The right journalists in minutes, the right statement by tier, and a sentiment read that updates in real time.
The first ten minutes are about the list, not the statement
Most crisis playbooks start with the holding statement. Start with the list instead — the statement is worth nothing if it reaches the wrong journalists or misses the ones already circling the story. Pull crisis-relevant journalists by beat, region, and prior coverage of your category in the time it takes to read this sentence, not the two hours it takes to rebuild a contact list you last touched two years ago.
One statement, tier-appropriate variants
A wire-service reporter, a trade journalist, and a regional outlet need the same facts delivered differently — one wants the on-record quote, one wants the technical detail, one wants the local angle. Distributing tier-appropriate variants through one workflow means the story stays consistent while the framing actually fits who's reading it, instead of one generic statement copy-pasted everywhere.
Watch sentiment across earned, social, and AI at the same time
A crisis doesn't stay in one channel. Real-time sentiment tracking across earned coverage and social gives you the traditional read; the newer question is whether AI engines are repeating the wrong version of the story back to anyone who asks. That's a different failure mode than bad press — an AI answer can keep citing an early, incomplete account long after the correction runs, and you won't know unless you're checking for it specifically.
Know within hours, not weeks
The AI visibility check exists for exactly this moment: run the same prompts a buyer or journalist would run, and see whether the answer reflects where the story actually stands. Speed and visibility together are what a crisis has always needed and rarely gotten from a tool built for the earned-only era.