"大叔，你怎么看小米的危机公关？" 本来不想写，因为很多信息不对称，又涉及到3条年轻的生命，现在这个节点，其实无法点评。 但好几个同行来问我的看法，就聊两句。 1、小米的声明，鸡贼吗？ 好多人关注到了"2秒"问题，认为这是小米故意往这方面引导。 大叔的观点是：不好说，因为有太多信息不对称了。 但小米在声明中"摘要公布"的"提交给警方的信息"，大叔认为，小米应该不敢作假。毕竟，这是给警方的信息，涉及了3条人命。 但是否存在"不说假话，但真话不全说"的所谓"公关套路"呢？ 大叔认为此场景也不敢和不应该，可能还有一个理由就是"全部真话"需要由交警部门通报为准。 2、小米为啥不在声明里多点"共情"呢？ 简单对比下华为问界M7针对"山西车祸"的第一封公告。 华为问界是两处： "对于事故中出现的人员伤亡，我们深表痛心，对遇难者表示沉痛的哀悼"和"并对家属提供一切可能的支持。" 小米呢，其实也是两处： "深感痛惜"和"同时，我们的专项组也将在警方的许可与指导下，与事故受难者家属取得联系，全力协助善后事宜，并提供支持与帮助"。 从字数上，好像是小米更多，但从情感上，似乎是华为多一点。 3、但为什么家属说"没联系我"啊？ 再仔 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the crisis management strategies of Haidilao, emphasizing the importance of brand narrative and effective communication in handling public relations crises [4][10][36]. Group 1: Brand Narrative and Crisis Management - Haidilao's brand narrative includes principles such as "changing fate with both hands," "apprenticeship system," and "extreme pursuit of customer experience," which form a coherent structure for brand storytelling [3][4]. - The company faced a significant crisis in August 2017 when a serious hygiene issue at its Beijing store was exposed, leading to widespread media attention [5]. - Haidilao's response was swift, acknowledging the issue, issuing an apology, and committing to comprehensive reforms across all stores, including transparency in kitchen operations and enhanced internal management [6][7]. Group 2: Recent Controversies and Responses - A recent incident in February 2023 involved two minors misbehaving in a Haidilao restaurant, which sparked public outrage and raised questions about food safety and management practices [12][30]. - The company's initial response focused on giving minors a chance and threatened legal action against those who spread the video, which was perceived as a misjudgment of public expectations [13][29]. - Haidilao later offered full refunds and tenfold compensation to affected customers, indicating a sincere attempt to address the situation and restore trust [14][38]. Group 3: Public Perception and Communication Strategy - The article highlights the importance of understanding public sentiment and the potential pitfalls of labeling individuals as "malicious spreaders," which can alienate the audience [18][23]. - Effective crisis communication should focus on empathy, clear messaging, and maintaining trust, rather than merely reacting to social media trends [37][46]. - The article warns against the trend of treating crises as marketing opportunities, emphasizing that genuine crisis management should prioritize restoring organizational reputation and addressing structural flaws [39][59].

文｜ 闰然 编辑｜ 何子维 视觉 | 顾芗 在17岁男孩的小便门事件中，身为受害者的海底捞，却成为了众矢之的。 从结果上看，海底捞不仅道歉，还不惜大方地掏出上千万的天价赔偿金——对4109单顾客，进行10倍补 偿。 但回顾整个事件便会发现，或因海底捞过度想要呈现"服务至上""消费者至上"的完美形象，反而对公众 的愤怒失去了判断，导致其公关策略犯了糊涂。 它宽容了犯事者，却将顾客架在对立面，顺风翻盘的局势被打成了逆风。 "老好人"海底捞 一则让人生理不适的视频在网上流传——2月24日凌晨，两个17岁的男孩，在海底捞上海外滩店聚餐， 醉酒后站上餐桌，向火锅内小便。 3月6日之后，视频火了。 海底捞和消费者，瞬间成了此次事件的直接受害者。 但事关未成年人，海底捞没有第一时间锚定受害者的身份，而是针对始作俑者，采取了原谅的态度，表 示要给他们一个接受教训与成长的机会，并且还呼吁大家避免对其个人及家庭进行不当传播或攻击，并 强调谴责并追究"恶意传播者"的责任。 但不明是非的大度，时机显然不对，共情对象也错了——未成年人公然挑衅公序良俗，向火锅内小便， 这是极为不文明的行为，影响十分恶劣。但海底捞不能保证消费者的用餐安全 ...