The Largest PR Disasters of 2024: A Year of Scandals, Backlash, and Lessons in Crisis Management
In 2024, the court of public opinion held sway more than ever. Public figures and organisations faced intense scrutiny, with controversies ranging from shocking allegations to social media-fuelled backlashes. The world felt unusually tense, as global issues collided with personal reputations. The ongoing cost of living crisis, political polarisation, and a high-stakes election year added to the complexity, as public figures and businesses were increasingly expected to take a stance on issues like Palestine. Anyone not publicly supporting Palestine risked being ostracised, and the lack of clear communication often led to backlash.
For some, their mishandling of crises worsened the damage, while others failed to capitalise on opportunities for redemption. Amid the chaos, the expectations of what constitutes a “correct” response to social issues seemed to shift faster than ever, leaving many scrambling to keep up. This list examines some of the year’s biggest PR disasters, unpacking what went wrong, how it was handled (or mishandled), and what these moments reveal about the ever-evolving dynamics of reputation management in an era of heightened social awareness and political tension.
Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs: Federal Raid and Allegations
What Happened: In late 2024, Sean “Diddy” Combs found himself at the centre of a massive scandal after federal agents raided his home as part of an investigation into financial misconduct, fraud, and conspiracy. This raid was only the tip of the iceberg, as the investigation revealed troubling allegations about Diddy’s business practices, including fraudulent financial schemes and possible ties to criminal activities. The raid sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry, leaving many to question how deep Diddy’s involvement might go and how long these allegations had been quietly simmering. What was once a career built on mogul status, music success, and fashion empire dreams is now at serious risk of unraveling. As the investigation intensifies, many are speculating that these charges could have devastating legal and financial consequences, potentially leading to the end of Diddy’s career.
Opinion:
Diddy’s once untouchable brand as a music mogul and philanthropist now appears to be in tatters. The scale of the allegations—ranging from financial misconduct to conspiracy—leaves little room for a comeback. What makes this case particularly damaging is the looming threat of the infamous “list” tied to Diddy, which could expose even darker secrets within the entertainment industry. This potential revelation could bring down high-profile figures and open the floodgates on deeper systemic corruption. For Diddy, the gravity of the charges, coupled with the public’s insatiable thirst for scandal, may make it impossible to salvage his reputation. His image, once synonymous with success and wealth, now faces a massive backlash that will be difficult to recover from.
Severity: High – The fallout from this investigation could be catastrophic for Diddy’s career. With serious allegations ranging from financial fraud to conspiracy, the damage is already significant. If the infamous “list” is ever released, it could not only destroy Diddy’s image but also send shockwaves through the entire entertainment industry, potentially implicating other high-profile figures. The ripple effects of these revelations would be far-reaching, damaging both the individuals and businesses tied to him, and reshaping the public’s perception of the entertainment industry’s inner workings. This crisis has the potential to end Diddy’s career, and the industry will be left to pick up the pieces.
Eurovision 2024: Political Protests, Bans, and New Rules
What Happened: The 2024 Eurovision Song Contest became a political battleground due to Israel’s participation amidst the ongoing Middle Eastern conflict. Pro-Palestine protests outside the arena in Malmö, Sweden, were met with heightened tensions within the event, as several contestants, including Ireland’s Bambie Thug, voiced their pro-Palestine stance. Israel’s participation faced backlash, with accusations from artists that the country was inciting violence. Israel’s representative, Eden Golan, was met with boos during her performance, further fueling the controversy. Additionally, Golan’s song faced significant scrutiny before the event. The lyrics of her track were altered under pressure to ensure compliance with Eurovision’s rules, as the original version was deemed too politically charged, adding fuel to the already heated atmosphere. Meanwhile, Joost Klein, the Netherlands’ entrant, was disqualified for allegedly making verbal threats to a female production worker, although the charges were later dropped.
Opinion: Eurovision, a platform traditionally focused on celebrating music and unity, found itself embroiled in a political dispute that overshadowed the competition’s usual festivities. The decision to allow Israel’s participation—despite the protests—sparked even more divisions, drawing attention away from the music and toward political arguments. Eurovision justifies Israel’s continued participation by stating that it remains a non-political event, open to all members of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), which includes countries from both Europe and the Middle East. Israel has been a member of the EBU since 1957, and its participation has been longstanding. However, this stance has been challenged by fans who point to the UN Commission’s findings of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Israel’s actions in Gaza, questioning how Israel’s involvement is different from Russia’s ban in 2022 due to the invasion of Ukraine. The backlash surrounding Israel’s participation suggests that public opinion does not see Eurovision’s commitment to “non-political” values as consistent, especially when compared to the exclusion of other countries involved in contentious conflicts.
Social media played a major role in amplifying the controversy. Certain Eurovision artists in 2024, particularly those who voiced opposition to Israel’s participation, heavily utilised social media to express their anger and share their views. Artists such as Bambie Thug filmed backstage content and shared personal reactions, posting heated messages and updates on their social media platforms. Their outspoken criticism further ignited online discussions, spreading the conflict beyond the stage and into the public domain. This increased visibility on social media created a massive ripple effect, pushing the debate into the mainstream and ensuring the controversy would dominate public discourse. While the intent of these artists was to advocate for their beliefs, the sheer volume of online content put pressure on Eurovision to respond to the growing backlash.
The aftermath revealed the European Broadcasting Union’s (EBU) struggle to manage the intensity of the situation. Their new rules, which include stricter artist wellbeing protocols and a ban on photography in key artist areas, reflect a sense of panic. These measures, while designed to protect performers, could be seen as an attempt to control the narrative and avoid further social media backlash. Critics, however, worry that such restrictions may limit artistic expression, which has traditionally been a cornerstone of the event.
Further complicating the issue is the fact that Moroccan Oil, the main sponsor of the event, is Israeli-owned. From a public perspective, this connection raises questions about whether Eurovision’s decision to allow Israel’s participation was more driven by commercial interests than by a commitment to its original values of unity and inclusivity. The decision to continue involving Israel amidst the political tensions in Gaza, while banning Russia for its actions in Ukraine, has sparked accusations that Eurovision is prioritising profit over principle.
