This study aims to investigate how companies formulate external communication in social media and sustainability reports when dealing with public criticism linked to sustainable development, in a society where information spreads quickly via social media and thus risk leading to loss of legitimacy and damaged reputation. The study is based on a qualitative method with quantitative elements. A qualitative directed content analysis has been conducted on six different companies' Twitter and Facebook pages as well as sustainability reports, where data has been interpreted, categorized and analyzed based on Image Repair Theory's communication strategies. A selection was made among 14 295 words in social media and 80 234 words in sustainability reports to find out which strategies the companies used in their crisis management, which strategies were most common in each medium and why.

The results show that strategies such as corrective action and mortification were equally common in both channels. In social media, it was also common for companies to formulate posts using strategies such as defeasibility and sympathy, while the content of sustainability reports often could be linked to strategies such as information, bolstering and transcendence. The study shows that companies' choice of communication strategies is based on a combination of the type of recipient and the type of channel used. A combination of one-way and two-way communication is thus important for the company to be able to meet the specific needs of both of these factors. Furthermore, the study shows that Image Repair Theory could be expanded with more strategies such as sympathy and information, as these were common in all companies' crisis management. Finally, the study shows that the monologic or dialogic characteristics of a medium have a major impact on how communication is formulated in response to public criticism.