What was also striking then – and still is now, I’d argue – is the honesty and openness of Chris Reid, the managing director of the security company, S.S.M.S. (Security Search Management and Solutions Ltd).

How often to do you see leaders or company owners fully ‘own’ a crisis like he did?

What is also striking about his media interview from a crisis communications perspective is that he contextualises the situation while still admitting that it was a huge error in his part.

“I have to take full responsibility for leaving a training item around….I have been part of the Metropolitan Police Service Specialist Search Unit since 1985 and retired in 2011.

I have dedicated my service to defeating terrorism …I am absolutely devastated that a lapse in my working protocols has resulted in many people being disappointed, frightened and inconvenienced.”

“The mistake is entirely mine, I have to take full responsibility.” [Read  more here]

Crisis communications – context is everything

The dummy bomb was initially described by police as an “incredibly lifelike explosive device” which was left in one of the toilet blocks and was destroyed in a controlled explosion.

When a crisis strikes—be it a cyberattack or a security emergency at a football ground—communication becomes the most valuable tool in maintaining trust and credibility.

But effective crisis communication isn’t just about speed or clarity- it’s about context.

Without contextualisation, even the most factual message can fall flat or, worse, cause more confusion.

Context Builds Relevance and Trust

• Contextualisation involves tailoring your message to align with your audience’s situation.
• During a crisis, people want to know not only what’s happening, but how it affects them.
• By framing your communication around their concerns—whether it’s safety, service disruption, or financial impact—you demonstrate empathy and authority.

This fosters trust when people need it most.

It Reduces Misunderstanding and Misinformation

• Crises can breed uncertainty. Without context, audiences may misinterpret information or fill in gaps with speculation.
• Providing background, rationale, and next steps helps your message land clearly—and prevents the narrative from being hijacked by rumours or panic on social media.

Different Audiences Need Different Contexts

Customers, employees, investors and the general public all have unique perspectives. A generic statement won’t meet everyone’s needs so tailor your message by audience:

• Customers want to know how their experience is impacted.
• Employees need clarity on job security or safety.
• Regulators expect compliance details and timelines.

By shaping communication through the right lens, you ensure each audience feels seen and informed.

Context Supports Long-Term Reputation Recovery

• Crisis communication doesn’t end when the headlines fade.
• How an organisation responds—and whether it speaks with transparency and care—can determine long-term public perception.
• Providing the full picture (not just damage control) shows accountability and integrity, setting the stage for recovery and resilience.

Final Thoughts

In a crisis, clarity without context is a missed opportunity.

By prioritising contextualisation, organisations can not only manage the immediate fallout but also protect their brand and build stronger relationships.

It’s not just about telling people what’s happening—it’s about helping them understand why it matters.

If you think your company or organisation might need some support to prepare your leadership teams for crisis communications don’t hesitate to get in touch with me – [email protected]

Here’s a link to our media training and crisis communications workshops  – https://www.mickord.com/crisis-management-services/

And here’s another link to some of our recent testimonials and case studies – https://www.mickord.com/case-studies/

I think many of our leaders in business and politics – to name just 2 sectors – could learn from Chris Reid.

Do you?