Severity: High – Eurovision faces a monumental reputational challenge following the 2024 competition. The new rules, while intended to safeguard artist wellbeing, reflect the organisation’s struggle to balance free expression with the political sensitivities surrounding the event. The anger toward Israel has only grown since May 2024, and with Israel still set to participate in 2025, it is safe to predict that the next Eurovision will likely be an absolute shitshow. The perception that financial motivations may have influenced their decisions, especially in light of their sponsorship ties, could further damage the credibility of Eurovision as an inclusive, non-political entertainment platform. The way Eurovision handles these controversies in the coming year will be crucial for its long-term image and trustworthiness.
Meghan Markle’s American Riviera Orchard Struggles
What Happened: Meghan Markle’s lifestyle brand faced significant criticisms in 2024, with issues surrounding pricing, product quality, and logistical delays. As if that wasn’t enough, trademark protests emerged, adding fuel to the fire. Despite the buzz surrounding its launch, reactions were fiercely polarised, with many questioning whether her brand could live up to the hype.
Opinion: What’s particularly frustrating about this situation is the level of personal attack Meghan faced. It feels almost as though the public has been waiting for her to fail since she started dating Prince Harry, and no matter what she does, it seems impossible for her to get it right. The backlash she’s received is not just about the brand or the product—it’s an intense, relentless hatred that goes far beyond professional criticism. Her product flaws are fixable, but the way she’s been vilified over something that could have been a mere business hiccup is shocking. She even opened an Instagram account for the new year, hoping to engage positively, and yet she faced hate just for existing on the platform. Imagine receiving backlash for literally just having an Instagram account—not for anything you’ve posted, but for existing. It’s mad.
It’s also impossible to ignore the hate Meghan and Harry received for their original Netflix documentary. Watching the public’s reaction, it’s clear that many found certain aspects of the documentary deeply triggering. To be honest, if I were managing Meghan’s PR, I would have wanted to make a lot of changes. There were obvious moments in the documentary that were bound to stir the public, and I’m genuinely shocked they were left in. This isn’t about silencing her voice—it’s about managing public perception, especially when there’s already so much hate and animosity directed at her. The documentary could have done wonders for her brand and reputation, but some decisions in the editing room really made it easier for the media to criticise her.
#BeKind has clearly been forgotten in her case, replaced by an overwhelming wave of negativity that’s so deeply rooted in public opinion that it’s almost impossible for her to break free of it. I genuinely feel bad for her—it’s hard to imagine facing this kind of scrutiny for trying to build a brand, especially when the hate seems to stem from something much deeper and personal.
Severity: Medium – While Meghan’s lifestyle brand launch certainly faced challenges, it’s still possible for it to recover with strategic changes. However, the deep-seated negativity surrounding her has made it far more difficult to separate her business from the ongoing public hate she faces. The public has seemingly decided they hate her, and that’s a tough mountain to climb. The brand could succeed, but only if Meghan can somehow navigate this incredibly toxic environment.
Joe Biden Steps Down from Re-Election
What Happened: In 2024, U.S. President Joe Biden announced that he would not seek re-election, citing health concerns as the primary reason for his decision. The announcement came after months of speculation about his ability to continue in office, particularly after a series of public stumbles, including delays in his speeches and a lacklustre performance in a crucial debate against Donald Trump. Biden’s decision to step down created a leadership vacuum within the Democratic Party, leaving voters and party members uncertain about the future of the party and who would lead it during a pivotal election year.
Opinion: Biden’s decision, while inevitable due to concerns over his age and health, felt abrupt, especially with no clear successor in sight. His delayed announcement sparked confusion and a sense of instability at a time when the country was already facing significant political challenges. The lack of a clear, unified vision for the future of the Democratic Party left voters with more questions than answers. Biden’s reputation, already strained by the performance issues mentioned during the election cycle—his delayed speeches and disappointing debate performance against Trump—further soured public opinion. His timing in stepping down seemed to come too late, contributing to the public perception that he had overstayed his welcome.
Severity: High – This decision represents a massive political and global shift. The impact on Biden’s reputation has been significant, especially with criticism about his perceived inability to navigate the demands of the presidency. The uncertainty surrounding his successor and the timing of the announcement leaves the Democratic Party facing a serious challenge in rallying behind a new leader, with lasting consequences for his political legacy and the country’s political landscape.
Lizzo’s Workplace Allegations
What Happened: In 2024, Lizzo, known for her empowering message of body positivity and self-love, faced serious allegations from former employees who accused her of creating a toxic work environment. These allegations included claims of harassment, bullying, and unfair treatment of staff, with some accusing Lizzo of making demeaning comments and subjecting employees to overly controlling behaviour. The allegations struck a chord with the public, as they were in stark contrast to Lizzo’s image as an advocate for empowerment and inclusivity. The controversy escalated when Lizzo’s defensive response to the claims failed to address the seriousness of the situation, further fuelling the backlash.
Opinion: This controversy hit Lizzo particularly hard because it directly clashed with the empowering persona she has built for herself in the public eye. As someone who has long championed body positivity and inclusivity, the allegations of toxicity in her own workplace severely damaged the credibility of her brand. Rather than addressing the claims with empathy and a more thoughtful response, Lizzo’s defensive reaction only exacerbated the situation, making it appear as though she was avoiding responsibility. Since the allegations surfaced, Lizzo has been relatively quiet, which has only furthered speculation about how she intends to handle the fallout and repair the damage to her image. The silence suggests a more strategic approach, but whether or not it will be enough to restore her reputation remains to be seen.
Severity: High – This became a major credibility crisis for Lizzo. It undermined her advocacy for self-love and empowerment and raised questions about her character and leadership. The fallout from this controversy has had a profound impact on her brand, and her silence since the allegations only highlights the difficulty in navigating such a crisis.
