1. SMRT and the Disruption
Backlash
MUHAMMAD AMIN BIN
RUSLAN
U1030128H
COM 4033

2. Disclaimer
 This case was developed based on archival research
with the sole purpose for class discussion. It does not
aim to serve as endorsements or to be used as a
source of primary data to illustrate managerial
practices of the organization(s) or individual(s)
mentioned in the case.

3. Case Objectives
This case aims to show the many challenges that
corporate communications professionals may
encounter when working for a highly visible
company with negative public sentiment. It also
demonstrates the challenges of competing for
airspace in a highly saturated social media
environment

4. SMRT at a Glance
 Founded in 1987
 Operates 3 lines: North-South Line, East-West Line
and Circle Line
 Average daily ridership of 252,00 passengers
 Operates taxis and buses as well

5. Public Transport Situation in Singapore
 Cars are very expensive with COE and ERP in place
 Road traffic is congested especially during peak
hours
 Only 45% of households own cars
 MRT is seen as a vital component of public transport

6. The Disruptions Start
 On 15th and 17th December, power to the trains on the
North-South line was cut causing lengthy disruptions
 Over 200,000 people were left stranded

7. The Disruptions Start (Cont’d)
 Scenes were chaotic
 Thousands were stuck between stations
 No one knew what was going on as SMRT did not
make any announcements
 Buses were deployed but came too late and were too
congested

8. Backlash
 A photo of SMRT instructing its taxi drivers to take
advantage of the situation was taken and soon went viral
 Netizens were unsurprisingly outraged
 SMRT quickly apologized and claimed it was a staff
member’s mistake
 Netizens remained sceptical

9. Backlash (Cont’d)
 A photo of a smashed train window also went viral
 Done by a man whose wife was facing breathing difficulties
 Rumors spread that he would be charged despite many
viewing his actions as heroic
 SMRT only denied it belatedly

10. Backlash (Cont’d)
 Social media erupted with activity, with most people
painting SMRT in a poor light
 #smrtruinslives became a trending topic with some
tweets even calling for the CEO to resign
 Blog posts expressing outrage were churned out
 Public was losing faith in SMRT

11. Underlying Issues
 SMRT had just hiked its fares
 People were unhappy with this given how they
perceived SMRT’s standards to be slipping
 Trains were getting over –crowded and delays were
becoming frequent

12. Underlying Issues (Cont’d)
 CEO revealed to be given a hefty salary
 Seen as out of touch for swatting aside the over crowding
problem
 Pictures of her becoming being hoisted on a sedan chair
became viral
 Became a scapegoat
 Calls for her to resign
intensified

13. SMRT Reacts
 Set up a Facebook page and Twitter account to
ensure information gets disseminated quickly
 Issued a news release apologizing to public and
stating that the CEO is in charge of the situation
 CEO stated that she would resign if the situation
calls for it and true enough she did 21 days later

14. Discussion Questions
 Why were netizens so antagonistic towards SMRT as




manifested in social media?
What could SMRT have done to counter the groundswell of
ill sentiment directed at it?
What price did SMRT have to pay for being such a late
entrant into the local social media scene?
Should SMRT’s CEO have listened to the numerous calls
asking for her to resign in the immediate aftermath of the
disruptions and why?
What more could SMRT do to win back the trust of the
public?