Spokespersons and Message Control: How the CDC Lost Credibility during the Anthrax Crisis

Abstract

This study evaluates the role of spokespersons and message control in complex organizations facing ambiguous crises. Specifically, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) response to the anthrax crisis in 2001 is offered as a case study. A textual analysis of CDC telebriefings and corresponding print media coverage of the anthrax crisis reveals the use of multiple spokespersons and poor message control resulted in a seemingly fragmented CDC message and apparent loss of CDC credibility. The study concludes that limiting the number of spokespersons and appropriate use of strategic ambiguity may afford organizations an opportunity to make sense of the situation, avoid confusing and contradictory messages and protect organizational credibility. Recommendations include (1) limiting the number of spokespersons, which allows for greater message control while reducing contradictory and inconsistent messages, (2) maintaining an organizational willingness to revise publicly stated positions as more accurate information becomes available, and (3) actively using strategic ambiguity as a mechanism to protect organizational credibility.

Keywords:

• Crisis communication
• Spokesperson
• Message control
• Organizational credibility
• Strategic ambiguity

The author would like to acknowledge and express his appreciation for the support and encouragement his NDSU colleagues provided during the research and its writing.

Notes

This paper was presented to the Red River Communication Conference April 22, 2004.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

M. Scott Barrett

M. Scott Barrett is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at North Dakota State University and the Director of Planned Giving, NDSU Development Foundation, Fargo, ND