BBC Controversies: Huw Edwards, Jermaine Jenas, and Gregg Wallace
What Happened: In 2024, the BBC found itself under significant scrutiny for its handling of allegations against on-air talent, particularly Huw Edwards, Jermaine Jenas, and Gregg Wallace. Huw Edwards, a senior BBC presenter, faced serious allegations, but the BBC was widely criticised for its slow response in addressing the claims and appeared to protect him in the public eye. In contrast, Jermaine Jenas, who was involved in less severe allegations, was swiftly removed from his presenting role. The BBC’s rapid dismissal of Jenas sparked concerns about racial bias, as many observers noted the speed with which he was removed compared to Edwards. Later, Gregg Wallace, another BBC personality, was also quickly removed from MasterChef amid accusations of inappropriate behaviour, adding further fuel to the debate.
Opinion: The BBC’s inconsistent response to these allegations raised serious questions about its commitment to fairness and impartiality. While Edwards was allowed to remain on air despite the severity of the allegations against him, Jenas’s swift removal felt disproportionate—especially when considering the nature of the allegations against him. The contrast in how the BBC handled its presenters based on the severity of the allegations, and in some cases, race, triggered public outcry. On the other hand, the fast removal of Gregg Wallace after his allegations, despite them being less severe than Edwards’s, helped the BBC improve its image slightly. It showed that the BBC was willing to apply more consistent standards in addressing misconduct, which could help repair some of the damage caused by the initial criticism of Jenas’s swift dismissal. However, the perception of the BBC as a neutral and impartial organisation was still severely damaged by this situation.
To be honest, it feels like the BBC is just never going to get a break while the public continues to fund them. Drop the TV licence, and people would probably care less about what they do. The insane amount of anger and hate the BBC receives—whether deserved or not—will always linger as long as the public is forced to fund them. It’s a tough road ahead for the BBC in terms of public perception, as these kinds of scandals will continue to cast a long shadow on their reputation.
Severity: Medium – While the BBC’s reputation has clearly been damaged by the handling of these cases, the implementation of more consistent policies and clear actions moving forward, especially after the fast removal of Gregg Wallace, could help restore some of its credibility. However, the lingering questions about bias, particularly in relation to race, may continue to haunt them. The public’s anger toward the BBC, driven by its funding model, means the broadcaster faces an uphill battle in restoring its image.
Kate Middleton’s Prolonged Absence
What Happened: 2024 has been a horrific year for the Royal Family, both personally and reputationally. Kate Middleton’s prolonged absence from several high-profile royal events, including state dinners and charity appearances, led to widespread speculation about her health and her role within the Royal Family. Media outlets and royal observers began to question whether her absence was a sign of personal struggles or a shift in her public duties. As Kate’s absence continued, damaging rumours about her wellbeing and her relationship with other royal family members spread, further fueling public intrigue. The Royal Family’s silence on the matter only added to the speculation, leaving the public to fill in the gaps with assumptions.
2024 has also highlighted a deeper issue: Gen Z simply does not care about the Royal Family in the way previous generations did. Their most loyal fanbase in the UK is, unfortunately, a dying breed. The monarchy is coming across as increasingly dated and out of touch, struggling to adapt to the new, fast-paced media environment. With Gen Z questioning what’s even the point of the monarchy in modern Britain, they face an uphill battle to remain relevant. The ongoing Meghan Markle dramas, Prince William rumours, and the long-term upset caused by Princess Diana’s legacy continue to hang over the family, with many younger people wondering if the monarchy has a place in today’s world. And, of course, the continued scandal surrounding Prince Andrew hasn’t done the Royal Family any favours, further eroding their public image.
The Royal Family’s fear of irrelevance was further highlighted when King Charles’ Christmas speech reached only 7 million viewers, a stark contrast to the 20+ million that would tune in during the Queen’s reign. This drop in viewership marks a sharp decline in engagement, pointing to a growing disconnect between the family and the public. It’s clear that the Royals are struggling to stay relevant, especially with younger generations.
Opinion: Kate Middleton’s absence became a major topic of conversation, and the Royal Family’s failure to address the situation allowed unfounded rumours to grow unchecked. It was painful to watch how the situation unfolded. I was genuinely confused at how their PR team couldn’t see how obvious it was that this issue could have been easily cleared up with a simple statement. Instead, they forced Kate into a horrific video to “prove” her existence. That video must have been incredibly painful to film, and it only added to the drama. A written statement much earlier would have saved Kate from having to go through that humiliating moment and, more importantly, stopped all the speculation in its tracks.
The Royal Family’s struggle to remain relevant seems to be a key factor here. Gen Z’s indifference towards the monarchy—coupled with the ongoing drama surrounding Meghan Markle, Prince William’s reputation, and Prince Andrew’s scandals—has placed the Royal Family in a precarious position. Their public silence on these issues only makes them seem more distant, which further alienates them from the younger generation.
Severity: Medium – While Kate’s absence didn’t turn into a full-scale crisis, it highlighted deeper issues that the Royal Family needs to address. The lack of transparency and the continued generational disinterest in the monarchy leave them vulnerable. If they don’t adapt to the changing media landscape and better engage with younger audiences, the Royal Family risks becoming increasingly irrelevant. With Gen Z questioning their purpose and an ongoing series of scandals, the Royal Family faces a tough road ahead to regain their place in public affection.
The Royal Family’s Photoshop Controversy
What Happened: In 2024, Princess Kate returned to the public eye after a prolonged absence from high-profile royal events. To mark her reappearance, a Mother’s Day photo was released, but it quickly became the subject of intense criticism. The image was heavily photoshopped, with noticeable errors, including unnatural proportions and awkward lighting. Fans and critics alike were quick to point out how poorly the image was edited, and it looked far removed from the genuine, relatable image the Royal Family typically projects. Kate’s absence had already sparked rumours about her health and role, and this photo—her first public image in weeks—seemed to be an attempt at controlling the narrative. Instead, it backfired.
As the backlash grew and conspiracy theories began to spread, it became clear that this issue was snowballing. The Royal Family’s failure to address it early only added fuel to the fire. Kate was forced to tweet a public apology in an attempt to defuse the growing storm. Her tweet read:
“Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother’s Day.”
