The Art of Authenticity, Trust, and Transparency

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash (2021)

Keywords: authenticity, trust, transparency, trust, crisis communication

Authenticity, trust and transparency are crucial components for a brand to maintain a strong reputation and powerful relationships. Through the given case studies, scenarios are presented that illustrate how a brand can achieve efficient communication, as well as inadequate communication.  Comprehension and inclusion of these aspects can lead to a brand or company’s success through consistency and ethical communication.

Authenticity

Authenticity is epitomized through the Fetterman vs Oz case study. Fetterman’s campaign used “an authentic voice, social media trolling, and irreverent humor” (VanSlette, 2023, p. 1) to complete a successful Senate run. Fetterman utilized social media effectively, giving him a significant advantage during the campaign. He was authentically himself on and off social media throughout the duration of the campaign and called out Dr. Oz for his lack of authenticity.

Fetterman had health issues that made him step back from social media but “his team was able to harness his authenticity to create a powerful messaging strategy even when he was physically sidelined and unable to be actively campaigning” (VanSlette, 2023, p. 4).

Fetterman was able to capture his authenticity through social media and it became a ‘viable’ way for him to communicate and campaign.

Public Relations Society of America Inc. states that "authentic storytelling goes beyond merely conveying information; it involves creating a narrative that speaks to the audience's emotions, values, and aspirations" (Caiola, 2025, para. 3). Fetterman did just that by relating to his audience through social media and staying true to himself.

A lack of authenticity is demonstrated in the case study of Ryanair. Ryanair was not known for authenticity, but more so, their 'attention-seeking' strategies. According to Sarah VanSlette and McKenzi McClain, "Ryanair lacked a good reputation with customers, but this did not seem to drastically influence customers' buying decisions since its flights were the cheapest across Europe" (2018, para. 4).

Photo by Luca Davies from Unsplash (2018)

Ryanair eventually implemented "Always Getting Better" (AGB) as a way to focus on customer service, which has led the company to make positive changes and increase authenticity.

Trust

‘Flying the Unfriendly Skies’ is a prime example of a company that lost the trust of its customers and the public. United lacked accountability for their actions and instead, blamed the passenger. United also released a statement that critics on social media ‘seized’.

In a PR Daily article, Allison Carter interviewed communicators on LinkedIn to share advice for off-the-record communication. One of the interviewees, Sarah Kissko Hersh, told her, "Don't say it if you don't want it published" (Carter, 2024). This is great advice for any company that does not think about what they say until it is too late. United should have thought about their word choices before releasing that statement.

The company failed to take accountability and continued to blame the passenger through multiple statements. As videos and the truth about the incident were exposed, perceptions of United were altered. People took it to social media and created hashtags #BoycottUnitedAirlines, #BoycottUnited, #wtfUnited, #UnitedAirlinesAssault and much more. Not only was United losing trust, but they were also lacking authenticity.

When a company continues to take accountability for its actions, it creates confusion about whether a customer can trust it anymore. Along with that, United was unclear through their later campaigns. The message they were sending to their consumers was inconsistent, leading to a lack of trust building.

Transparency

The case study involving Disneyland’s response to the measles outbreak at Disney California Adventure Park is a testament to crisis communication involving ‘societal issues and the varied interests of multiple actors’ (Aylesworth-Spink, 2016, para. 1). This study highlighted the response of not only Disneyland but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as well. In this scenario, the California Department of Public Health was transparent about the confirmed measles cases and whether the people were vaccinated or not.

The outbreak had sparked anti-vaccination sentiments, introducing debate and confusion. However, the stances between the CDPH and The Walt Disney Corporation can be easily differentiated. The CDPH was transparent about updates and consistent with communication. Along with that, they pushed for the necessity of immunization.

On the other hand, Disney lacked consistency and clarity. The company can be said to have focused on promoting the mission and values of the company. They lacked reporting updates until the end, when it was declared safe to visit. Disney did not engage on social media the way many believed it should have. With their large presence on social media, it would have benefited the public more if Disney had utilized those channels.

In conclusion, these case studies showcased a plethora of components that are necessary to maintain sufficient public relations. Authenticity, trust and transparency can be demonstrated through multiple channels and methods. Each study displayed and/or fell short of these important traits in different ways.  

References

Aylesworth-Spink, S. (2017, August 29). Protecting the Herd: An Analysis of Public Relations Responses to the 2015 Measles Outbreak Originating at Disneyland and Disney California Adventure Park. Case studies in strategic communication. http://cssc.uscannenberg.org/cases/v5/v5art10/index.html

Caiola, M. (2025, February). Authentic storytelling: The key to campaigns that connect and inspire. PRSA. https://www.prsa.org/article/authentic-storytelling-the-key-to-campaigns-that-connect-and-inspire

Carter, A. (2024, November 12). “It comes down to trust”: Communicators on when to go on background, off the record. PR Daily. https://www.prdaily.com/when-to-go-on-background-off-the-record/

Flying the unfriendly skies. "Coffee, tea, or a savage beating?". (n.d.)

S. VanSlette. (2023). Trolling and sick burns: John Fetterman’s winning social media strategy against Mehmet Oz in the 2022 Pennsylvania Senate campaign. Case Studies in Strategic Communication Journal. https://whyy.org/articles/fetterman-oz-pa-senate-race-social-media-trolling/

VanSlette, S., & McClain, M. (2018). The case of Ryanair: Demonstrating the benefits and the limits of incivility. Case Studies in Strategic Communication, 7, 36-55. https://cssc-ojsutexas.tdl.org/cssc/issue/view/7