| name | crisis-communications |
| description | Crisis communication and rapid response workflows for journalists and communications professionals. Use when covering breaking news events, managing organizational communications during crises, coordinating rapid fact-checking efforts, or developing crisis response plans. Essential for newsrooms, PR teams, and anyone who needs to communicate accurately under time pressure. |
Crisis communications
Frameworks for accurate, rapid communication during high-pressure situations.
When to activate
- Breaking news requires immediate coverage
- Organization faces public crisis or controversy
- Misinformation is spreading rapidly and needs countering
- Emergency situation requires coordinated communication
- Rapid fact-checking is needed before publication
- Preparing crisis response plans before incidents occur
Breaking news protocol
First 30 minutes checklist
## Breaking news response
**Event**: [Brief description]
**Time detected**: [HH:MM]
**Initial source**: [Where we learned of this]
### Immediate actions (0-10 min)
- [ ] Verify event is real (minimum 2 independent sources)
- [ ] Alert editor/team lead
- [ ] Check wire services (AP, Reuters, AFP)
- [ ] Monitor official accounts (agencies, officials)
- [ ] DO NOT publish unverified claims
### Verification phase (10-30 min)
- [ ] Primary source contacted/confirmed
- [ ] Location verified (if applicable)
- [ ] Official statement obtained or requested
- [ ] Eyewitness accounts gathered (note: unverified)
- [ ] Social media claims flagged for verification
### First publication decision
- [ ] What we KNOW (confirmed facts only)
- [ ] What we DON'T know (be explicit)
- [ ] What we're working to confirm
- [ ] Attribution clear for every claim
Newsroom escalation matrix
from enum import Enum
from dataclasses import dataclass
from typing import List
class CrisisLevel(Enum):
LEVEL_1 = "routine"
LEVEL_2 = "elevated"
LEVEL_3 = "major"
LEVEL_4 = "critical"
@dataclass
class BreakingEvent:
description: str
level: CrisisLevel
confirmed_facts: List[str]
unconfirmed_claims: List[str]
sources_contacted: List[str]
assigned_reporters: List[str]
def escalation_needed(self) -> bool:
"""Determine if event needs escalation."""
triggers = [
len(self.unconfirmed_claims) > 5,
"fatalities" in self.description.lower(),
"official" in self.description.lower(),
"government" in self.description.lower(),
]
return any(triggers)
ESCALATION_TRIGGERS = {
CrisisLevel.LEVEL_2: [
"Multiple fatalities confirmed",
"Major public figure involved",
"Legal/liability concerns",
"Significant local impact",
],
CrisisLevel.LEVEL_3: [
"National news potential",
"Active danger to public",
"Major institution affected",
"Coordinated misinformation detected",
],
CrisisLevel.LEVEL_4: [
"Mass casualty event",
"Government/democracy implications",
"Our organization directly involved",
"Imminent physical threat",
],
}
Rapid verification framework
The 5-minute verification
When time is critical, prioritize these checks:
## Rapid verification checklist
### Source check (1 min)
- [ ] Who is claiming this?
- [ ] Are they in position to know?
- [ ] Have they been reliable before?
### Corroboration (2 min)
- [ ] Does anyone else confirm?
- [ ] Check wire services
- [ ] Check official sources
### Red flags (1 min)
- [ ] Too perfect/dramatic?
- [ ] Matches known false narratives?
- [ ] Single source only?
### Decision (1 min)
- [ ] PUBLISH: Multiple credible sources, no red flags
- [ ] HOLD: Needs more verification
- [ ] MONITOR: Developing, don't publish yet
Verification triage
For verification mechanics (source credibility, image/video checks, archiving evidence), use the source-verification skill. This skill focuses on the time-pressure layer: what to triage first, who decides to publish, and how to communicate uncertainty.
Triage rule: claims with the highest physical-harm or election-impact potential go first, then claims that name specific people, then everything else.
Crisis communication templates
Holding statement
For when you need to say something but facts are incomplete:
## Initial statement template
[Organization] is aware of [brief description of situation].
We are actively [gathering information / investigating / monitoring the situation].
[If applicable: The safety of [stakeholders] is our top priority.]
We will provide updates as verified information becomes available.
For media inquiries: [contact]
For [affected parties]: [resource/hotline]
Last updated: [timestamp]
Correction/clarification
## Correction notice
**Correction [or Clarification]**: An earlier version of this [article/statement/post] [stated/implied] [incorrect information].
[If factual error]: The correct information is: [accurate facts].
[If misleading]: To clarify: [accurate context].
This [article/statement] has been updated to reflect accurate information.
We regret the error.
[Timestamp of correction]
Retraction (when necessary)
## Retraction notice
**Retraction**: [Publication name] is retracting [article title], published on [date].
[Brief explanation of what was wrong]: Our reporting [stated/relied on] [problematic element]. Subsequent verification revealed [why it was wrong].
[What you're doing about it]: We have [removed/updated] the article and are reviewing our editorial processes.
[Accountability]: We apologize to [affected parties] and our readers.
The full text of the original article is available [here/on request] for transparency.
