This case is situated within a public relations context in which media organizations begin to show interest in a particular issue while internal organizational information is still under review and cannot yet be fully verified.
In public relations practice, information related to a specific issue is rarely available in complete form at the same time.
However, media organizations operate under their own deadlines and may initiate inquiries before an organization is able to confirm sufficient facts for formal communication.
Under such conditions, communication decisions cannot be limited to determining what should be communicated.
They must also address when communication should occur and to what extent information should be disclosed.
Relevant information was still undergoing verification and confirmation
Time pressure imposed by media production cycles
The risk of communicating incomplete or potentially inaccurate information
Communication decisions in this case were shaped by several critical constraints, including:
The need to maintain accuracy and credibility of information
The potential long-term impact of communication on organizational reputation
Ethical principles of communication and responsibility to the public
These constraints required that decisions not be driven solely by time pressure,
but by careful consideration of broader and longer-term consequences.
The decision-making approach began with an assessment of the level of information readiness,
distinguishing between facts that could be verified and those that required further confirmation.
The execution process involved:
Defining clear boundaries around information that could be communicated safely
Selecting language that conveyed transparency without drawing premature conclusions
Sequencing communication to ensure message consistency across all channels
Communication efforts therefore focused on providing information at an appropriate level,
while allowing room for updates as greater clarity became available.
This approach helped mitigate the risks associated with miscommunication:
Media outlets received a clear informational framework grounded in verified facts
The organization maintained credibility and message consistency
The need for corrective communication or subsequent clarification was reduced
These outcomes underscore the importance of deliberate and well-considered decision-making in public relations practice.
This case demonstrates that public relations work is not merely a matter of responding quickly to media inquiries.
Rather, it is a decision-making process that requires balancing speed, accuracy, and responsibility to the public.
Choosing to communicate at an appropriate level may, in certain contexts, hold greater value than attempting full disclosure when information is not yet sufficiently established.
Aur-Anggoon Aiempaphad (Peach)
Digital Marketing & PR Practitioner
Practice-led | Execution-focused
89/213 Soi Sukhumvit 64, Phra Khanong Tai,
Phra Khanong, Bangkok 10260
© 2025 MR.PEACH All Rights Reserved.
