Clear communication, direct acknowledgment, and public problem-solving are what I believe to be at the heart of a PR apology.
It’s not a foolproof way of bringing a business’s reputation back to 100%, but it’ll certainly make it easier to recover.
I bring this up because of a recent PR crisis that has angered a good chunk of the Philippine nation.
The Troubling Tail
Recently, Filipino dog lovers have banded together against a restaurant in the Philippines called Balay Dako for discriminating against a dog owner because their dog wasn’t a pure breed.
Said restaurant proudly proclaimed that it was a pet-friendly restaurant.
However, when Lara Antonio came in with Yoda, her aspin (short for asong pinoy, which translates roughly to Philippine dog), the staff approached her to say that her dog wasn’t allowed.
Despite following all regulations and her dog behaving well, the staff claimed that they can’t come in because Yoda wasn’t a medium-sized dog. Specifically, that he was above their designated 10 to 15 kg weight limit since Ms. Antonio said he was 18 kg.
That in itself isn’t an indication that they were against Yoda because he isn’t a “fancy, foreign” breed, though.
Ms. Antonio said she knew they weren’t being let in because of his breed when the staff mentioned that the kind of dogs they let in are “shitzus, labradors, etc.”
If you know anything about dogs, you know that labradors most definitely aren’t 15 kgs.
After leaving, Ms. Antonio made a Facebook post about this issue which went viral. Philippine dog lovers have bashed the restaurant because of this viral post.
Eventually, the restaurant posts a response to the growing backlash.
Here’s what they had to say:
Where Their A-Paw-Logy Went Wrong
Now, we’re at the crux of why I’m writing this.
See, even after they posted their apology, the people were still dissatisfied. If anything, this incited their anger even more.
And if you also read the apology above, you’d understand why.
The response misconstrues the issue, diminishes the main problem, and has a distinct lack of a direct apology.
One of the first red flags is that they described the conundrum as a “misunderstanding.” Describing the issue as a misunderstanding is a way to downplay it. It sounds like they’re belittling the people who were infuriated by the problem.
The second main red flag is that they didn’t address the real issue.
Their apology implies that Yoda’s size is the issue because it brings up safety and space issues.
However, as mentioned on Ms. Antonio’s post, their social media where they post the dogs that went into their restaurant featured a large breed dog in it, which they promptly removed after the post went viral.
This inconsistent messaging makes their apology even more disreputable.
So, what is a better response, in my opinion?
How I’d Write A Better Res-Pounce
A good PR apology is one that:
- takes accountability
- is prompt
- is straightforward
- has transparent steps on how they plan to solve the issue
The restaurant’s PR response was prompt as it was posted the day after Ms. Antonio’s post. It did present the steps they plan to take to address the issue.
However…
They didn’t take accountability. They didn’t even say what the main issue Ms. Antonio and the Filipino people had with the interaction. If anything, they were the ones that misunderstood the issue.
They weren’t angry because of the lack of staff training.
They’re mad because it felt like Yoda was discriminated against for not being a pure breed.
It may have come from poor reinforcement of their rules or inconsistent policy-making and enacting. But, the main problem is that a pet owner felt that they were being discriminated against just for not having an “acceptable” dog breed.
To craft a better PR apology for this issue, one must avoid these missteps.
Now, let’s say I was hired as a PR consultant by a restaurant called Resto for Dog Owners. And they had the same incident on the same day with a dog named Yoga and their owner, Ms. Lisa Anthony. Here’s what my response would’ve been.
RESTO FOR DOG OWNERS APOLOGIZES TO YOGA AND MS. LISA ANTHONY
In September 8, 2024, Ms. Lisa Anthony and her dog, Yoga, were asked to leave one of our establishments. The reason cited was that it was because Yoga did not fit the restaurant’s pet size requirements.
However, as Ms. Anthony rightly pointed out, our restaurant has proudly welcomed dogs of the same size as Yoga and even bigger. Thus, being asked to leave has made Ms. Anthony feel that it’s due to Yoga’s breed and not his size.
