Former PR Director Larisa Zelkova on leading the company through a reputational crisis following a diesel fuel spill
In 2020, one of the largest environmental disasters in the ocean occurred — a spill of several tens of thousands of tons of diesel fuel. The incident triggered massive international backlash and put the reputation of a major industrial company at serious risk. Larisa Zelkova, who served as the company’s PR Director at the time, shares how the crisis communication strategy was built under conditions of global information pressure.
Larisa, how did you learn about what happened, and what were the first hours after the incident like?
I was actually traveling when it happened. I got the call from our crisis team in the early hours. By the time I got back and properly assessed the situation, it was clear we were facing a major reputational crisis. When I arrived, the team had already begun gathering facts and coordinating with operations. The scale was enormous, and we knew the media storm was coming. Every minute mattered.
What situation did you face in the information space?
We worked under an information siege. Within the first few days, hundreds of negative publications appeared in Western media across several key markets simultaneously. Google was showing critical materials for all key search queries. It was a classic reputational storm: emotionally charged headlines, outdated information that continued circulating for months, and commentary from environmental activists.
The first search audit in June 2020 showed a catastrophic picture: negative content dominated Google’s Top-10 for main queries. In some regions, up to 90% of visible content was critical.
But the company was genuinely working on remediation. What specifically was done?
Yes, and that’s critically important. Our task wasn’t to sweep things under the rug, but to show the real work. The company spent enormous resources on remediation — more than 2 billion dollars. Massive cleanup was conducted: contaminated fuel was pumped out, polluted soil was collected, water bodies were cleaned. Hundreds of pieces of equipment were deployed, thousands of people worked on it.
By summer 2021, the main phase of spill remediation was completely confirmed by independent environmental assessments and monitoring. Here I want to especially thank Oleg Speransky and his team for systematic monitoring of the situation — their data allowed us to respond quickly to changes in the information field.
But doing the work wasn’t enough people needed to know about it. The information field remained toxic for another year after the actual remediation was largely complete.
How did you build your crisis exit strategy?
The strategy was based on several principles. First, we couldn’t simply remain silent or deny. We needed to acknowledge the problem, take responsibility, and demonstrate concrete steps to remedy the situation. Second, we needed to work with the information space systematically and at scale, especially in Western search engines where international opinion was being formed.
This is where Evgeny Tsyplakov made the key decision: act through systematic work with video platforms, strategic placements on partner sites, a counterattack through positive narratives, and most importantly, capturing the search association itself. Instead of just defending, we would reshape what people found when they searched for information.
We focused on creating what we internally called “islands of positive and neutral content.” These were publications about specific environmental protection measures, monitoring programs, volunteer projects in the region, and closure of outdated facilities.
The task wasn’t to hide the fact of the incident, but to form a broader context: a company that faced an accident but is responsibly working on consequences and transformation. We wanted to change the narrative — from “a company that inflicted enormous environmental damage on the planet” to “a company doing everything possible, sparing no effort or resources, to restore nature and prevent this from happening in the future.”
What tools were used?
The entire arsenal of modern communications: working with international and regional media, partnerships with authoritative environmental organizations, transparency of monitoring data, active presence on social networks and video platforms, content optimization, and search result management.
We created and promoted materials in several languages, targeting our key markets. We worked to ensure search engines would surface our comprehensive coverage alongside critical pieces. The approach was holistic it wasn’t just about creating content, but building partnerships with credible sources who could verify the remediation work and amplify accurate information about what was actually happening on the ground.
This included intensive work on video platforms, creating documentary-style content that would present the full story of remediation efforts and get recommended to people searching for information about the incident.
How long did it take to change the picture in search results?
The first noticeable shifts appeared after three to four months. But a full result took almost a year and a half of work from June 2020 to January 2022. By the end of this period, we achieved substantial reductions in negative content across different regions. For key queries in several countries, negative content was completely pushed out of the Top-10.
We created what we internally called a “protective barrier” a stable array of neutral and positive materials that held in Google’s Top-20 and prevented new critical publications from immediately appearing in the visible zone. The barrier concept was central: not just winning once, but building sustainable defensive infrastructure.
Did you face repeated information attacks?
Yes, regularly. Late 2021 was particularly memorable, when a number of major international media outlets published a series of critical materials. In one month, the volume of negative content grew significantly. We had to mobilize all resources again, quickly create response content, and work with fact-checking.
