Corporate PR Done Poorly in 2024: A Year of Missteps and Missed Opportunities

In 2024, corporate public relations (PR) has become more vital than ever before. The rapidly evolving media landscape, fueled by social media, instant news, and digital communication, means that the way companies handle their public image can either elevate or damage their reputation in mere moments. With new challenges such as increasing corporate scrutiny, shifting consumer expectations, and heightened competition, corporate PR is more than just about managing press releases or organizing events; it’s about building trust, engaging audiences, and maintaining a brand’s integrity.

However, 2024 has seen some notable corporate PR disasters that demonstrate just how easily things can go awry when companies fail to respond to crises effectively, communicate poorly, or overlook the nuances of brand messaging. This op-ed will delve into several high-profile instances of corporate PR gone wrong in 2024, examining the missteps, the fallout, and the lessons these cases offer for the future of corporate communications.

1. Twitter’s Struggling Identity Crisis: A Brand Lost in Translation

When Elon Musk acquired Twitter in late 2022, the promise of a revamped platform, new policies, and a fresh approach to social media was initially met with both optimism and skepticism. By 2024, however, Twitter’s transformation was riddled with PR missteps that left the brand struggling to maintain any semblance of its former self. Musk’s controversial decisions, inconsistent messaging, and erratic leadership not only alienated users but also resulted in a PR disaster that sent the company into an ongoing identity crisis.

What Went Wrong?

• Inconsistent Messaging: Throughout 2024, Twitter’s PR efforts were dominated by confusion and a lack of clear, cohesive messaging. One moment, Musk was making bold claims about transforming Twitter into a “free speech platform”; the next, he was banning journalists and high-profile users without much explanation. This inconsistency created a sense of unease about what Twitter actually stood for and undermined any attempts to rebuild the company’s reputation.
• Ignoring Stakeholder Sentiments: Instead of considering the concerns of users, advertisers, and stakeholders, Twitter’s PR strategy often appeared reactive and dismissive. When backlash arose—whether over controversial content moderation decisions or the firing of long-time employees—the company’s public response was late, defensive, and failed to engage meaningfully with the criticisms. Instead of owning up to mistakes and listening to its audience, Twitter’s messaging often shifted blame or deflected responsibility.
• Tone-Deaf Communication: One of the most glaring missteps came in 2024 when Twitter attempted to rebrand itself as X, a bold pivot toward becoming an “everything app.” While rebranding itself wasn’t inherently problematic, the manner in which it was executed reflected a deeper lack of understanding of its user base. Instead of embracing the heritage of Twitter and its history as a platform for news, trends, and social conversations, the rebrand seemed to come out of nowhere and lacked a clear explanation or rationale. The abruptness of the change, coupled with an absence of user engagement, only added fuel to the fire of public distrust.

Lessons Learned

In 2024, Twitter’s PR failure serves as a textbook example of how lack of clarity, failure to address concerns, and inconsistent messaging can lead to an identity crisis for a brand. When undergoing significant change—such as a leadership shift or rebrand—corporate PR needs to ensure that communication with both internal and external stakeholders is consistent, transparent, and empathetic.Listening to customer concerns and responding with authenticity is key to maintaining brand loyalty and public trust.

2. Starbucks’ “Black Lives Matter” Controversy: Tone-Deaf Corporate Responses in a Time of Social Justice

Starbucks has long been regarded as a brand committed to social justice and inclusivity. However, in 2024, the company faced a significant PR debacle when its public stance on theBlack Lives Matter (BLM) movement came under scrutiny after an incident at one of its stores in the U.S.

In this case, a Starbucks employee posted a video on social media criticizing the company’s apparentlack of action and commitment to racial justice despite its vocal support of BLM in the past. The employee pointed out that the company had been slow to address issues of racial bias and diversity within its stores, particularly in light of its public statements. The video quickly went viral, and Starbucks was forced to respond publicly. Unfortunately, their response only deepened the crisis.

What Went Wrong?

• Lack of Action Behind Statements: Starbucks had publicly voiced support for racial justice movements in 2020, making strong statements about combating systemic racism. However, by 2024, the company had failed to deliver on these promises in a tangible way. When faced with allegations of racial bias and inaction, Starbucks’ initial PR response felt like little more than a performative statement rather than a genuine commitment to change.
• Delayed and Defensive Response: Starbucks’ PR team took days to respond to the viral video, and when they did, the response was insufficient. The company issued a generic statement acknowledging the situation but failed to provide concrete actions or a timeline for how it would address the allegations. Instead of acknowledging the problem head-on and addressing it with transparency, the company seemed more focused on protecting its image.
• Inconsistent Messaging with Employees: The broader issue for Starbucks lay in its failure to align its internal culture with its external messaging. Employees, especially those from marginalized communities, felt increasingly disillusioned by the company’s lack of progress on racial diversity and inclusion. When PR campaigns fail to align with internal company culture, the public can sense the disconnect—and it becomes much harder to restore trust.

