Crisis communications: The critical importance of visible action

Food waste crisis communications were thrust into the spotlight when Marks & Spencer faced an unexpected reputational challenge at the start of the year. On TikTok, a vigilante ‘food inspector’ documented wheelie bins full of in-date food behind one of its stores. Sliced meat, whole chicken, potatoes and bakery items were all shown languishing in piles of rubbish – creating exactly the kind of visual evidence that can quickly escalate into a communications issue.

Marks & Spencer wasn’t the only supermarket to come under fire from the activist, known as Food_waste_inspector_ on TikTok. He also showed food going to waste at Waitrose, Iceland and Lidl.

One post showing hordes of wasted food – in which the activist said M&S staff had refused to address the issue, and instead questioned his permission to film – gained nearly 16,000 views. The story spread to titles such as The Grocer and Daily Express. This is a classic example of how an issue can rapidly move from social media to mainstream media, amplifying reputational risk.

Set against claims made on the M&S website – where the retailer talks about its commitment to tackling food waste and says its “number one priority is to reduce waste occurring in the first place” – it wasn’t a good look. When brand purpose and operational reality appear misaligned, crisis communications scrutiny intensifies.

So M&S needed to act fast. The initial response was a masterclass in crisis communications best practice. The retailer promptly invited the TikTokker to come for a coffee to “hear more about what you are finding”. It took responsibility and recognised the severity of the issue. An M&S spokeswoman told The Grocer: “It’s clear that at these stores something has gone wrong and we’re investigating that right now.” This demonstrated two essential crisis comms principles: responsiveness and accountability.

The meeting went well on a surface level. Initially, the activist left with positive feelings. “M&S assured me today that they are on top of this and they’re going to put a stop to this and make sure all edible foods like I’ve been finding go to charities,” he said in an update to his 80,000 followers. “They’re looking up other charities to collect, so if a charity fails to turn up, they have others to fall back on.” At this stage, proactive engagement had helped stabilise the narrative – a key objective in crisis communications.

However, those positive sentiments soon turned sour. Food_waste_inspector_ went on to document ongoing cases of “absolutely crazy waste” in M&S store bins, including multiple tubs of mashed potato with a use-by date of 30 January 2026. “Marks & Spencer, I’ll carry on showing it until you sort the problem out,” he warned. “It ain’t gonna go away.”

Worse still, he went on to accuse M&S of covering up the problem, telling The Grocer many stores had simply locked their bins inside to keep the waste behind closed doors.

It highlights how even the warmest words and promptest statements can be challenged if visible progress isn’t yet apparent. Arguably, it’s unrealistic to expect M&S to have solved the problem overnight. However, effective crisis communications require transparency about timelines, progress and challenges – not just intent.

Ultimately, this situation underlines a defining principle of crisis communications: reputation isn’t protected by what you say first, but by what you do next – and how clearly you communicate that progress. If you’d like support in managing crisis communications and protecting your brand’s reputation when it matters most, get in touch to see how we can help.

---

« Spring reset: How food and drink brands can tap into seasonal optimism Messaging matters: How brands can keep low & no alcohol buzzing »