However, the public wasn’t convinced by this response. Many felt that the explanation was too vague, and the apology was seen as insufficient, given the scale of the controversy. Critics pointed out that this was a case of the Royals being out of touch with the public’s desire for genuine, unpolished content, especially from a family that prides itself on appearing down-to-earth.
Opinion: This photoshopped image, released at a time when the public was already questioning Kate’s whereabouts and health, only added fuel to the fire. It wasn’t just about a badly edited photo—it symbolised a deeper issue. For many, it seemed to suggest that the Royal Family was out of touch with the realities of their audience and, more troublingly, that they were using photos as a tool to manipulate the public’s perception. The backlash was swift and severe, and Kate’s tweet defending the photo, without addressing the public’s concerns, only worsened the situation. The PR failure here was clear: the Royals could have used this moment to show transparency and authenticity but instead chose to offer a half-hearted explanation. The incident raised the uncomfortable question: Can the British public trust the Royals if they can’t even trust a simple photo?
This moment showed how deeply disconnected the Royals seem from the public’s expectations. With transparency being key in today’s media landscape, the Royals missed an opportunity to show authenticity and to rebuild trust with the public. The attempt to manipulate the narrative through an edited image not only backfired but also exposed how out of step the Royals are with the public’s desire for honesty and realness.
Severity: High – This was a complete PR train wreck. The poor execution of the photoshopped image, combined with the timing of her return and Kate’s awkward response, severely damaged the Royal Family’s image. It left the public feeling even more disconnected from the Royals and raised serious questions about transparency and authenticity in their PR approach. A genuine, unedited image would have resonated much more with the public, and this was a missed opportunity to restore trust. Instead, the incident turned into yet another example of the Royals’ struggle to connect with their audience and manage their own image effectively.
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s Overexposure
What Happened: The relationship between Taylor Swift and NFL star Travis Kelce became a media sensation in 2024, with paparazzi capturing nearly every moment of their time together. While their relationship was adored by many, it quickly reached the point where the constant media coverage started to feel overwhelming. Fans grew divided, with some expressing their excitement and others starting to question the authenticity of the couple. There were growing suspicions about how “real” the relationship was, as it seemed to coincide too perfectly with photo opportunities and public appearances. The strategic timing of their outings made it appear too staged for some fans, leading to questions about whether the couple’s love story was being used for publicity.
Opinion: While Swift and Kelce have remained beloved figures, the relentless media coverage risked alienating audiences. The couple’s every move was turned into a headline, and the constant attention began to feel more like a product than a natural relationship. As a result, fans started to become suspicious, with some questioning how genuine the romance was. A quieter, more private approach would have preserved the intrigue and excitement surrounding their relationship without overwhelming the public. At a certain point, the saturation of coverage only diminished the authenticity and excitement for their fans.
Severity: Low – The overexposure became more of a minor annoyance, but it still served as a reminder of the importance of pacing in public relations. If managed with more discretion, this relationship could have remained an exciting talking point rather than a source of fatigue.
The Wonka Experience Flop
What Happened: The immersive Wonka Experience, an interactive event designed to bring the magic of the Willy Wonka universe to life, quickly became the subject of widespread ridicule. High ticket prices, coupled with a lacklustre execution, left attendees feeling disappointed and frustrated. Social media users seized the opportunity to mock the experience, and it quickly became a viral joke. Fans and critics alike pointed out that the event didn’t live up to the whimsical, imaginative world that the Willy Wonka brand promised. Instead, it felt like a poor imitation that didn’t tap into the magic that made the original story so beloved.
Opinion: While the Wonka Experience turned into a viral joke, it didn’t have to be a failure. With a more strategic PR approach, this could have been reframed as a quirky, self-aware experience—a fun, somewhat absurd take on the Wonka legacy that fans could embrace. People love the absurd, and this was a golden opportunity to tap into that by presenting the event with humour and confidence. By leaning into the over-the-top nature of the experience and acknowledging its flaws, the organisers could have turned this into an exciting, cult-favourite attraction. Instead, the negative press snowballed, and the event became synonymous with disappointment.
Severity: Low – While the Wonka Experience was a funny failure, the PR missteps left a lot of potential untapped. With the right strategy and a more playful, self-aware approach, this could have been a massive success, turning the backlash into buzz and securing a loyal fanbase for future immersive events.
Justin Timberlake’s Arrest
What Happened: In 2024, Justin Timberlake was arrested following an altercation at a Los Angeles nightclub. The incident, which allegedly involved a physical confrontation, quickly made headlines and reignited criticism of his past behaviour. Timberlake, who had been a beloved figure in pop culture for years, has faced previous scrutiny over his past actions, including the infamous 2004 Super Bowl “wardrobe malfunction” with Janet Jackson and his treatment of Britney Spears. This recent arrest added fuel to the fire, overshadowing his career and making it difficult for his team to control the narrative.
Opinion: Timberlake’s public image has been on shaky ground for some time, and this arrest was a significant setback. While his music career remains intact, public opinion about him has been less favourable, and this incident only intensified those negative perceptions. The arrest brought his past controversies back to the forefront, overshadowing any positive strides he had made in recent years. A genuine apology—acknowledging both the nightclub incident and past missteps—could have been an opportunity for him to show personal growth and take responsibility. However, Timberlake has yet to offer a meaningful public statement that addresses both the arrest and the deeper issues surrounding his image, which has only prolonged the backlash. His failure to seize this moment has made it difficult for him to shift the narrative in a more positive direction.
Severity: Medium – This arrest was a significant setback for Timberlake’s reputation, further tarnishing his legacy. Although it may not end his career, the incident exacerbated existing issues with his public image, and until he makes real efforts toward reconciliation and growth, it will continue to cloud his reputation.
