For a crisis communications response certain to scare most PR practitioners, look no further than the handling of the Boar’s Head listeria outbreak. 

While at times the luxury brand of lunch meat has done the right things – making statements about its values, taking timely action, and putting out heartfelt messages – it has failed at one of the most basic tenets of the crisis handbook: Put a human face on your company’s response, especially when people have died.

Instead, Boar’s Head has mounted a communications campaign that is nameless, faceless and, as one crisis podcast described it, a “headless boar.” The result is a crisis that casts a dark shadow over the entire brand and threatens the company’s future.

Let’s face it, any instance of listeria contamination is bad, especially one that is fatal. Any product recall is bad. But a botched communications response makes everything so much worse. 

For those who haven’t been following this as closely as The Wilbert Group’s 12-member Crisis Response Team, a little background: On July 19, the Atlanta-based CDC launched an investigation into dozens of hospitalizations and two deaths in several states tied to listeria. By July 26, the CDC had traced the contamination to meat products made at a Boar’s Head plant in Virginia. The company immediately issued a recall for its liverwurst brand and nine others made on the same production line. A few days later, it expanded the recall to every item produced at the Jarratt, Virginia plant.

The company’s first public statement was brief. “We are cooperating fully with government authorities and conducting our own investigation into this incident.” Its first Instagram post was this image:

Trite, yes, but at least a statement of values and an okay first attempt at messaging. That was followed by a new company web page dedicated to information about the product recall. Again, helpful and timely.

But in the following days and weeks, there came more hospitalizations and deaths, numerous lawsuits, and more media reports about the outbreak and poor safety conditions at the Virginia plant. As the Washington Post reported on July 30 based on interviews with former employees and government reports, “Filthy work areas, aging equipment and haphazard cleaning at the Jarratt plant may have made some of its products microbial time bombs waiting to explode.”

While the company did not respond directly to those characterizations of the plant, it did issue an effective response following the filing of a lawsuit by the family of a Holocaust survivor who died after allegedly eating tainted Boar’s Head liverwurst. "We deeply regret the impact this recall has had on affected families. No words can fully express our sympathies and the sincere and deep hurt we feel for those who have suffered losses or endured illness," the company said in a statement to USA TODAY.

The company then aggressively shuttered the Jarratt plant, and it penned an effective letter to customers in September, stating: “We understand the gravity of this situation and the profound impact it has had on affected families . . . Comprehensive measures are being implemented to prevent such an incident from ever happening again.”

The problem with all of these statements, including those on the Boar’s Head website, is that they come from no one in particular at Boar’s Head. And that is the real issue with the company’s crisis response.

In a brand-threatening crisis such as this, someone at the top must step forward. Provide answers to the most pressing questions. Accept some level of responsibility. Show they are taking strong action. And show some compassion.

The problem is, as additional media reports have identified, that figuring out who actually runs Boar’s Head is difficult. Two families have long controlled the company, but their penchant for secrecy – and infighting – has appeared to have left them leaderless in the biggest crisis of their stewardship. The company would not even disclose who is its CEO to Forbes magazine.

Private companies like Boar’s Head can typically do just fine being extremely private. But not in a crisis. Now, it looks to outsiders like secrecy and self-preservation have taken priority over consumer safety and concern for the victims.

At a time where transparency is paramount, we have faceless, nameless responses. This can come across as evasive to the public, or worse. It also begs the questions of (1) who at Boar’s Head stands behind the company’s promises of putting the health and safety of its customers first? and (2) at a time when Boar’s Head must move quickly to begin rebuilding trust, how is that possible when nobody is stepping forward?

Honestly, I’ve been a longtime consumer and fan of Boar’s Head products. I’ve considered them the Mercedes of Meats. I even love liverwurst. But if someone there cannot put their name on this crisis and all that entails, I don’t want to put their meat on my next sandwich.