“Mayday, Mayday, Mayday… Garuda Indonesia is in an emergency!”

It wasn’t due to a flight accident, but rather a communication “blunder” by Garuda Indonesia on July 13, 2019. After going viral over the Japanese fast-food incident in business class, Garuda Indonesia is now the talk of the town among netizens for yet another “new” incident.

It all started with a post by an Indonesian vlogger named Rius Vernandes about a handwritten business-class menu on a scrap of paper; Garuda Indonesia, however, sparked controversy with a notice banning photography on board the plane, which circulated on social media. Consequently, this incident sparked fierce protests from netizens who felt their freedom as consumers had been infringed upon.

To make matters worse, instead of trying to defuse the issue, Garuda Indonesia took the reckless step of reporting Rius Vernandes to the police on charges of defamation through its employees’ union. Like pouring gasoline on a fire, this incident further fueled netizens’ anger and successfully propelled Garuda Indonesia to the #1 trending topic on Twitter.

I can’t imagine what it must be like to be on Garuda Indonesia’s PR team. Just imagine how on edge they must be as they monitor the tone of media reports and social media sentiment since the incident began. Even in this situation, they likely can’t sleep. Especially considering their “rival” isn’t just an ordinary person, but a vlogger with over 105,000 Instagram followers.

If not contained immediately, this issue will snowball. The wider the issue’s reach, the harder it will be for Garuda Indonesia to mitigate the “damage” from this crisis.

Moreover, many brands have already capitalized on this momentum to engage their audiences through playful content—brilliantly riding this issue, as Grab, SangPisang, and several others have done—which only compounds the situation for Garuda Indonesia.

As a public relations consultant, I’m curious to see how Garuda Indonesia handles this situation. Can they implement effective crisis management and crisis communication? Do they have creative communication strategies beyond the standard crisis response protocols typically used by companies?

As far as I can tell, I’ve only come across a few statements from Garuda Indonesia’s VP of Corporate Secretary, M Ikhsan Rosan, which come across as overly defensive. Ikhsan argued that the ban was an internal company memo that wasn’t final but had been leaked to the public.

The response issued failed to satisfy the public. One source of dissatisfaction had not yet been addressed when another arose. In short, it’s double the dissatisfaction.

In fact, there are two strategies Garuda Indonesia must implement immediately. First, address public complaints and manage the crisis. Second, carry out a public relations campaign to restore the company’s image and repair the damage to its reputation.

If we identify the cause of the crisis, it stems from subpar service. It then escalated into a full-blown crisis due to public perception—triggered by Garuda Indonesia taking actions that were in direct conflict with public sentiment, such as the ban on photography and the police report.

It must be a nerve-wracking experience to be on Garuda Indonesia’s public relations team, as this crisis has already reached the acute stage. If not addressed immediately, it will generate a flood of negative media coverage, ultimately leading to severe repercussions for the company’s business.

Garuda Indonesia should no longer remain silent and must issue a statement that reassures the public. This time, silence is no longer golden—it’s deadly.

Garuda Indonesia’s public relations team must craft a strong narrative to address several public complaints, including: 1) in-flight meal service, 2) Rius Vernandes’ police report, and 3) the prohibition on taking photos on board.

Regarding in-flight meals, Garuda Indonesia must humbly acknowledge that its meal service has been unsatisfactory, apologize, and present solutions for improvement. This will manage public expectations by showing that Garuda Indonesia is actively working to improve.

Next, regarding the police report filed by Rius Vernandes, Garuda Indonesia needs to inform the public that the airline is leaving the matter entirely in the hands of the employees’ union—as the reporting party—and the police to continue investigating and handling this case. Include a brief narrative to encourage the public to view this issue from both sides and to apply the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Regarding the request to refrain from taking photos, Garuda Indonesia does not need to provide an explicit explanation. Use subtle persuasion so that the message is well-received by netizens. This will help foster an emotional connection between the company and the public.

For example, emphasize a narrative of nationalism. Encourage the public to view Garuda Indonesia as a vital element of Indonesia—the face of Indonesia in the global aviation industry. Thus, its image must be preserved collectively.

With this narrative, the public will feel a sense of shared responsibility to help protect Garuda Indonesia’s image and refrain from continuing negative discussions on social media. I hope this clarifies my point. Once Garuda Indonesia has successfully addressed public complaints, it can then implement a public relations strategy to restore its image. I have two ideas in mind: a conventional one and a bold one.

For the conventional approach, Garuda Indonesia must secure brand advocacy from other influencers whose level of influence is equal to or greater than Rius Vernandes. For example, Garuda Indonesia’s CEO, I Gusti Ngurah Askhara Danadiputra, could invite them to a #InFlightTalks discussion session. The discussion would take place on a business-class flight while addressing issues surrounding improvements to Garuda Indonesia’s flight services. The content would be produced as a video and uploaded to both Garuda Indonesia’s YouTube channel and the influencers’ channels.

The key message: Garuda Indonesia wants to understand public concerns and demonstrate a strong commitment to improving service quality in the near future. If they want an even bolder idea, Garuda Indonesia could employ a “twisted scenario” strategy. Turning a misfortune into a blessing—much like the “content misdirection” marketing strategy employed by Bukalapak in its ad featuring the wrong date for Youth Pledge Day. This ad captured the public’s attention while simultaneously “testing” their memory of the Youth Pledge Day date.

Both approaches lead the public to assume there is an element of “intent.” The difference is that while “content misdirection” is intentionally created to be wrong from the start, this strategy actually turns a mistake into an opportunity to showcase improvements. Garuda Indonesia can use this moment as a turning point for the transformation of its business-class in-flight dining service. To make this crisis seem as though it was actually planned, Garuda Indonesia needs to introduce a “WOW” factor that leaves the public in awe of this crazy marketing idea.

For example, it could launch a menu book with a special cover design featuring a rare type of batik, such as hand-drawn Banyuwangi batik. Or it could introduce a new menu of authentic Indonesian dishes that have never been offered in its catering service before. Invite influencers and the media to attend the launch, held onboard a flight. That way, this crisis will leave a positive impression on the public.

That’s roughly my hypothetical strategy for now. I hope this first post of mine can offer an additional perspective for my fellow PR professionals and journalists. If I may, I’d love to hear your thoughts and share ideas regarding crisis management and crisis communication that are relevant to the Garuda Indonesia case.