When Location Determines Response Strategy

White Paper

Mar 14

Managing Global Corporate Crises:

The Role of Proximity & Salience in Crisis Communication

In an era of globalization, corporations operate in a complex media and regulatory landscape. A crisis in one region does not automatically translate into reputational damage globally. How should companies tailor their crisis response based on the nature of the controversy?

Core argument: The level of public attention and perceived impact—determined by distance and salience—shapes whether companies should use moral messaging, technical justifications, or fact-based crisis responses.

This paper integrates findings from Policy Controversies and Political Blame Games and applies the distant-salient, proximate-nonsalient, and distant-nonsalient controversy framework to crisis communication strategies.

1. Theoretical Framework: Proximity & Salience in Crisis Communication

Distant-salient controversy: High emotional resonance but physically removed from key stakeholders.
Proximate-nonsalient controversy: Technically relevant to local stakeholders but of little wider concern.
Distant-nonsalient controversy: Low visibility and little stakeholder engagement, often ignored in corporate PR.

Example: A multinational drilling company faces an environmental disaster in Southeast Asia.

If European consumers are the primary market, public perception will focus on moral responsibility and ethical narratives.
If local governments & businesses are the main stakeholders, response efforts should emphasize technical expertise and compliance.

2. Distant-Salient Controversies: When Moral Framing Dominates

Crises that occur far from a company’s core consumer base but trigger moral outrage (e.g., child labor, environmental degradation).
Case Study: Drone Procurement Scandal (DRONE) – A controversial government drone purchase created significant public backlash, driven by moral concerns rather than technical issues.
Case Study: Solyndra Loan Controversy – A U.S. government loan to a solar company that failed, leading to public outrage over wasted taxpayer funds, despite its economic rationale.
Crisis Communication Strategy:
- Emphasize corporate responsibility, moral leadership, and ethical commitments.
- Public-facing responses over technical solutions.
- Leverage high-profile influencers, NGOs, and media engagement to control the narrative.
Key risk: If ignored, public outrage could escalate to boycotts and long-term brand erosion.

3. Proximate-Nonsalient Controversies: Controlling Localized Technical Crises

Crises that directly impact a company’s operations or local stakeholders but lack global media appeal.
Case Study: Health Care Targeting Scandal (HCT) – A healthcare policy failure with significant regional impacts but limited national attention.
Case Study: Corporate Tax Reform Debate (TAX) – A policy controversy with extensive financial consequences but minimal public outrage outside the affected sector.
Crisis Communication Strategy:
- Focus on fact-based, technical explanations rather than emotional appeals.
- Address affected stakeholders directly (government agencies, local businesses, institutional clients).
- Avoid unnecessary global attention that could elevate the crisis.
Key risk: If mishandled, could escalate into a trust and regulatory crisis.

4. Distant-Nonsalient Controversies: When Silence or Strategic Inaction is an Option

Low-visibility crises with limited stakeholder concern beyond the immediate area.
Case Study: Millennium Dome Scandal (DOME) – A controversial UK infrastructure project that received limited public engagement but high political criticism.
Case Study: National Exposition Controversy (EXPO) – A policy dispute that faded into obscurity due to weak public feedback.
Crisis Communication Strategy:
- Minimal intervention, avoid unnecessary attention.
- Localized containment rather than broad corporate responses.
- Use selective media engagement to limit spread.
Key risk: If the crisis unexpectedly gains traction, companies may have to pivot toward transparent disclosuresquickly.

5. Case Applications: Corporate Crisis Management Across Regions

Case Study 1: Apparel industry supply chain crisis (Distant-Salient) → Moral framing required.
Case Study 2: Industrial accident affecting local operations (Proximate-Nonsalient) → Technical response.
Case Study 3: Small-scale corporate governance failure with no public impact (Distant-Nonsalient) → Strategic silence.

6. Conclusion: Proactive Crisis Strategy in a Globalized Media Landscape

Tailoring crisis responses based on proximity and salience ensures companies do not overreact or underreact to controversies.
The key to PR crisis success is recognizing when moral narratives, technical framing, or quiet resolution are the best approach.
Graef & Co. provides data-driven crisis modeling to help businesses predict public reactions and refine their response strategies.