Crisis communication as politics

In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair repeatedly emphasized the clear and present danger posed by Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD). As the conflict with Iraq escalated, and skeptical voices were heard in the United Nations Security Council, presidential and prime ministerial rhetoric intensified. The two leaders assured that there was virtually no doubt that Iraq possessed such weapons and that only military intervention could guarantee that these illicit programs, which had allegedly eluded UN WMD inspectors, would be found. Both leaders staked their personal credibility on this claim and managed to drum up a considerable amount of political support at home for their position. However, both leaders quickly became the subject of increasingly bitter attacks from the opposition and from elements of their own parties when no evidence of ongoing WMD programs was turned up in the wake of the military intervention.

In a crisis, authorities often lose control, if only temporarily, over the dramaturgy of political communication. They are literally overtaken by events. The mass media rapidly generate powerful images and frames of the situation, well crafted for mass consumption. The crisis turns into a “symbolic contest over the social meaning of an issue domain.”