Failed Approach: Pakistan Air’s PR Response to Their Paris Ad Controversy
Mistakes happen. They’re part of life and business, and no organization or individual is immune. What’s critical, though, is how you respond when you realize you’ve made one. In today’s hyperconnected world, where missteps can ignite viral backlash in an instant, the stakes are higher than ever. This brings us to the recent controversy involving Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) and their poorly-conceived ad featuring an airplane pointed at the Eiffel Tower. While I don’t believe there was any malicious intent, the magnitude of the blunder can’t be overstated, and their response highlights key lessons in issues and reputation management that we can all learn from.
The Mistake
PIA’s ad was meant to announce the resumption of flights to Paris after a four-year hiatus. Unfortunately, the image—a plane angled toward the Eiffel Tower—struck a nerve, and rightfully so. The visual evoked troubling memories of 9/11 for many, leading to widespread backlash. Compounding the problem, the accompanying text, "Paris, We’re Coming Today," felt ominous and amplified the negative perception. While it’s baffling how such an ad made it through any kind of review process, I firmly believe there was no ill intention behind it. In my assessment, this was a mistake born of oversight (or lack thereof), not malice.
The Response That Fell Short
Where PIA faltered most wasn’t in the creation of the ad but in how they responded to the controversy. Instead of taking accountability, their apology was noncommittal, apologizing that some people were offended rather than apologizing for the mistake itself, stating: “We apologize to those who feel the advertisement hurt them.” They signalled their lack of ill intent, which was the right move, but followed it with a defence of the post, claiming the backlash was “blown out of proportion” and pointing out that negative feedback (in the form of 60-70,000 negative comments!) accounted for only a small fraction of the ad’s total views. Like, what? 60-70,000 negative comments is a reputation crisis if I’ve ever seen one. Even if there were five times as many positive comments, that still alienates a significant audience, and the negative fallout will only grow if left unaddressed. To make matters worse, the ad was left online and remains online today, further signalling a lack of acknowledgment and poor judgment.
This response missed a crucial opportunity to rebuild trust and demonstrate awareness and accountability. Instead, it came across as dismissive and defensive—qualities that only compound reputational harm.
What Could Have Been Done Differently
The ad should have been pulled immediately from all platforms where it was published—and it still should be removed! Additionally, a stronger response would have acknowledged the mistake, demonstrated empathy and outlined clear steps to prevent similar issues in the future. To illustrate, here’s an example of what PIA could have said, crafted in just minutes:
“We sincerely apologize for the imagery used in our recent advertisement. While our intention was to celebrate the resumption of flights to Paris, we understand that the visual evoked distressing memories for some viewers, and we deeply regret the unintended impact it caused. This was a serious lapse in judgment, and we take full responsibility for it.
Moving forward, we are implementing a more robust review process for all of our marketing materials to ensure sensitivity and appropriateness. We value the trust of our customers and the public, and we are committed to learning from this experience to do better in the future.
We deeply regret any harm caused and appreciate the feedback that allows us to grow as an organization.”
Pro tip: One thing I’ve always subscribed to when crafting an issues response is what I’ll call “the sentence check.” Knowing that reporters often pull only parts of a statement, it’s important to ensure that each sentence stands alone. Look at each sentence and ask yourself: if this were the only part quoted, does it communicate the message clearly and effectively? This statement delivers.
Additionally, if there was insistence on keeping the ad running, a simple adjustment—such as having the plane point away from the Eiffel Tower instead of toward it—could have significantly mitigated the negative perception.
While I would counsel pulling the ad immediately, if there is insistence on keeping it running, a simple adjustment to the plane's direction—pointing it away from the Eiffel Tower—significantly alters the perception and reduces the negative connotations.
Cultural Nuance and Global Perspectives
It’s worth acknowledging that cultural context may play a role in how this incident unfolded, from the ad’s creation to the issues response. As someone viewing this from a Western perspective, it’s possible I’m applying different expectations or norms to PIA’s actions. They might genuinely feel this is no big deal, and that some people can be too sensitive. Still, I believe the principles of empathy, accountability and clear communication are universal in effective reputation management. Just as I can acknowledge that I may have a different perspective, so too should PIA in their evaluation, understanding and response to the backlash.
Verdict: Go-around (New to the blog? My tomatometer is explained here.)
This ad, and more so the response, is a hard go-around. Like an airliner on final approach, suddenly faced with unexpected traffic on the runway, a go-around is vital to avoid total disaster. The flight crew must gather themselves and plot a new course to land safely. This controversy is a reminder of how important it is to respond thoughtfully and decisively when things go wrong. Mistakes are forgivable; dismissiveness is not. Organizations that handle crises with transparency and accountability can often emerge stronger, turning a misstep into an opportunity to demonstrate their values. For PIA, this could have been one of those moments. Instead, their response has only deepened the fallout. Let this serve as a lesson for us all: When the spotlight is on, how you handle a mistake says more about your character than the mistake itself ever could.
How Prepared are You?
If you’re navigating challenges in issues and reputation management, I can help. With extensive experience in crisis planning and issues response—spanning everything from workforce reductions to corporate misconduct—I work with organizations to prepare for the unexpected and respond effectively when the stakes are high. Don’t wait until it’s too late—proactive planning can make all the difference.
Get on the List!
Loving the blog? Don’t miss a thing—sign up for my newsletter at the bottom of the page.
