• Media: Major criticism for “price gouging,” sparked congressional hearings

• Response: Leadership changes, rebranding as Bausch Health, attempts at transparency in financial reporting

Stock Impact & Recovery Timeline

• Over 90% drop in share price

• Partial rebound post-rebrand, but never returned to previous highs

End of Appendix