Wicked Press Tour
What Happened: The 2024 press tour for the Wicked film adaptation, starring Ariana Grande as Glinda and Cynthia Erivo as Elphaba, became the subject of intense public scrutiny and online mockery. Fans and critics began accusing the actresses of faking their behaviour during interviews and public appearances. Ariana, in particular, was seen as overly sweet-natured, often holding hands with her co-stars, crying, and being soft-spoken and overly empathetic in interviews. This shift in Ariana’s persona, compared to her more confident and direct past public appearances, led to accusations of her behaviour being too scripted or manufactured for emotional impact.
Meanwhile, Ariana’s relationship with her co-star Ethan Slater further fuelled controversy. Slater, who was married to his high school sweetheart, Lilly Jay, and had a baby in 2022, filed for divorce in 2023. Rumours began swirling that Ariana and Slater had started their relationship while Slater was still married, leading to accusations of infidelity. Lilly Jay has publicly spoken out about the heartbreak of their separation, calling it one of the “saddest days” of her life. While Ariana has defended Slater, calling him a man with “the best heart,” the timing of their relationship raised eyebrows. The public attention on their romance seemed to be an added layer of scrutiny for the press tour. Some fans and critics speculated that the relationship—and the emotional performances during the tour—might have been a strategic PR move to keep the media focused on the film. Whether intentional or not, it sparked conversations about whether the publicity was authentic or PR-driven.
Despite the backlash, the film adaptation of Wicked became a box office hit, and the press tour didn’t significantly impact the film’s commercial performance. However, the scrutiny over Ariana’s behaviour and her relationship with Ethan Slater highlighted the fine line between authenticity and PR manipulation in today’s media landscape.
Opinion: While the accusations of “fake” behaviour didn’t overshadow the film’s success, the controversy raised important questions about how much of a celebrity’s image is authentic versus carefully curated by PR teams. Ariana’s new, more sensitive and empathetic persona in interviews seemed like a stark contrast to her previous, more confident and direct public appearances. Fans quickly noticed the shift, and many wondered if it was all part of a scripted emotional appeal. The controversy surrounding her relationship with Ethan Slater, particularly the timing of their romance and the divorce from his high school sweetheart, only added fuel to the fire. Was their relationship genuine, or was it strategically timed to generate media attention during the film’s promotional period?
Ariana has defended her relationship with Slater, emphasizing his good character, but the timing of their relationship, coming shortly after his marriage ended, makes it hard for the public to see it as anything other than potentially PR-driven. The way the media latched onto the publicity surrounding the film and their bond further raised doubts about how much of it was truly authentic versus staged for the cameras. Going forward, Ariana may face more scrutiny if she continues to present an image that feels too orchestrated or overly curated.
For both Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo, there’s a balance to be struck between authenticity and PR strategy. While emotional interviews and heartfelt moments can resonate with audiences, they must be genuine, or else the public will see right through them, as they did during this press tour.
Severity: Low – While the press tour received its share of criticism, the film’s huge success ensured that the controversy had minimal impact on the project itself. However, the scrutiny around Ariana Grande’s emotional persona and her relationship with Ethan Slater will likely continue to surface in future public engagements. If Ariana shifts her persona again, fans may perceive it as inauthentic, leading to future challenges in her public image. Ultimately, this controversy will likely fade as the film continues to perform well at the box office, but it serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between authenticity and PR manipulation in celebrity culture today.
MasterChef UK’s Gregg Wallace’s Sexual Harassment Allegations
What Happened: In late 2024, MasterChef UK host Gregg Wallace faced multiple allegations of inappropriate behaviour and sexual harassment, dating back to 2005. Several women who worked with Wallace claimed he made sexually explicit remarks, inappropriately touched colleagues, and made lewd comments. The accusations resurfaced amid an ongoing investigation by Wallace’s production company, Banijay UK, which led to Wallace stepping away from MasterChef during the review. His public response, which included a dismissive Instagram post, angered many, with high-profile figures publicly defending the accusers and calling for accountability.
Opinion: Wallace’s response to the allegations, notably his failure to offer a serious and empathetic reply, has intensified the backlash. His decision to dismiss the allegations instead of taking the situation seriously has damaged his credibility. In a world where public figures must manage their reputation carefully, Wallace’s approach is a stark reminder of the importance of handling such allegations with professionalism. The public support for the accusers from other industry figures has only exacerbated his situation. Restoring Wallace’s career will require an extensive, thoughtful, and sincere PR strategy that demonstrates true contrition and commitment to changing behaviour.
Severity: High – The serious nature of the allegations, combined with the support from prominent figures defending the accusers, makes this a major reputational crisis for Wallace. His career now faces a monumental PR effort to recover from this scandal.
Adidas and the Kanye West Yeezy Fallout
What Happened: In 2024, Adidas continued to deal with the fallout from its terminated partnership with Kanye West, following his widely condemned antisemitic remarks. While Adidas severed ties with West and initially suspended Yeezy production, the brand faced significant losses from unsold Yeezy stock. To recoup some of these losses, Adidas made the controversial decision to resume limited Yeezy sales, despite the backlash from critics who felt the brand was prioritising profits over principle. Although Adidas pledged to donate the proceeds from the revived Yeezy sales to charity, the optics of reviving a partnership with such a tainted history created further division.
Opinion: Adidas’s decision to resume selling Yeezy products undermined its earlier stance against hate speech, as it appeared to be backtracking in the face of financial pressure. While the financial logic behind the decision is clear—Adidas had a substantial amount of unsold stock—it compromised the ethical position they had taken when first cutting ties with West. By choosing to clear out Yeezy inventory, Adidas risked alienating the customers who supported the brand’s stance on morality. The optics of reviving a deal with someone whose behaviour had sparked international outrage harmed Adidas’s credibility. Even with the promise of charitable donations, the brand’s reputation was tarnished by its perceived prioritisation of financial recovery over its original commitment to social responsibility.
Severity: Medium – While this was a necessary financial decision for Adidas, the move raised ethical concerns and sparked reputational challenges. The decision to revive Yeezy sales will likely continue to be scrutinised, leaving Adidas to navigate a difficult balance between profit-making and maintaining its values in a socially-conscious marketplace.
