How 'Thank You' Turned Into a Crisis Communications Disaster
- John Huck
- Jul 11
- 8 min read
The July 5 press conference in Texas was supposed to offer guidance after catastrophic floods swept through the Hill Country, claiming the lives of children and adults along the way. Instead, it became a viral example of how crisis messaging can falter under the weight of protocol.
Officials, including Texas Governor John Abbott and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, spend nearly 80% of a news conference thanking each other before getting to the first reporter question or sharing the latest casualty information.
In a perspective that has now gone viral, KSAT's Stephania Jimenez shared frustration live on air, saying, in part, "My point is that they spent way too long thanking each other."
As a longtime news anchor, and as Jimenez rightly pointed out, the back-patting and thank-yous at press conferences like this are standard fare. It’s not new, and it’s rarely malicious. But in a crisis, it can come across as tone-deaf or even self-congratulatory.
The real question is: why does this keep happening, and what can you do differently if you're the one holding the mic next time? That’s what this article is here to unpack.
Case Study: What Happened in Texas Hill Country
First, let's set the scene of what went down on the 4th of July weekend in the Hill Country of Texas near Austin.
The Flooding Disaster
Catastrophic flooding hit the Hill Country near Austin, leaving several people dead and dozens more displaced. Among the most heartbreaking moments was the rescue effort at a summer camp, where children and staff were swept away by rising waters.
The News Conference on July 5
On July 5, state and federal officials held a press conference to address the crisis. This was the fifth news conference since the disaster happened.
The news conference included several speakers:
Texas Governor Greg Abbott (7 minutes)
Secretary of Defense Kristi Noem (6:40 minutes)
Senator John Cornyn (About 3 minutes)
Rep. Chip Roy (About 3 minutes)
Kerr County Judge Rob Kelly, the most senior elected official of Kerr County (About 2:30 minutes)
Kerrville Mayor Joe Herring (Just more than 1 minute)
Chief of the Texas Department of Emergency Management Nim Kidd (About 2 minutes)
After those comments, at 26:35 into the news conference, the floor was opened to media questions for seven minutes. Five questions were asked before the news conference was abruptly ended.
The Aftermath
Shortly after the news conference, San Antonio news anchor Stephania Jimenez was live on air when she started discussing the length of the news conference compared to the (lack of) new information.
"What we want is actual information. That is what the people of Kerrville and all over the Hill Country are waiting for right now. That was a lot longer than it needed to be. If they don't have the latest information, they should have said so," Jimenez said.
She also acknowledged that this wasn't an outlier, adding, "I don't know what it is about people who run for federal office that whenever disasters like this happen, they take it upon themselves to first list all the names of people they want to thank."
It's also worth noting that this news conference wasn't weeks after the tragedy, but a wrap-up summary of all that had been done. This was within 48 hours of the disaster happening, while search and rescue were still underway.
The Response
As the general public, viewers, and concerned citizens of Texas weighed in on the topic, support was largely in support of Jimenez and her point.
Without trying to armchair quarterback it too much, I went through the news conference word by word. Here is a list of the frequency of some words to show how it did or didn't balance out.
Some version of the word or phrase including "Thank": 32 Times
"Rescue": 13 Times
"Recover": 11 Times (most of which were during the Q&A section)
"Flood": 7 Times
"Water": 8 Times
"Emergency": 9 Times
The Media's Take
While we’ve touched on what one anchor said, it’s worth zooming out and looking at this through the lens of what the media actually needs in a crisis. In the first 24 to 48 hours of a disaster, especially when search and rescue efforts are active, reporters are looking for timely, factual updates to share with the public.
Who’s missing? What’s being done? What should people avoid? Delays, filler, or vague assurances only add frustration. Especially since this was a rather remote area with little to no media access, they could only get the information that was shared with them by public officials.
In a crisis, every minute spent on thank-yous is a minute reporters aren’t getting critical information, and that’s what their audience is demanding. The media’s job is to distill urgent facts for the public.
When officials spend 26 out of 33 minutes praising each other, it delays the delivery of answers about deaths, damage, safety, and response efforts. It also puts journalists in a tough spot: either air the ceremony or cut it and risk missing the actual updates. It feels like performative politics instead of real communication, and that erodes trust, fast.
Plus, public officials should know that media organizations will take the news conference live from start to finish. That includes broadcast channels and digital streams. Regardless of what proper etiquette might suggest, they should keep the ultimate stakeholder front of mind. Of course, those are the people who elected them and can remember such a communication blunder during the next election cycle.
The Public Officials Take
This kind of drawn-out gratitude isn’t (always) about ego; it’s about etiquette. In multi-jurisdictional disasters, especially when federal agencies like FEMA or Homeland Security are involved, there’s an unwritten rule: everyone gets acknowledged.