As a proudly pet-friendly establishment, we want our aspin patrons to feel that they’re just as beloved and welcomed as any other dog breed.
We failed in that endeavor on September 8.
Thus, we would like to formally apologize to Ms. Anthony and Yoga for this problem. We have already reached out to Ms. Anthony to directly apologize and address this disappointing situation in a manner that’s most pleasing for them.
We also apologize to the pet-lovers we have disappointed and angered with this encounter.
Moving forward, we plan to create clearer rules on which dog sizes are allowed into the restaurant. We will base our review of pet policies on the current demographic of our patrons. We will aim to avoid inconsistencies and to enforce fairness for pets, pet owners, and non-pet owners in our establishments.
We will also retrain staff on the best approach to enforcing these rules in a kind and appropriate manner.
We also want to reiterate that our aspin doggies are more than welcome customers into our establishments when they fulfill the pet requirements. We will not tolerate any instances of discrimination against our aspin guests and owners. We’ll be reinforcing that through our staff training and pet policies as well.
Again, we sincerely apologize to Yoga, Ms. Lisa Anthony, and all the pet-lovers community for this encounter.
We at Resto for Dog Owners are sorry, and we appreciate you all for being a vanguard and advocate for our aspin pets and owners. We will do our best to regain your trust slowly through the changes we’re making moving forward.
— From the RESTO FOR DOG OWNERS TEAM
What I Changed In The PR Statement
A true crisis communications strategy isn’t just a statement. It’s a plan.
The PR social media response is just one part of how businesses in a PR crisis should act. That’s why in my revised PR statement, I highlighted the restaurant’s plan moving forward that directly addresses the main issue. It’s listed in the latter part of the statement.
Ideally, businesses should also enact these plans. But, not everybody does that anyway. 🤷
Another approach I did differently is that my response acknowledges the main problem.
Does it put the business in the best light? No, but you’re already in a PR crisis. You’re already in bad lighting.
Your goal in a PR crisis is to put out fires. Not prevent them.
Too many businesses don’t want to acknowledge the problem because of this. However, unless you have large enough resources to sweep things under the rug, many businesses will dig themselves deeper into a hole if they fail to acknowledge the issue.
The best way, in my opinion, to acknowledge the problem is simply by plainly stating what had happened.
I’m sorry that you feel that way. I’m sorry for this misunderstanding.
In both of these sentences, there is no acknowledgement of one’s responsibility in creating the problem. That’s why people react negatively to them.
That’s why in my version of the restaurant’s statement, the first four paragraphs were dedicated to acknowledging the problem alone.
Another aspect I changed is that there was a direct and sincere apology to the aggrieved.
Regardless of whether the apology will be accepted or not, that isn’t the goal of apologizing. The goal is to show that you know that your business has misstepped. That there is repentance on your business’s end.
As you can see, there’s an apology in the headline, the middle, and the end of this statement.
Lastly, a very minor change I made in my version of the statement is the direct mention of names involved.
I mentioned the pet owner’s name, the pet’s name, and the restaurant’s name. Multiple times.
It’s a personal preference perhaps, but to me, the lack of names in their original statement seemed cold and like they didn’t want to hold anyone responsible for anything. The business’s name was only on the logo and nowhere else.
In my revised response, I even added a signature at the end for the business’s name. This way, the response feels more like it’s coming from real people.
Paws and Reflect: A Conclusion
This frustrating experience underscores a broader cultural issue in the Philippines, where anything local is often undervalued or deemed inferior.
I applaud Ms. Antonio for fighting for her aspin and the community of pet lovers that rallied behind her.
Hopefully, more Filipino people avoid these elitist tendencies that have been culturally ingrained in us.
And also, hopefully, dear reader, you’ve learned a thing or two about better crisis communications.
(Special shoutout to my college education. I finally used my PR training, haha! 💪🏼)