Questions: [contact]
Social media crisis response
Monitoring during crisis
from dataclasses import dataclass
from datetime import datetime
from typing import List, Dict
from collections import Counter
@dataclass
class CrisisMention:
platform: str
content: str
author: str
timestamp: datetime
sentiment: str
reach: int
requires_response: bool = False
class CrisisMonitor:
"""Track crisis-related social mentions."""
def __init__(self, crisis_keywords: List[str]):
self.keywords = crisis_keywords
self.mentions: List[CrisisMention] = []
def add_mention(self, mention: CrisisMention):
self.mentions.append(mention)
def get_dashboard(self) -> dict:
"""Real-time crisis overview."""
recent = [m for m in self.mentions
if (datetime.now() - m.timestamp).seconds < 3600]
return {
'total_mentions_1h': len(recent),
'sentiment_breakdown': self._sentiment_counts(recent),
'top_platforms': self._platform_counts(recent),
'misinformation_count': len([
m for m in recent
if m.sentiment == 'misinformation'
]),
'high_reach_negative': [
m for m in recent
if m.sentiment == 'negative' and m.reach > 10000
],
'pending_responses': len([
m for m in self.mentions
if m.requires_response
])
}
def _sentiment_counts(self, mentions: List[CrisisMention]) -> Dict:
return dict(Counter(m.sentiment for m in mentions))
def _platform_counts(self, mentions: List[CrisisMention]) -> Dict:
return dict(Counter(m.platform for m in mentions))
Response decision tree
## Should we respond to this?
### High priority (respond quickly)
- [ ] Factual misinformation spreading rapidly
- [ ] Direct question from journalist
- [ ] Affected party seeking help
- [ ] Influential account spreading false info
### Medium priority (respond thoughtfully)
- [ ] General negative sentiment
- [ ] Questions about our response
- [ ] Comparisons to competitors' handling
### Low priority / Do not engage
- [ ] Obvious trolling
- [ ] Bad faith actors
- [ ] Pile-on with no new claims
- [ ] Emotional venting (let it pass)
### Never respond
- [ ] While angry
- [ ] With unverified information
- [ ] In a way that escalates conflict
- [ ] By deleting legitimate criticism
Internal crisis coordination
Communication chain
from dataclasses import dataclass
from typing import List, Optional
from datetime import datetime
@dataclass
class CrisisTeamMember:
name: str
role: str
phone: str
email: str
backup: Optional['CrisisTeamMember'] = None
@dataclass
class CrisisLog:
"""Maintain record of all crisis decisions."""
entries: List[dict] = None
def __post_init__(self):
self.entries = self.entries or []
def log(self, action: str, decision_maker: str,
rationale: str, outcome: str = "pending"):
self.entries.append({
'timestamp': datetime.now().isoformat(),
'action': action,
'decision_maker': decision_maker,
'rationale': rationale,
'outcome': outcome
})
def export_for_postmortem(self) -> str:
"""Generate timeline for after-action review."""
lines = ["# Crisis Response Timeline\n"]
for entry in self.entries:
lines.append(
f"**{entry['timestamp']}** - {entry['action']}\n"
f"- Decision by: {entry['decision_maker']}\n"
f"- Rationale: {entry['rationale']}\n"
f"- Outcome: {entry['outcome']}\n"
)
return '\n'.join(lines)
Status update template
For keeping stakeholders informed:
## Crisis status update [number]
**As of**: [timestamp]
**Next update**: [scheduled time]
### Current situation
[2-3 sentence summary of where things stand]
### What we know
- [Confirmed fact 1]
- [Confirmed fact 2]
### What we're working on
- [Action item 1] - [owner]
- [Action item 2] - [owner]
### Key decisions made
- [Decision] - [rationale]
### Immediate next steps
1. [Next action]
2. [Next action]
### Resources needed
- [Resource/support needed]
---
**Contact**: [Crisis lead name and number]
Post-crisis review
After-action checklist
## Post-crisis review template
### Timeline reconstruction
- When did we first learn of the crisis?
- When did we first respond publicly?
- Key decision points and timing
### What went well
- [Specific success 1]
- [Specific success 2]
### What could improve
- [Gap or failure 1] → [Recommended fix]
- [Gap or failure 2] → [Recommended fix]
### Process questions
- Did escalation work as intended?
- Were the right people involved?
- Did we have accurate information when needed?
- Was external communication timely and accurate?
### Specific improvements
- [ ] Update crisis protocol to address [gap]
- [ ] Train team on [identified weakness]
- [ ] Add [resource/tool] for future incidents
### Documentation
- All communications archived: [ ] Yes
- Decision log complete: [ ] Yes
- Media coverage compiled: [ ] Yes
Misinformation rapid response
Counter-messaging framework
## Misinformation response checklist
### Before responding
- [ ] Is this claim spreading significantly?
- [ ] Will our response reach the affected audience?
- [ ] Could responding amplify the false claim?
### The response formula
1. **Lead with truth** (don't repeat the myth first)
2. **Be specific** about what's accurate
3. **Explain briefly** why the false claim is wrong
4. **Provide source** for accurate information
### Example structure
GOOD: "The event starts at 7pm at City Hall. Some posts incorrectly listed the time as 5pm."
BAD: "Some people are saying the event is at 5pm. That's wrong. It's actually at 7pm."
(Repeating the myth first reinforces it)
Journalist safety during crisis
## Field safety checklist
### Before deployment
- [ ] Editor knows your location and check-in schedule
- [ ] Emergency contacts updated
- [ ] Phone charged, backup battery
- [ ] First aid basics reviewed
- [ ] Exit routes identified
### During coverage
- [ ] Regular check-ins maintained
- [ ] Location sharing active
- [ ] Press credentials visible
- [ ] Recording when safe to do so
- [ ] Not taking unnecessary risks for story
### If situation escalates
- [ ] Leave immediately if directed
- [ ] Follow crowd flow, don't fight it
- [ ] Protect equipment but not at personal risk
- [ ] Contact newsroom ASAP
Related skills
- source-verification - Verify claims during fast-moving events
- social-media-intelligence - Monitor spread of information
- interview-transcription - Document statements accurately
Skill metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|
| version | 1.0.0 |
| created | 2025-12-26 |
| updated | 2026-05-08 |
| author | Joe Amditis |
| domain | communications, journalism |
| complexity | advanced |