Jaguar’s Failed Electric Vehicle Launch and Reputational Setback
What Happened: In 2024, Jaguar, a brand renowned for its British heritage and association with luxury, elegance, and iconic cultural moments (like its longstanding link to James Bond), launched its highly anticipated all-electric SUV. Despite the initial buzz surrounding its design and prestige, the vehicle faced significant technical issues, including battery life problems and software malfunctions, which were widely reported in customer reviews and media coverage. The launch, which was supposed to cement Jaguar as a key player in the luxury electric vehicle market, instead resulted in disappointed customers and a tarnished reputation.
Opinion: Jaguar, with its rich legacy of crafting prestigious, high-performance vehicles, missed the mark with its entry into the EV market. The brand’s traditional focus on craftsmanship and reliability clashed with the disappointing technical issues of the new electric model. For a brand that has built a reputation around British sophistication, the launch felt rushed, undermining the trust that loyal customers had in Jaguar’s commitment to excellence. With other brands, like Tesla, already dominating the luxury EV market, Jaguar must recalibrate its strategy to focus on building a high-quality, reliable electric vehicle that aligns with its esteemed legacy.
Severity: High – A significant reputational blow to a brand long associated with British luxury and performance, jeopardising its future standing in the competitive EV market.
Donald Trump’s Assassination Attempt
What Happened:In mid-2024, an attempted assassination on Donald Trump during a campaign rally shocked the nation. The incident, which could have derailed any other politician’s campaign, instead became a symbol of defiance for Trump. The now-iconic photo of Trump, with blood streaming down his face, his arm raised defiantly in the air, and the American flag behind him, quickly became the face of his campaign. The image sent a powerful message of resilience and patriotism, with Trump framed as a leader willing to sacrifice everything for his country. It was a moment that redefined his narrative in the media and to his supporters, portraying him as an unwavering symbol of strength in the face of adversity.
Once it was confirmed that Trump was unharmed, his PR team wasted no time capitalising on the moment. The photo was distributed widely across media platforms, transforming what could have been a devastating blow to his campaign into a rallying point. The imagery, unmistakably powerful, projected strength, bravery, and unwavering commitment. It allowed Trump to reframe his campaign, shifting the narrative to one of resilience and patriotism. In a year of intense political division, this photo presented him as the defiant leader many conservative Americans were craving.
This imagery not only galvanised his base but also cemented him as the symbol of Republican patriotism. His followers saw him as a leader who had been willing to risk it all, and the photo quickly became emblematic of his campaign’s message. His reputation, particularly within his base, remained strong. Moreover, his impressive performance in the presidential debates further strengthened his position, with Trump effectively countering Biden’s points and solidifying his command of the race.
In fact, not long after the assassination attempt, Trump won the election and was named Time’s Person of the Year, solidifying his status as one of the most influential figures in the world. The recognition reflected the tremendous public interest in his persona and campaign, showing that despite the controversy and criticism, his image was more resilient than ever.
The momentum from the assassination attempt, coupled with his strong debate performance, positioned Trump as the clear frontrunner. Biden’s decision to step down shortly after, citing health concerns, was widely seen as a direct response to the political momentum Trump had gained in the aftermath of the attack. The defiant imagery of Trump, combined with his commanding presence during the debates, made him the clear winner in the public’s eyes, and the political landscape shifted dramatically in his favour.
Opinion: The image of Trump, bloodied but defiant, became a powerful visual rallying cry for his supporters and was skilfully leveraged by his PR team. What could have been a devastating moment instead turned into one of the most iconic political images of the year, showcasing Trump’s resilience. His campaign not only survived the attack but thrived, with the assassination attempt and the subsequent photo becoming a cornerstone of his message. The resilience narrative that followed gave Trump a boost of political momentum, solidifying him as a figurehead of Republican patriotism.
Severity: Low (for reputation) – While politically and emotionally charged, the event overwhelmingly benefited Trump’s campaign, cementing him as a defiant figurehead for conservative America. The image of strength following the attack not only reshaped Trump’s narrative but also contributed to a significant boost in his reputation, ultimately strengthening his position as a leading figure in the 2024 election race.
Kamala Harris’s Campaign Spending Controversy
What Happened: Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign faced sharp criticism over its financial management. Despite raising over $1 billion, the campaign concluded with more than $20 million in debt. Lavish expenditures on celebrity endorsements and high-profile events dominated headlines, with reports revealing payments of $165,000 to Beyoncé’s Parkwood Entertainment for a Houston rally and nearly $2.5 million to Oprah Winfrey’s Harpo Productions for a celebrity-packed town hall event. Additionally, millions were spent on influencer marketing ($4 million) and media advertising ($690 million).
Opinion: Harris’s campaign was already struggling to connect with voters, and revelations of extravagant spending only exacerbated the issue. The heavy focus on celebrity endorsements and glossy events seemed out of touch with the economic realities many Americans were facing, further alienating her base. While star power can generate buzz, it underscored a disconnect between the campaign’s priorities and the concerns of everyday voters. More balanced spending on grassroots outreach could have strengthened her campaign’s credibility and resonance.
Severity: Medium – The controversy highlighted significant weaknesses in campaign strategy, reinforcing narratives of financial mismanagement and elitism.
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck’s Divorce
What Happened: Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck’s divorce became a tabloid spectacle in 2024, quickly overshadowing both of their individual careers. The high-profile nature of their relationship, combined with the breakdown of their marriage, turned their split into a media frenzy. Speculation about the reasons behind their divorce, alongside public and private details being leaked to the press, kept them in the tabloids for weeks. The relentless coverage risked turning their personal lives into a circus, distracting from their professional achievements and ongoing projects.
Opinion: Lopez, who has been through public breakups before, now faces the challenge of navigating this latest chapter with a narrative that is at risk of being controlled by others. With so much speculation surrounding her and Affleck, there is a danger that this story will continue to overshadow her career, particularly when much of the narrative is driven by out-of-context clips and personal details splashed across social media. For Lopez, the race to regain control of the narrative will be crucial. While Affleck can navigate this with less scrutiny, Lopez will face a much harder battle. The internet, which already has deeply ingrained opinions about her, tends to target and distort her public image. This makes it even more difficult for her to move beyond the tabloid-driven discourse. By refocusing on her professional projects and steering the conversation back to her career, Lopez can slowly shift the narrative—but the battle will be much more intense for her given the relentless online criticism.