Lessons Learned

The Starbucks PR debacle underscores the critical importance of following through on social justice commitments with tangible actions, not just words. PR campaigns that tout support for social causes need to be backed by genuine efforts to change internal practices and improve corporate culture. When facing a crisis related to social justice issues, brands must be transparent, quick to respond, and show clear evidence that they are actively working toward resolving the issue. Internal alignment is just as important as external communication.

3. Bud Light’s “Transgender Ad Campaign”: A Classic Case of Alienating Core Audiences

The Bud Light brand was rocked by a public relations disaster in 2024 when it launched a controversial transgender-inclusive ad campaign featuring Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender influencer. While the campaign’s intent was to reach a more diverse, younger audience, it inadvertently alienated the company’s core demographic: conservative beer drinkers in the American heartland.

The backlash was swift and severe, with many loyal customers feeling that the campaign was an attempt to push apolitical agenda. Sales plummeted, and Bud Light faced significant public scrutiny, including calls for boycotts and protests at bars and sporting events. The company’s PR response to the crisis was riddled with errors.

What Went Wrong?

• Lack of Understanding of Core Audience: Bud Light’s attempt to engage with a more progressive and diverse audience was admirable, but it came at the expense of alienating their traditional customers—particularly those in conservative or rural areas. Bud Light’s PR team failed to gauge the cultural sensitivities of its core demographic and instead prioritized a progressive narrative that many of their customers perceived as too political or inappropriate for a beer brand.
• Confusion and Mixed Messages: Bud Light’s initial reaction to the backlash was to downplay the controversy rather than engage with it directly. The brand issued several conflicting statements—first doubling down on the campaign, then attempting to distance itself from it. This indecisiveness created confusion and made it seem like Bud Light had no clear direction on where it stood, further aggravating its audience.
• Failure to Address the Crisis Head-On: Instead of owning the situation and initiating an open dialogue with its customers, Bud Light’s response was defensive. The company seemed more focused on damage control than truly listening to the concerns of its loyal customers. This only heightened the sense that the brand had lost touch with its audience.

Lessons Learned

Bud Light’s PR misstep highlights the need for brands to carefully consider their core demographic when executing campaigns, particularly when addressing political or social issues. Brands must also be prepared for potential backlash and have a clear crisis communication plan in place. When responding to a crisis, authenticity is key—brands should be transparent about their intentions, engage with critics respectfully, and own their decisions. In this case, Bud Light would have benefited from more nuanced messaging and a better understanding of how its actions would be perceived by its primary customers.

4. Amazon’s Labor Crisis: The Failure to Acknowledge Worker Concerns

In 2024, Amazon faced yet another public relations nightmare regarding its treatment of warehouse workers. Amid growing concerns about unsafe working conditions, inadequate pay, and poor treatment of labor unions, Amazon’s PR team was tasked with addressing both public scrutiny and mounting pressure from labor rights groups.

The company responded by issuing a series of press releases and hosting corporate webinars where executives touted the company’s commitment to fair wages, worker safety, and diversity. Yet, in the face of growing protests and negative press, Amazon’s approach failed to adequately address the root causes of its labor crisis.

What Went Wrong?

• Dismissive Communication: Amazon’s messaging often appeared dismissive of the worker concerns. Rather than addressing the specific grievances or acknowledging the real challenges faced by its warehouse employees, the company’s response was overly generalized, focusing on its larger efforts and corporate initiatives, which felt disconnected from the workers’ immediate needs.
• Failure to Address Root Issues: Amazon’s PR campaign failed to acknowledge systemic issues, such as workplace conditions, that led to the labor protests. Instead of genuinely engaging with workers’ demands for safer conditions and fair treatment, the company continued to emphasize its global success and technological advancements, which came across as tone-deaf given the context of the crisis.

Lessons Learned

Amazon’s labor crisis highlights the need for companies to approach issues of labor rights and worker concerns with the same level of seriousness and transparency as they would with customer complaints or product issues. When facing labor unrest, it’s critical to acknowledge the root cause of the crisis, engage directly with the affected parties, and offer tangible solutions to improve working conditions. Corporate PR that skirts around these issues or downplays the significance of worker concerns can result in long-term damage to both brand reputation and employee trust.

In 2024, corporate PR remains as crucial as ever in shaping how brands are perceived by the public. While companies are increasingly under scrutiny from stakeholders, consumers, and employees alike, those who fail to adapt their PR strategies or mismanage crises are bound to face long-lasting reputational damage. The cases ofTwitter, Starbucks, Bud Light, and Amazon demonstrate that poor crisis communication, inconsistency, tone-deafness, and failure to engage authentically with key audiences can quickly spiral into a full-fledged disaster.

The key takeaway for brands is that corporate PR should always be rooted in transparency, empathy, and authenticity. By aligning external messaging with internal values and listening to the concerns of all stakeholders, companies can avoid the pitfalls of bad PR and ensure their long-term success. Crisis PR is about building trust—and when handled poorly, it can just as easily destroy it.