State officials thank the feds.
Local leaders thank the governor.
Everyone thanks first responders.
Public officials could argue that the accolades show just how well all tiers are working together. In a way, it is thought to preempt any concern that not enough is being done to help the victims because "look at all these agencies here!" This can also signal the massive scale required to address such a once-in-a-century disaster.
In fact, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that part of the governmental crisis communications plans include these praises as a way to show unity, respect hierarchy, and maintain working relationships.
In addition, no one wants to be the one person who doesn’t give thanks on the record. In a room full of cameras and chain-of-command politics, skipping the pleasantries can feel risky. Yes, even when it's already been said and you're in a list of seven people.
Unfortunately, when everyone sticks to the script, the public ends up waiting and wondering. Especially since we're trained to think the biggest news is coming at the top of a newscast, newspaper, or news conference.
What Can You Learn from This Crisis Communications Disaster?
Let’s break this down like we’re in a crisis comms masterclass because this Texas press conference is a near-perfect case study in how strategy, politics, and public expectation collide.
Learn the Hierarchy and Your Role In It
First, understand the reality: this wasn’t a failure of leadership; it was a failure of audience alignment. The officials did what they were supposed to do by the book. In a multi-jurisdictional response with federal agencies present, the etiquette is almost ceremonial.
If you're even in this position, where you're one of several people speaking during a crisis, know the ground rules. Generally, this will come from the highest-ranking person.
If you're one of the people who needs to be on the list, don't say no unless you have a damn good reason why. If you skip it, you risk political blowback, strained relationships, and accusations of grandstanding or disrespect.
Know Your Audience
In many cases, especially in government, you're not just speaking to the public. You're performing for your peers, your superiors, and future funding sources. And no one wants to be that person who didn’t say thank you when the cameras were rolling.
As much as you want to thank the federal government or the President himself for helping with emergency funds, ensure your message contains at least one new update or nugget of information. Even if everyone else defaults to Oscar-winning style speeches, you'll be the one who shared some kind of update.
You can also take pre-emptive steps behind the scenes to help adapt for the moment. Suggest pre-releasing a joint statement. Pin the praise to your agency’s website or social channels. You can even lead with one unified thank-you paragraph and then move quickly into the facts the public actually needs.
Read the Room
During a disaster, time is currency. The media is on deadline. Residents are watching in real time, many of them scared or grieving. Keep in mind, you might be scared or grieving right along with them.
When formalities dominate your messaging, the public sees it as tone-deaf, even if your intent was gratitude. That’s the communications gap.
In this case, the highest-ranking county official, Judge Kelly, was the only one who didn't go on a thank-you tour. In fact, he pointed out that he was "the only one at this table that lives on the Guadalupe River, and our properties were devastated."
The closest he came to accolades echoed more of teamwork: "And what I would reiterate that I've heard of others saying is, as long as we stay together, we'll get this done."
Anticipate Blowback
Part of any solid crisis communications plan I'll help you build comes with "what ifs?". What if you have no new information? What if a power beyond your ability to tame is demanding a list of thank yous? What if the media and viewers see through the veil of saying virtually nothing new across 33 minutes?
Here's how you can control the narrative in a situation like this:
Focus on specifics in the media advisory you send out. Is it clear who is speaking and what the topic is? If the headline is "Flood Rescue Updates," everyone expects news. If the headline is "Governor Abbot signs emergency declaration with Secretary Neom addressing federal efforts," then the expectations are lowered.
Give enough time for media questions. While the news conference here was 33 minutes long, only seven of those minutes went to reporters, and quite frankly, much of that time was eaten about about a clarification on "rescue" vs. "recovery." The media felt rushed out of the room at the end. If nobody is giving answers and you shush the people trying to get answers, that's not a good look for anyone.
Tell them what you're going to tell them. Avoid any bated breath anticipation of a heroic rescue or prepare for a gut punch of additional death toll numbers. Simply starting with, as Jimenez pointed out, "We don't have a lot of new information," can let them know what to expect. Then add a "We hope to get new statistics to you by the next news conference at XX time."
Final Takeaway: Crisis Communication Strategy & Texas Floods
The takeaway? Sometimes, you have no choice but to follow the etiquette. But you do have a choice in how you structure it. And in how you train your spokesperson to pivot. The best crisis communicators know how to balance diplomacy with urgency and how to speak to multiple audiences at once without losing sight of the people most affected.
Are you prepared for the next time you're facing the media? This is what I do: help leaders and executives prepare for the highest-profile moments of their lives. Whether you want media training or a crisis communications strategy, I work directly with clients to make the message stick and stay away from viral dissension.
Comments