Why Companies Often Don’t Address Internal Controversies in Public, Generally Speaking

IMPORTANT NOTE: I wrote this post prior to Thursday’s news, and is not directly related to that or any other specific company or situation. Please read it only as important background information to help explain why, generally speaking, companies often don’t address internal controversies in public.

I’ve seen various controversies within the virtual world/gaming user community light up across social media over the years, some of them involving serious (if unconfirmed) allegations involving the companies themselves. 

When this happens, it sometimes leads angry user community members to ask: “Why isn’t the company announcing anything about these allegations publicly?”

Speaking very generally -- and this reflects my own experience working for various virtual world/online gaming companies over the years, when situations like this happen -- there’s often a very good reason for the radio silence. 

Here’s some considerations that often come up in cases like this:

When the allegations are serious enough, for starters, the company’s legal team tends to take over the entire show, ordering a company-wide STFU. 

Often this is a very smart (if frustrating) move: The company is juggling staff obligations, workers rights claims, their reputation with the industry and in the media, and so on. 

Then there’s the allegations themselves. Saying anything about them publicly may prejudice any eventual legal claims that crop up. 

This move also tends to be self-reinforcing. If the company lawyers are saying STFU, staffers become very leery of trying to overrule this order. Whoever even attempts to do so may find themselves on the chopping block. So the silence becomes even more silent (so to speak).  

But what happens if serious allegations are somehow confirmed?

Radio silence may still rule even then. If they involve management or employees, the implicated people may just be asked to leave quietly. The goal here would be to avoid a wrongful termination lawsuit, or bad press, or both. 

Also: Publicly firing an employee/manager can expose the company to defamation/slander lawsuits.

None of this silence is very reassuring to the user community, and may even provoke more angst. Often the company staff is very aware of that, and frustrated that they can’t say anything publicly.

At most, the company may put out a highly anodyne public statement like, “We’re aware of some very serious allegations, and are investigating them.” And leave it at that.

And while it may be frustrating, I recommend not assuming the company isn’t taking those allegations seriously. If it’s any consolation, they’re often the heated subject of closed door, board-level discussions -- discussions that few beyond those doors will ever know about.  

It’s happened before, and it will happen again. It’s surely happening right now within thousands of companies and organizations around the world, from a small plumbing company in Peru to the White House in Washington.

Comments note: As this post relates only to general company policy, please refrain from discussing any current specific situation or personnel.

Comments

[Antonio]

well what is a little bit more hard to explain is why you closed the comments on your previous post about what is happening in Linden Lab..

[Media Matters]

But let’s not talk about the thing, let’s talk about the coverage:

Are you taking the allegations seriously?

Why did you outsource your moderation of the comment topics to a subreddit with (a particular) moderator who uses mod status to peddle a dismissive view of the allegations?

[Wagner James Au]

I can only report that two trusted sources tell me it's being investigated. I'll report more if I can confirm more.

[Ant]

@Antonio ~ its understandable. Not closing comments may lead to accusations of defamation or libel by this website.

[Wagner James Au]

Also the Reddit thread was already active, is heavily moderated, and requires people to at least create a Reddit account to post.

[Siobhan Dreadlow]

As far as NWN goes -- and speaking as a journalist and former newspaper editor -- I would be leery of comments on the investigation as well, particularly when my sources let me know the corporate lawyers are looking into defamation.

Defamation/Libel are damnably hard to PROVE, mind, but "the process is the punishment" if you don't have corporate legal budgets you can be bankrupted even if you WIN.

[Arwyn Quandry]

It's more interesting and telling to watch the behavior surrounding the allegations - the accused persons closing their social media accounts, website pages going down, public staff lists being hidden. That gives some hint into how the company is really feeling about what's going on.

[Jolly Roger]

But they kind of have addressed it by mass deleting of information - that's a reaction and gives us an insight into what panic/crisis reactions are being taken.

The corporate website deletion of the team information - that is not a normal response from a "corporate" UNLESS somebody is no longer on that public team.

Also strange that both LL and the individual concerned forgot wayback machine etc exists which allows that content to still be visible and draws more attention to themselves as a result of the knee jerk actions.

The pictures on Flickr, well anyone can make up their own mind if they set a certain viewpoint on the basis of this being a professional account representing a corporate company.

It looks like they are only making it worse, and perhaps should seek a corporate strategist or crisis PR team to help them. Thank goodness Tilia is under a separate entity.