# data[].attributes.body
How did the research team construct the different categories?
Defined 'who' i.e.,
Tesla - car manufacturer
Digital media - news channels
Faith holders - brand ambassadors

I believe then, the way they set-up the research questions to gather the information  i.e.,
RQ1
Which crisis response strategies did Tesla use on its website and how did it assign responsibility for the crisis?

RQ2
Which Tesla crisis response strategies and attribution of responsibility for the crisis appeared in the digital media?

RQ3
Which crisis response strategies did Tesla Motors’ faith-holders use to defend the organization in the comments posted to the digital media articles and how did they assign responsibility for the crisis?

RQ4

What are the similarities and differences between a crisis communication response used by Tesla Motors on its website, a Tesla Motors crisis communication response which appeared in the digital media, and a crisis communication response of Tesla faith-holders?

How did they ensure that the content analysis categories were distinct from each other?
They drew on the census sample of articles and first-order comments from:
1) The top two U.S. digital newspapers.
2) the top two news blogs that specialize in automobiles.

Then using the keyword phrase “Tesla fire” the researchers searched each of the media outlets for the articles and blog posts containing the phrase.

To be included in the sample, articles had to be about the crisis and had to have more than three first-order comments to ensure that commenters attempted to state their position in response to the article or the blog post.

Have you ever participated in the crisis response of an organization? If yes, why? If not, why not?
No, I just have not been at an organization where there was a catastrophic failure of a product or service that created a crisis in my career thus far.

Which faith-holder crisis response strategies were most persuasive to you in the Tesla example?
Faith-holders’ strategies, where faith-holders wrote comments defending Tesla’s car design i.e., (n = 813, 89.9 %) rather than the price of its stock shares (n = 91, 10.1 %). The main reason being, is that the design of the car is the most paramount thing here, regarding the safety of people, rather than Tesla's share price.

How can you use the findings of this study to help your organization respond to a crisis? In what ways could you leverage your "faith-holders"?
This would be to understand the publics who are faith-holders i.e., research their existing interaction with the brand on media platforms, and the look to use these themes (and them) as co-creators in creating a unified brand voice.

# data[].attributes.body
How did the research team construct the different categories? How did they ensure that the content analysis categories were distinct from each other?

The researchers used both qualitative and quantitative approaches to conduct the content analysis. They determined there were three key groups: Tesla Motors, media and supporters (faith-holders). They used “constant comparative technique” to identify the latent categories, then two coders spent 12hours discussing and improving the code book and once they agreed on 80% they independently coded a sample each to determine the intercoder reliability before coding the rest of the sample

Have you ever participated in the crisis response of an organisation? If yes, why? If not, why not?

No I have not ever participated in a crisis response, mostly because I have not felt I had enough information to comment, defend or criticise.

Which faith-holder crisis response strategies were most persuasive to you in the Tesla example?

Faith-holders mainly used the following strategies to defend Tesla: Confirmative action; faith-expression, suggestion of remedy, self-gain, self-victim, conspiracy, change of reference and crisis as positive.
They focused communication mainly on the design of the car and assigned responsibility to the roads, media, fire-fighters and the drivers.

How can you use the findings of this study to help your organisation respond to a crisis? In what ways could you leverage your "faith-holders"?

To leverage the co-creation of meaning that can come from bringing together the organisation crisis comms, the media response and the faith-holders response. By Tesla and the media using and seeking quotes from faith-holders they treated them as credible sources.

Faith-holders can be useful in defending the organisation, co-creating meaning of the crisis and also communicating somethings that the organisation may not be able to, such as responses to financial related comments.

# data[].attributes.body
How did the research team construct the different categories?

Using the keyword phrase “Tesla fire” the researchers searched each of the media outlets for the articles and blog posts containing the phrase. To be included in the sample, articles had to be about the crisis and had to have more than three first-order comments to ensure that commenters attempted to state their position in response to the article or the blog post.

To study the crisis communication of Tesla Motors’ and Tesla Motors’ faith-holders, the researchers used qualitative and quantitative content analysis (Neuendorf, 2002). The qualitative part of the content analysis helped to examine the organisations' and the faith-holders’ crisis communication for the emergent frames and strategies, while the quantitative portion of the content analysis allowed researchers to examine and quantify message characteristics in the objective manner. The quantitative content analysis also helped to measure the extent to which the organisation’s and the faith-holders’ crisis responses differed from each other.

Using the “constant comparative technique” (Wimmer & Dominick, 2011, p. 120), one of the researchers examined each latent Tesla strategy and a proportion of the strategies created by the faith-holders. The researcher compared each latent strategy with the strategies and frames identified by the theory. If the strategy or a frame did not fit the strategies and frames established by the SCCT, the researcher created a category for a new strategy or a frame, provided a description of each, and then further refined and simplified the coding book. New strategies and frames emerged from the data, including the main topic frame and the frame of comparison of the crisis with other issues and discourses (Schultz et al., 2012). The main topic frame aimed at capturing the aspect of the company that was defended (e.g., safety, financial situation), while the comparison frame specified to what the crisis was compared to (e.g., fires in other gasoline cars, other crises, etc.). Once the initial coding book was ready, two coders, including one of the authors, spent 12 h in three training sessions and discussions to improve the codebook. When 80 percent of agreement was reached, both coders selected 15 % of the sample and independently coded it. The intercoder reliability was at a sufficient level, and the coders proceeded with coding the rest of the sample.

Research Questions?

RQ1
Which crisis response strategies did Tesla use on its website and how did it assign responsibility for the crisis?

RQ2
Which Tesla crisis response strategies and attribution of responsibility for the crisis appeared in the digital media?

RQ3
Which crisis response strategies did Tesla Motors’ faith-holders use to defend the organisation in the comments posted to the digital media articles and how did they assign responsibility for the crisis?

RQ4

What are the similarities and differences between a crisis communication response used by Tesla Motors on its website, a Tesla Motors crisis communication response which appeared in the digital media, and a crisis communication response of Tesla faith-holders?

How did they ensure that the content analysis categories were distinct from each other?
They drew on the census sample of articles and first-order comments from:
1) the top two U.S. digital newspapers (Lulofs, 2013): the Wall Street Journal and the USA Today and 2) the top two news blogs that specialise in automobiles: Jalopnik and Leftlanenews.com (Blogrank, 2013).

Then using the keyword phrase “Tesla fire” the researchers searched each of the media outlets for the articles and blog posts containing the phrase.

To be included in the sample, articles had to be about the crisis and had to have more than three first-order comments to ensure that commenters attempted to state their position in response to the article or the blog post.

Have you ever participated in the crisis response of an organisation? If yes, why? If not, why not?

Yes, I have been involved in numerous product recalls within food and beverage companies. Also, I was on the Board of a business that had a workplace incident and the worker became a quadraplegic.

Which faith-holder crisis response strategies were most persuasive to you in the Tesla example?
Faith-holders’ strategies, where faith-holders wrote comments defending Tesla’s car design i.e., (n = 813, 89.9 %) rather than the price of its stock shares (n = 91, 10.1 %).

How can you use the findings of this study to help your organisation respond to a crisis? In what ways could you leverage your "faith-holders"?

Faith-holders can be leveraged to assign responsibility, adjust information and change the point of reference for digital publics.