1. CASE 10: TWO EMPLOYEES
WITH A VIDEO CAMERA
Social Mediaand a Damaged GlobalDomino’sBrand
Haley McGee
PR192, SpringSemester, 2015, Dr. Martinelli

2. McGee 1
The influx of social media in the digital age has led to new challenges for companies and
their relations with the public. For companies to be able to detect and handle potential crises, a
form of monitoring has been developed called ‘social media monitoring’ and is defined as “the
continuous systematic observation and analysis of social media networks and social
communities.”1 The monitoring of media can be an incredibly effective tool at diffusing a crisis,
or if used inefficiently or incorrectly, can let a minor crisis develop into a major one. In studying
the company Domino’s and its ability to use social media monitoring for a crisis shows just how
potentially damaging this medium can be. Domino's response to its crisis can be compared to
Sony's use of social media monitoring to see how effectively it can be used.
An effective way to monitor social media is to create an account on the forums that are
wanting to be monitored, so that the public can directly query and be kept up to date with events
relating to the company. When these forums are responded to in a quick manner, it has the added
effect of easing tensions, as Armon, D states, “For fans, just knowing that someone is on duty
and moderating the channel may be enough to calm the frayed nerves of an angry consumer.”2
Giving customers a chance to release frustrations with the ability to be contacted allows for a
better company image, but also gives the chance to diffuse situations that may become larger
problems if left unattended to. Allowing customers to express their opinions can help reduce
negative feelings; this is because “it is well known in psychology that people’s anger could be
reduced by simply venting their sentiments.”3 Responding to these issues directly allows the
company to resolve issues and stop them from turning into a crisis. The other benefit of actively
1 (Fensel, Leiter, & Stavrakantonakis, 2012)
2 (Armon, 2010)
3 (Frantz & Bennigson, 2005)

3. McGee 2
using social media to monitor customers is that it allows a rapport to be built and for clients to be
more likely to check on your responses to an event.
Social media monitoring is a multi-faceted tool that is designed to track discussions about
a company by one of two methods, the first of which contains a software search for keywords, in
order to create an overview of online communications and their locations. The other is to monitor
specific forums for a number of keywords; this software can be setup to monitor continuously
over a certain period of time as opposed to the other.4 If the software is used effectively, it can be
a very useful tool from a management perspective as it allows “both for detecting new or
emergent crises, as well as getting a better situation awareness of how people react to a particular
crisis.”5 Because of this awareness, management can make a decision on whether their current
public relations plan is effective as well as allowing them to determine promptly whether a crisis
is about to occur.
None of these monitoring methods were in place when Domino’s Pizza faced its crisis in
2009. Two employees videotaped themselves in series of vile acts that went against Domino’s
health and safety policies. These tapes included acts such as putting cheese in their nose and then
placing it on a food order. The videos were then uploaded to YouTube, where an online resource
for consumer driven advice, The Consumerist, began to display them on its site along with
outraged comments from customers. The videos were uploaded on Monday the 13th of April, but
were not seen by Dominos until a customer notified Tim McIntyre, Vice President of Corporate
Communications. McIntire was unable to get the videos removed from YouTube until
Wednesday the 15th of April. Once Domino’s was aware of the situation it sprang into crisis
4 (Bekkers, Edwards, & de Kool, 2013)
5 (Johansson, Brynielsson, & Quijano, 2012)

4. McGee 3
mode, launching a campaign with the following three key messages, “Two idiots with a video
camera”, “They don’t represent the rest of us” and “Nothing is more sacred than your trust.”6
These messages were targeted to distance the company from the tapes. The company then
created a temporary Twitter account to respond to any queries and statements from the public
and the president of Domino’s, Patrick Doyle released an apology video to YouTube on
Wednesday, the 15th of April.
The lack of social media monitoring by Domino’s meant that the videos had been
uploaded almost 24 hours before they were noticed. By the time that Domino’s was able to react,
48 hours later, the videos had been viewed 350,000 times before the apology video was uploaded
or the Twitter account was created to respond to customers. If Domino’s had used media
monitoring effectively, it would have been able to identify the crisis quicker and reduce the
damage done to the company’s reputation. Once Domino’s had discovered the issue and began to
use social media monitoring through its Twitter account and the YouTube video, its ability to
handle the crisis improved. This allowed the company to calm people with updates like notifying
people that none of the food in the videos was given to the public and the two staff members in
question were facing legal charges for the incidents.
Despite the effective crisis management after the first 48 hours, the initial delay that
occurred because Domino’s was not actively monitoring social media led to a damaged
reputation. Because there was no communication to its consumers, it was equivalent to saying
“It’s OK. We’re going to outsource our reputation, and we’re comfortable with our customers
defining it for us.”7 In thiscase,the reputationbecame threatenedwhenviewersof the videoworried
6 (Swann, 2014)
7 (Solis, 2008)

