Nonprofit organizations rely on the goodwill of the public to engage in the tasks they undertake, and this relationship is based on trust and the ethical ground that nonprofits strive to maintain. Unfortunately, nonprofits often suffer a loss of reputation due to negative reports published about them, which makes them appear lesser than other nonprofits.

For this reason, it is very important for these organizations to have a plan in place to mitigate the impact of negative publicity. Below are four steps that nonprofits can follow to build the appropriate plan for dealing with negative press.

1. Assess the Source of the Rumor

Assessing the source of the rumor or negative report is the first step in dealing with negative publicity. Therefore, the nonprofit organization should verify the source of the reports that tarnish its reputation, identify the entities behind them, and determine whether these negative reports are taken seriously. When the source is disreputable, silence is the best strategy to avoid giving it the credibility it does not deserve, and to prevent these organizations from spreading the circulating rumors further. However, investigating and discussing the story is beneficial if it has been published by a more reputable source.

2. Communicate with the Article Writer

If the source of the article is reputable and trustworthy, and if the published article contains some inaccuracies, the concerned nonprofit organization can reach out to the article's writer and explain its perspective on the story, maintaining respect and composure since reacting emotionally in such cases will generate a negative response that exacerbates the problem. The main goal of this step is to make the targeted organization’s viewpoint regarding the various aspects of the story heard, and to prevent creating more enemies.

3. Issue a Public Response

Thanks to the internet, issuing a widespread response is easier than ever. Therefore, the concerned nonprofit organization can publish a public response on its blog or on social media platforms. When drafting the response, the nonprofit must explain its viewpoint, and if it has made a mistake, it should then focus in its public response on what it plans to do in the future to rectify the situation.

After explaining its viewpoint and making promises to rectify the mistakes (if necessary), the concerned nonprofit should then move on to highlight its key positive aspects, including the number of people it has helped, the successful projects it has contributed to, and the importance of its mission. It is essential for the public response published by the organization to conclude with a positive note so that readers have the opportunity to reflect and focus on all the charitable work carried out by the organization.

4. Avoid Argument on Social Media

Arguing on social media is futile, and the organization should not pay too much attention to comments here or there on its social media platforms, especially if these comments come from a disreputable source. However, if comments are overwhelming and come from dozens of users in response to a rumor about a particular organization, that organization should not react defensively; instead, it should politely respond, including a link to its official public response, and invite users to read it.

Finally, the nonprofit organization must consider that everything it publishes online is visible to everyone, and poor and emotional wording in a response can turn that response into a completely different argument. If the attacks are unreasonable, the nonprofit should avoid responding to these comments or consider deleting them.

Source