Severity: Medium – A significant distraction that plays into tabloid narratives, reinforcing public perceptions about Lopez. It risks overshadowing her professional work unless she can reclaim control of the narrative and refocus the public’s attention on her accomplishments.
Balenciaga’s Continued Fallout from Child Exploitation Ad Scandal
What Happened: While the original scandal broke in 2023, Balenciaga struggled throughout 2024 to regain its footing as public backlash over its controversial ad campaign—including imagery perceived to exploit children—lingered. Major celebrities distanced themselves, and campaigns failed to resonate.
Opinion: Balenciaga’s slow response and lack of meaningful accountability kept the scandal alive in public memory. A complete overhaul of leadership and a transparent commitment to ethical practices were needed but never fully delivered.
Severity: High – A long-term reputation crisis that continues to erode consumer trust.
Strictly Come Dancing Bullying Allegations
What Happened: Allegations of bullying among Strictly Come Dancing‘s professional dancers surfaced, sparking concerns about toxic backstage behaviour within the popular BBC show. These claims raised questions about the show’s backstage culture and the treatment of dancers, which contrasted with Strictly’s public image as a family-friendly, positive environment. While the BBC responded by launching an internal investigation, the controversy put a temporary shadow over the show’s wholesome image.
Opinion: Strictly Come Dancing has built its reputation on showcasing light-hearted entertainment, and these allegations tarnished that image. A transparent and thorough response, coupled with clear actions to address any underlying issues, was critical to restoring confidence among fans and participants. Despite the initial backlash, the BBC’s handling of the situation and their commitment to taking action helped contain the crisis. As the next season proceeded without major issues, it demonstrated that the show’s core appeal remained intact. However, the incident highlighted the need for ongoing oversight to ensure that Strictly remains a safe and positive environment for its stars.
Severity: Low – Although a reputational hit, the controversy didn’t cause long-term damage as the show successfully ran another season with no major disruptions, reinforcing its cultural relevance.
Prince Harry and Meghan’s Netflix Special
What Happened: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s latest Netflix project, Polo, premiered on December 10, 2024. The docuseries delves into the exclusive world of professional polo, featuring players like Nacho Figueras and Adolfo Cambiaso. While the series aimed to expand their media portfolio, it received lukewarm reviews, with some praising the insight into the sport and others criticising its niche appeal.
Opinion: Meghan and Harry’s continued focus on Netflix content has drawn attention, but Polo failed to generate the buzz of their earlier projects. While the series showcased their ability to align with high-profile individuals and exclusive lifestyles, it also reignited criticism about their overreliance on media ventures tied to their celebrity status. Polo felt more like a passion project than a strategic hit, raising questions about the long-term sustainability of their brand.
Severity: Medium – A lukewarm reception that underscores the challenge of balancing authenticity with audience engagement.
Boeing’s Ongoing Safety Concerns
What Happened: In December 2024, a Boeing 737 aircraft, operated by a major South Korean airline, made headlines when a door blew out mid-flight, causing panic among passengers. While the flight was able to land safely, the incident raised alarm over Boeing’s safety protocols. Investigations pointed to potential issues with the aircraft’s design and quality control processes. This incident followed previous revelations about lapses within Boeing, further amplifying concerns about its manufacturing standards.
Opinion: The South Korea flight incident added to an ongoing reputation crisis for Boeing. While the public may not fully understand the technicalities of aviation safety, the perception that Boeing planes are unsafe could have a long-term impact. Airlines, which rely heavily on consumer trust, will be cautious if these safety concerns become a widely held belief. If passengers start fearing Boeing’s aircraft, airlines will face pressure to consider alternatives, even if Boeing’s planes are statistically safe. The company needs to make substantial moves towards transparency, accountability, and trust-building to regain confidence both from airlines and the general public.
Severity: High – A significant reputational issue that, if left unaddressed, could lead to long-term challenges for Boeing, affecting both consumer confidence and airline partnerships.
OceanGate Lawsuits from Families of the Titan Victims
What Happened: The tragic Titan submersible incident, which occurred in 2023, continued to haunt OceanGate in 2024 as the company faced multiple lawsuits from the families of the victims. These legal battles and public outrage revealed the emotional and legal aftermath of the disaster. Many of the families accused OceanGate of gross negligence, citing the company’s failure to address concerns about the submersible’s safety and its decision to allow the ill-fated voyage to take place despite warnings. As the lawsuits piled up, OceanGate’s handling of the situation was widely criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Instead of engaging meaningfully with the families or offering public remorse, the company remained largely silent, compounding its already tarnished reputation.
Opinion: OceanGate’s refusal to engage in a meaningful and empathetic way with the grieving families and the public has exacerbated the situation. Instead of taking responsibility and showing genuine remorse, the company’s defensive stance only served to fuel anger and mistrust. This crisis highlights the inherent dangers of cutting corners, particularly in industries that involve human lives. OceanGate’s failure to be accountable has left it with little credibility and has ensured that the scandal remains front and centre in public consciousness. The lack of a proactive response has compounded the company’s reputation issues, and unless they adopt a more transparent and empathetic approach, this will remain a major blight on their legacy.
Severity: High – The ongoing lawsuits and the continued fallout from the Titan tragedy underline the severe damage to OceanGate’s reputation. The company’s refusal to show accountability or engage with the victims’ families has made this an ongoing disaster, with no quick fix in sight.
Meta’s Threads App Struggles
What Happened: Meta’s much-hyped entry into the social media landscape, the Threads app, launched in 2024 as a direct competitor to Twitter, faced massive user abandonment shortly after its release. Initially gaining attention due to its timing, following Twitter’s turmoil, the app quickly lost momentum as users criticised its lack of functionality, basic features, and the absence of innovative tools that could distinguish it from existing platforms. Threads failed to provide a compelling reason for users to stick around, and its incomplete product offering alienated the very people it needed to attract. The app’s early failure raised questions about Meta’s ability to create meaningful, competitive social platforms in an already crowded market.
