in

Six Flags claims visitor did not die, users ask for closure

During the afternoon of this Tuesday, it was announced that during the weekend, a young man lost his life after suffering an accident in one of the Six Flags amusement rides.

Reports indicate that the visitor got on the El Pingüino attraction, where apparently, the employees of the place did not properly secure the young man. In an abrupt movement, the person “flew out” and after being hospitalized, he lost his life.

According to information published by El Universal, the research folder identified with folio FIMC / MC-2 / UI-3 C / D / 01381 / 11-2020 R1 “It is clear that the victim, identified as Abdiel Alexey, hit his head against a security fence of the game, which caused him head trauma, as well as a frontoparietal wound of approximately 11 centimeters ”.

Now the young man’s family and Six Flags legal representative face a legal battle, since the amusement park, allegedly, does not want to be responsible for the expenses derived from this accident.

The event has generated all kinds of reactions from social networks, where users have demanded the closure of the park in the same way that happened last year with the Chapultepec Fair, considering that the death of the young man was the responsibility of the amusement park itself .

This situation has begun to position the label “Six Flags” among the first conversation trends in social networks, which led the brand to issue a position.

From its social networks, Six Flags issued an apparent position. And it is that without any type of signature, letterhead or logo, the brand published a text capture in which it ensures that the visitor who, allegedly lost his life, is in stable condition after being injured in one of his games:

The brand’s response, far from reassuring users, led to a new wave of criticism, where many say that the firm’s lack of formality in responding and the inconsistencies in its response is only a strategy to save time.

Beyond the veracity of both the reports that indicate the death of the young man and what was said by Six Flags, the only thing that is clear is that the brand is wrong in giving an answer to the fact in the way in which it did.

And although we are clearly facing a crisis that demands a quick response, the truth is that issuing a position with little formality leaves much to be desired about the firm’s communication strategy as well as how credible its justification may be.

We are talking about a case that is not minor. A more formal response to the incident, with a date, signature and a logo, would be necessary to clarify the presumed death of a person at the firm’s facilities.

The matter is not a minor matter, and the firm must pay more attention to a case in which something as valuable as its reputation is at stake.

The premise is even more important when you consider that 85 percent of consumers construct their opinions about companies based on how brands react to a crisis, according to Weber Shandwick and KRC Research.