This case study investigated the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada's crisis communication tactics employed in response to the Hepatitis C outbreak springing from the clinic in 2008. The research sought to evaluate the success of the clinic's crisis PR strategy, as it followed the advice of its lawyers and declined to take responsibility for the patients' exposure or offer an apology. The aim of this study is to illuminate public relations alternatives to apology in instances of corporate transgressions resulting in major harm, to salvage reputation and preserve company viability. Content analysis was used to extract public opinion from reader feedback comments on online news stories regarding the clinic. Benoit's (1995) Image Restoration theory and Coombs and Holladay's (2002) Situational Crisis Communication theory were used to develop the content analysis instrument and evaluate the clinic's crisis communication strategies. Agenda-setting theory was also explored between the news stories and the reader feedback. Analysis yielded overwhelmingly negative public response to the clinic's communications, and revealed some possible reasons for the negativity. A list of five crisis communications \"best practices\" was developed from these discoveries, highlighting five public relations principles to consider when the lawyers say apology is not an option: 1. Have a rapid initial response; 2. Maintain consistent message strategy, especially when employing Situational Crisis Communication tactis; 3. Compensate victims; 4. Give 'em a \"pound of flesh,\" and 5. Get the situation squared away quickly. Evidence showed agenda-setting effects for the public influencing the \"tone\" of reporting (positive, neutral or negative), and both the news outlet and the public contributed to determining focal issues of the crisis. This finding underscores the importance of following \"best practices\" guidelines to devise effective communication strategies for shaping reputation in times of crisis.
","abstract_html":"<p>This case study investigated the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada's crisis communication tactics employed in response to the Hepatitis C outbreak springing from the clinic in 2008. The research sought to evaluate the success of the clinic's crisis PR strategy, as it followed the advice of its lawyers and declined to take responsibility for the patients' exposure or offer an apology. The aim of this study is to illuminate public relations alternatives to apology in instances of corporate transgressions resulting in major harm, to salvage reputation and preserve company viability. Content analysis was used to extract public opinion from reader feedback comments on online news stories regarding the clinic. Benoit's (1995) Image Restoration theory and Coombs and Holladay's (2002) Situational Crisis Communication theory were used to develop the content analysis instrument and evaluate the clinic's crisis communication strategies. Agenda-setting theory was also explored between the news stories and the reader feedback. Analysis yielded overwhelmingly negative public response to the clinic's communications, and revealed some possible reasons for the negativity. A list of five crisis communications "best practices" was developed from these discoveries, highlighting five public relations principles to consider when the lawyers say apology is not an option: 1. Have a rapid initial response; 2. Maintain consistent message strategy, especially when employing Situational Crisis Communication tactis; 3. Compensate victims; 4. Give 'em a "pound of flesh," and 5. Get the situation squared away quickly. Evidence showed agenda-setting effects for the public influencing the "tone" of reporting (positive, neutral or negative), and both the news outlet and the public contributed to determining focal issues of the crisis. This finding underscores the importance of following "best practices" guidelines to devise effective communication strategies for shaping reputation in times of crisis.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["O'Harra, Erin Kaye"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts (M.A.)","degree_level":"Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted","degree_discipline":"Communication","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Carol Ann Hackley"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2009,"date_issued":"2009-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2009-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:46Z","subjects":["Communication in public health","Emergency management","Crisis management","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/725","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Carol Ann Hackley"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["O'Harra, Erin Kaye"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2009-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Communication"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Communication in public health","Emergency management","Crisis management","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/725"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This case study investigated the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada's crisis communication tactics employed in response to the Hepatitis C outbreak springing from the clinic in 2008. The research sought to evaluate the success of the clinic's crisis PR strategy, as it followed the advice of its lawyers and declined to take responsibility for the patients' exposure or offer an apology. The aim of this study is to illuminate public relations alternatives to apology in instances of corporate transgressions resulting in major harm, to salvage reputation and preserve company viability. Content analysis was used to extract public opinion from reader feedback comments on online news stories regarding the clinic. Benoit's (1995) Image Restoration theory and Coombs and Holladay's (2002) Situational Crisis Communication theory were used to develop the content analysis instrument and evaluate the clinic's crisis communication strategies. Agenda-setting theory was also explored between the news stories and the reader feedback. Analysis yielded overwhelmingly negative public response to the clinic's communications, and revealed some possible reasons for the negativity. A list of five crisis communications \"best practices\" was developed from these discoveries, highlighting five public relations principles to consider when the lawyers say apology is not an option: 1. Have a rapid initial response; 2. Maintain consistent message strategy, especially when employing Situational Crisis Communication tactis; 3. Compensate victims; 4. Give 'em a \"pound of flesh,\" and 5. Get the situation squared away quickly. Evidence showed agenda-setting effects for the public influencing the \"tone\" of reporting (positive, neutral or negative), and both the news outlet and the public contributed to determining focal issues of the crisis. This finding underscores the importance of following \"best practices\" guidelines to devise effective communication strategies for shaping reputation in times of crisis.
"]},{"key":"dc:source","label":"Dc Source","values":["80"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["When going to the doctor makes you sick : a case study of the crisis communication strategy of the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Carol Ann Hackley"],"dc:creator":["O'Harra, Erin Kaye"],"dc:date.available":["2009-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This case study investigated the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada's crisis communication tactics employed in response to the Hepatitis C outbreak springing from the clinic in 2008. The research sought to evaluate the success of the clinic's crisis PR strategy, as it followed the advice of its lawyers and declined to take responsibility for the patients' exposure or offer an apology. The aim of this study is to illuminate public relations alternatives to apology in instances of corporate transgressions resulting in major harm, to salvage reputation and preserve company viability. Content analysis was used to extract public opinion from reader feedback comments on online news stories regarding the clinic. Benoit's (1995) Image Restoration theory and Coombs and Holladay's (2002) Situational Crisis Communication theory were used to develop the content analysis instrument and evaluate the clinic's crisis communication strategies. Agenda-setting theory was also explored between the news stories and the reader feedback. Analysis yielded overwhelmingly negative public response to the clinic's communications, and revealed some possible reasons for the negativity. A list of five crisis communications \"best practices\" was developed from these discoveries, highlighting five public relations principles to consider when the lawyers say apology is not an option: 1. Have a rapid initial response; 2. Maintain consistent message strategy, especially when employing Situational Crisis Communication tactis; 3. Compensate victims; 4. Give 'em a \"pound of flesh,\" and 5. Get the situation squared away quickly. Evidence showed agenda-setting effects for the public influencing the \"tone\" of reporting (positive, neutral or negative), and both the news outlet and the public contributed to determining focal issues of the crisis. This finding underscores the importance of following \"best practices\" guidelines to devise effective communication strategies for shaping reputation in times of crisis.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/725"],"dc:rights":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:source":["80"],"dc:subject":["Communication in public health","Emergency management","Crisis management","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"dc:title":["When going to the doctor makes you sick : a case study of the crisis communication strategy of the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Communication"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:46Z"}