5. McGee 4
that the foodhad beensentoutand wonderedif thatwasa regularoccurrence inall of the Domino’s
stores. Because there was no medium for customers to turn to in order to get accurate
information on what had happened and what was being done to correct the issue, customers were
left to find information from other sources. Companies cannot allow this because, as stated by
Armon, “of course, the nature of social media is that everyone is a publisher. Because consumers
can generate content that is sometimes incorrect—or, worse yet, deliberately disparaging.”8 With
a company that serves food, word of mouth about produce and quality is important and not
reacting to these statements hurts the reputation of the entire company, not just the store where
the incident occurred.
The inefficient way that Domino’s Pizza handled its social media monitoring can be
noted when compared to a crisis that occurred to the Sony Corporation. Sony had experienced a
delay and was forced to postpone the release of the PlayStation 3, breaking its promise of a
global release date. This lead to backlash from its customers with one blogger writing “All the
king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put this disastrous mess back together again.”9 At
the time Sony had been monitoring social media through software known as Biz360 and found
that nearly a quarter of all online mentions were negative. Further research allowed it to create a
real-time spider map to show keywords used by bloggers so Sony was able to find the criticism
and rumors against the company; which can be even damaging when they turn into perceived
facts. With this knowledge Sony was able to release statements and correct any misinformation
and negative views. Nick Sharples, Director of Corporate Communications at Sony Computer
Entertainment, shows the risk of not addressing a customer’s statements when he stated, “‘One
8 (Armon, 2010)
9 (Crush, 2006)

6. McGee 5
website in Spain - meristation.com - wrote that the PS3 would not be out until May 2007. This
was wrong,' Says Sharples. 'It could have got to the BBC, but we were able to nip it in the bud
before that happened.’”10 Because of Sony’s actions, the delay of the PlayStation 3, while still a
crisis, did not develop into a much larger one thanks to Sony’s intuitive use of social media
monitoring.
The importance of social media monitoring is clearly seen in Domino’s 2009 crisis.
Because of Company’s lack of monitoring, it was unaware of the disgusting videos until many
hours had passed. This issue, in turn, caused the company to suffer damage to its reputation that
would take time to regain. Once the video was detected, Domino’s acted effectively but the first
48 hours created a crisis that would not have been as large if found sooner. There is no doubt that
if Domino’s had used media monitoring, it would have had a positive effect on the situation.
Using this crisis management tool would have allowed the company to act on the situation
quickly and quash any issues as they arose.
10 (Crush, 2006)

7. McGee 6
WorksCited
Armon,D. (2010). Readyor Not:Is Your CrisisCommunicationsPlanAnti-Social?PublicRelationsTactics
, 10-11.
Bekkers,V.,Edwards,A.,&de Kool,D.(2013). Social mediamonitoring:Responsive governace inthe
shadowof surveillance. GovernmentInformation Quarterly ,335-342.
Crush,P. (2006). Firefightinginthe digital age. PRWeek,London Ed. (pp.24-25, 27). London:Haymarket
BusinessPublicationsLtd.
Fensel,D.,Leiter,B.,&Stavrakantonakis,I.(2012, 07 19). Social Media Monitoring. Retrieved02 11,
2015, fromInnsbruck:SemanticTechnological Institute:
http://oc.sti2.at/sites/default/files/SMM%20Handouts.pdf
Frantz,C., & Bennigson,C.(2005). Betterlate thanearly:The influence of timingonapology
effectiveness. Journalof ExperimentalSocialPsychology ,201-207.
Johansson,F.,Brynielsson,J.,&Quijano,M.(2012). Estimatingcitizenalertnessincrisesusingsocial
mediamonitoringandanalysis.(pp.189-196). Odense:IEEE.
Solis,B.(2008, 11 03). Reinventing CrisisCommunicationsfor theSocialWeb. Retrieved0211, 2015,
fromBrian Solis - Definingthe impactof technology,culture andbusiness:
http://www.briansolis.com/2008/11/reinventing-crisis-communications-for/
Swann,P.(2014). Two EmployeeswithaVideoCamera.InP.Swann, Casesin Public Relations
Management:TheRiseof Social Media and Activism (pp.144-153). London:Routledge.