Opinion: Meta squandered a golden opportunity to capitalise on Twitter’s instability. With so many users looking for a viable alternative to the chaotic Twitter, Threads could have filled that gap if it had been a more refined and feature-rich product. Instead, Meta rushed to market with an incomplete and underwhelming app that failed to meet user expectations. This was a classic case of a company resting on its laurels and assuming its size would carry it through, without fully understanding the needs and desires of users in the social media landscape. For Meta, the failure of Threads serves as a reminder that the sheer scale of a company doesn’t guarantee success if the product doesn’t deliver on its promises.
Severity: Medium – The failure of Threads is a missed opportunity for Meta, but due to the company’s size and resources, it still has the capacity to recover. However, this blip in Meta’s social media ventures raises questions about its ability to stay relevant in an ever-changing digital world.
Tesla’s PR Issues and Elon Musk’s Controversial Statements
What Happened: Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s outspoken support for Donald Trump, along with controversial tweets about geopolitical issues, COVID-19 policies, and other hot-button topics, sparked significant backlash. These statements not only polarized public opinion but also had a direct impact on Tesla’s brand image and share price. While Musk’s personal opinions have always been part of his public persona, they’ve increasingly blurred the line between the man and the brand, leaving Tesla vulnerable to reputational damage.
Opinion: Musk’s continued support for Trump, especially in the face of political and social polarisation, has made Tesla less appealing to a large portion of the American public. For many consumers, their choice to purchase a Tesla now extends beyond the car’s performance and innovation—it’s also a reflection of their values. Musk’s divisive political stance and controversial tweets alienate potential customers, particularly those who disagree with his positions. A more disciplined approach to public statements and a clearer distinction between his personal views and the Tesla brand could help avoid unnecessary distractions and mitigate the growing divide.
Severity: Medium – Ongoing distractions that undermine Tesla’s innovative image, with potential long-term consequences for consumer loyalty and brand reputation.
Disney’s Box Office Flops
What Happened: Several high-profile Disney films, including Wish and Haunted Mansion, underperformed at the box office in 2024, raising alarms about the company’s creative direction. Wish, despite being heavily promoted, failed to draw the expected audiences, while Haunted Mansion’s reception was lukewarm at best, despite the popularity of its original IP. These underperformances sparked concerns about creative stagnation and the growing impact of franchise fatigue, particularly as audiences grow weary of the same storytelling formula. Disney’s reliance on reboots, sequels, and familiar franchises has led to diminishing returns in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape.
Opinion: Disney’s dominance in the entertainment industry has long been fueled by its ability to deliver both nostalgic and innovative content. However, as evidenced by the box office results of Wish and Haunted Mansion, audiences are no longer as captivated by the same rehashed concepts. Disney’s formulaic approach risks alienating viewers who are craving something fresh. To reclaim its place as a cinematic powerhouse, Disney needs to invest in original ideas, take creative risks, and innovate beyond the traditional franchise model. A balance between leveraging legacy properties and fostering new stories will be key to revitalising the company’s appeal.
Severity: Medium – A significant warning for Disney, highlighting the risks of over-relying on familiar franchises, with potential long-term impacts on the brand’s creative reputation and box office performance.
2024 has been a year full of highs and lows, with many public figures and businesses navigating crises that tested their reputations. While some faced significant challenges, others demonstrated resilience and growth, showing that even in difficult times, there’s room for recovery and success. As we move into the future, these stories remind us that reputation is fragile, but with authenticity, transparency, and a genuine connection with the public, it can be rebuilt. Despite the challenges, there were countless moments of hope, growth, and positive change, proving that even in the toughest times, progress is possible.
As we look toward 2025, I hope we can start shifting the way we treat one another—especially in the digital world. I manage the Instagram accounts of people who’ve been cancelled. I see it all—the hate, the insults, and the relentless judgement. And what blows my mind is how the internet can be so cruel without a second thought. Take Liam Payne, for example. People scrutinised every move he made while he was alive, but once he passed away, suddenly he was treated like a hero. The irony is staggering. This constant cycle of tearing someone down and then elevating them once they’re gone—it’s a pattern that seems never-ending, and nothing ever changes.
The online bullying is real, and the level of misinformation is out of control. I log into the accounts of those who are struggling with this and read utterly evil comments—from complete strangers who are armed with facts they’ve twisted or just made up. Imagine the mental toll that takes on someone. Imagine being in the public eye, reading these things, knowing that hate is being directed at you, even when most of it is completely unfounded.
And then there’s cancel culture, which has gone way too far. For some, it’s become a hobby—a thrill they get from watching someone fall. But nobody considers the devastating effects on those at the receiving end. Most of the people who are canceled don’t deserve it. And sure, some do, but just because you’re offended or triggered by something, it doesn’t mean someone should lose their career, reputation, or livelihood. That’s the reality of today’s culture. It’s become a free-for-all where everyone’s jumping on the bandwagon of outrage without thinking about the consequences.
What drives me insane is the irony of it all. Those who preach about kindness—the ones shouting “Be Kind”—are often the biggest culprits of spreading cruelty. It’s hypocritical on an alarming scale. The very people demanding kindness are too often the ones making hurtful comments and pushing the cancel button. It’s maddening to witness, especially when it’s so obvious, and I honestly can’t understand why more people don’t see it.
I really hope 2025 brings a shift. I want to see more empathy and understanding. We all deserve a chance to make mistakes and learn from them, but instead, we’re all too busy tearing each other down. We need to focus on open dialogue, not jumping to conclusions. Cancel culture is already spiralling too far—what we need is more compassion, more thoughtfulness, and less of this mob mentality. We need to support one another, not constantly search for reasons to pull others down.
Let’s make 2025 a year where we focus on healing, growth, and being human. The world is hard enough without adding to the toxicity.