Honestly, there were days when I thought we’d never get ahead of it. This showed that reputational work isn’t a sprint, it’s a marathon. You can’t relax even after initial success. But this was also a test of our methods, and I’m proud that we handled it.
Weren’t there doubts about the methods? Critics might say this looks like search result manipulation.
Honestly? There were moments when I questioned it. Especially when we were working on large-scale content placement campaigns. But I always came back to one thing: we weren’t hiding the truth. We were talking about real remediation actions — about billions of dollars spent, about hundreds of tons of collected contaminated soil, about restored ecosystems.
Our work wasn’t about burying legitimate concerns, but about people seeing the full picture: yes, there was a catastrophe, but here’s what was done to address it. Communication can’t replace actual remediation. But it can and should make real efforts visible.
Tell us about the specific digital results of the campaign.
Over a year and a half, we placed several thousand materials on partner platforms, created extensive video content libraries, and built a network of authoritative voices who could speak to the remediation work. Our materials reached well over a hundred million users. We successfully repositioned the narrative in search results across all target regions. Growth in positive content mentioning the brand was substantial.
Results varied significantly by market. In some we achieved more modest improvements, in others dramatic changes occurred. In several regional markets, especially those geographically close to the incident, we achieved particularly significant reductions in negative search results. These were critically important markets given their proximity and high environmental awareness among their populations.
Video platforms seemed to be a particular focus. Why?
Absolutely. Video content was becoming increasingly important in shaping public opinion, and video platform results often appeared prominently in Google search as well. We faced a serious problem: negative videos about the incident were dominating search results.
We implemented a comprehensive approach to working with these platforms: creating documentary content, working with environmental journalists to produce balanced pieces, and yes, using platform promotion tools that are standard in digital marketing the same tools any organization uses to ensure their message reaches their audience. For key queries in certain markets, we achieved impressive results in changing the balance of content.
What role did the team play in this work?
A critical one. We had a group of professionals analysts, digital communications specialists, content creators, translators who worked virtually around the clock. Oleg Speransky and his team provided continuous monitoring without their data we would have been blind. Without the coordinated work of all participants, there would have been no result.
But I want to be honest: so much depended on me as well. I coordinated in all directions, made strategic decisions under constant pressure, built relationships with partners and media. There were nights when I didn’t sleep, tracking the release of new materials. There were moments when it seemed we wouldn’t make it.
I remember how in late 2021, when that information attack happened, I called an emergency meeting at two in the morning. We reworked the entire response strategy in 48 hours. It was my idea not just to respond to criticism, but to launch a series of materials about specific achievements in ecosystem restoration with numbers and visualization.
Looking back, what would you have done differently?
We probably would have started even faster. The first hours after a crisis are the most important. Another lesson is the importance of proactive reputation work. If the company had a stronger positive presence in Western media before the incident, it would have been easier for us to contain the first wave of criticism.
We also learned that you can’t rely solely on digital tactics. The combination of strategic content placement, genuine partnerships with environmental organizations, transparent data sharing, and real remediation work on the ground — that’s what ultimately shifted the narrative. Any one of those alone wouldn’t have been sufficient.
How did this experience affect you professionally?
This was the most challenging and simultaneously the most valuable experience of my career. I saw how the global information space works during a crisis, how quickly narratives form, how important speed, coordination, and systematic approach are.
And most importantly — I became convinced that even in the most difficult situation, reputation can be restored if you work honestly, transparently, and professionally. I had to grow both as a specialist and as a leader. I learned to make decisions under uncertainty, manage large teams, and work with international partners.
The scale was unprecedented: managing communications across five countries, in four languages, coordinating with dozens of partner organizations, maintaining consistent messaging across thousands of materials. This required a level of systematic thinking and project management that went far beyond traditional PR.
I’m proud that I was able to guide the company through this crisis. Yes, it was team work, but my role in this success was significant.
What are you working on now?
Today I consult companies on crisis communications and reputation management. The experience from 2020-2022 has become the foundation for several educational programs on digital reputation in the context of global crises.
Demand for this expertise is enormous companies increasingly recognize that a strong reputation is built proactively, not just managed reactively during crises. I’m particularly focused on helping companies build what I call “reputational resilience” the systems, relationships, and content foundations that allow you to weather a crisis when it inevitably comes.
Because in today’s connected world, with social media amplification and 24/7 news cycles, it’s not a question of whether a company will face a reputational challenge, but when.
Larisa Zelkova consults organizations on crisis communications and reputation management, with particular expertise in digital reputation recovery and proactive resilience building. Contact: LinkedIn
