Crises in the Age of Disinformation: How Brands Are Responding to Fake Attacks

As of February 2025, the spread of fake news and disinformation remains one of the most pressing challenges for businesses. While information travels faster than ever, its reliability often falls short. Brands are increasingly forced to act not only as market players but also as defenders of truth, fighting back against targeted attacks, fabricated scandals and AI-generated defamation.

Understanding the Threat: Disinformation as a Crisis Trigger

In recent years, businesses of all sizes have found themselves victims of fake narratives intentionally created to discredit them. From falsified product reviews to entirely fictional news reports, the range of tactics has expanded significantly, often fuelled by bots and anonymous accounts. Such content spreads quickly on social media, frequently triggering real-world consequences like stock drops or customer boycotts.

Unlike traditional PR crises, fake attacks are difficult to contain because they aren’t based on verifiable facts. They often emerge from nowhere, catching communications teams off guard. A single viral post can trigger an avalanche of mistrust and public outrage, regardless of its truthfulness. Brands that lack a proactive media strategy often find themselves powerless in such moments.

At the core of the issue lies the erosion of public trust. When people question the credibility of information, they become more susceptible to sensationalist lies. For companies, this creates a volatile environment where reputation management must include not only reactive strategies but also preemptive monitoring and verification mechanisms.

The Role of AI and Deepfakes in Modern Attacks

One of the defining features of modern disinformation is the increasing use of AI-generated content. In 2024 alone, there was a 67% increase in reported cases of deepfakes being used against public figures and corporations. These aren’t just manipulated videos; AI can fabricate voice recordings, clone brand visuals, and create entirely fake websites designed to mimic legitimate ones.

For example, a European banking institution faced an AI-generated video in which a fake executive issued fraudulent financial guidance. Although promptly debunked, the video caused significant concern among stakeholders. It took days to fully restore the institution’s credibility in the public eye, highlighting how realistic these attacks have become.

Countering such tools requires advanced technological responses. Some companies are now using blockchain to verify their official statements and digital signatures to authenticate content. Others partner with cybersecurity firms specialising in misinformation tracking. Regardless of method, it’s clear that combating disinformation requires the same technical sophistication used to create it.

Strategic Communication as a Defence Tool

Organisations facing fake crises must have a flexible and well-prepared communications strategy. Speed is crucial: the first few hours after the appearance of fake news are the most critical for establishing control over the narrative. Companies that react too slowly risk losing the opportunity to shape public perception.

Effective crisis responses begin with rapid verification of facts, followed by clear and direct communication to key audiences. This includes customers, media outlets, regulators, and partners. Transparency is key – acknowledging what is known and unknown avoids speculation and builds trust. A consistent voice across all channels helps prevent mixed messages that could undermine credibility.

Additionally, brands benefit from maintaining an active online presence even in non-crisis periods. This allows them to establish channels of trust with their audience. When a disinformation campaign arises, these trusted touchpoints become vital for distributing accurate information. Regular engagement also makes it harder for fake narratives to gain traction.

Internal Preparedness and Staff Involvement

Crisis communications cannot function in isolation from the rest of the business. Companies must invest in internal training, ensuring that employees know how to recognise signs of disinformation and how to respond. Social media policies should be clear and up to date, especially for employees with public-facing roles.

Some firms conduct crisis simulations involving multiple departments to stress-test their response procedures. This helps identify gaps in their system and ensures that all teams understand their role in a coordinated response. Preparedness extends to IT, HR, and even legal departments, as attacks may also involve data breaches or reputational lawsuits.

Staff also play a role in defending the brand externally. Encouraging employees to responsibly share official updates and correct misinformation within their own networks can create a ripple effect of credible content. Human voices remain a powerful antidote to fake narratives, especially when coming from those inside the company.

Restoring Reputation and Learning from Attacks

Even after a disinformation campaign has been stopped, its effects can linger. Brands must focus on rebuilding trust by emphasising transparency and openness. This includes publishing detailed timelines of what happened, the actions taken, and what has been done to prevent future incidents. Such honesty signals accountability, which is crucial for repairing damaged reputation.

Recovery also involves engagement with stakeholders who may have been affected – from confused customers to sceptical investors. Listening to concerns and providing personalised responses helps restore confidence. In some cases, legal action against the originators of the fake content may be necessary, although tracking and prosecuting such actors remains difficult in many jurisdictions.

Lastly, each crisis offers lessons. Companies that treat fake attacks as learning opportunities become more resilient over time. They improve monitoring systems, refine messaging strategies and often discover new allies in media, academia or law enforcement. The ability to learn quickly is one of the most important assets in this evolving information battleground.

Proactive Brand Integrity Management

Beyond reactive measures, proactive integrity management is becoming a standard part of business operations. This includes regular audits of brand mentions, automated alerts for misinformation signals, and collaboration with fact-checking networks. Some companies even use sentiment analysis to detect shifts in public perception early.

Being proactive also means contributing to a healthier information environment. Brands can support media literacy programmes or partner with educational institutions to raise awareness about disinformation. By doing so, they demonstrate social responsibility and contribute to the broader fight against falsehoods.

Ultimately, in an era where truth is under attack, integrity is a competitive advantage. Businesses that are seen as trustworthy and resilient will retain customer loyalty, attract better talent, and be better prepared for whatever challenges may arise in the next cycle of digital disruption.