Oprah Interviews Kristin Cabot, and "The Bachelorette": The Trust Collapse Behind Every Viral Scandal

What actually breaks first in a scandal?

Not the headline. Not the viral clip. Not the backlash. It's trust.

In this episode, Molly McPherson breaks down three stories where trust was fractured long before the public ever reacted. Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos keeps inserting himself into the news cycle while Nancy Guthrie is still missing. Oprah scores a viral interview with Kristin Cabot and misses the only question that matters. And ABC's The Bachelorette production collapses under the weight of a casting decision everyone should have seen coming.

Each case exposes the same mistake in a different form. A leader who confused visibility with control. A media icon chasing relevance instead of values. A network that profited from someone's visible instability and then acted surprised when it blew up.

The takeaway is direct. You cannot out-message a trust collapse. You can repair it and rebuild it, but only if you're willing to name the thing that actually broke. Most people avoid doing exactly that.

Want More Behind the Breakdown?
Follow The PR Breakdown with Molly McPherson on Substack for early access to podcast episodes, private member chats, weekly live sessions, and monthly workshops that go deeper than the mic. It is the inside hub for communicators who want real strategy, clear judgment, and a little side-eye where it counts.

Follow Molly on Substack
Subscribe to Molly's Weekly Newsletter  

Need a Keynote Speaker? Drawing from real-world PR battles, Molly delivers the same engaging stories and hard-won crisis insights from the podcast to your live audience. Click here to book Molly for your next meeting. 

Follow & Connect with Molly:

• https://www.youtube.com/mollymcpherson
• https://mollymcpherson.substack.com/
• https://www.tiktok.com/@mollybmcpherson
• https://www.instagram.com/molly.mcpherson/
• ...

Transcript

Molly McPherson 0:06

Hey there. Welcome back to the PR Breakdown. I'm your host, Molly McPherson. In this episode, we're talking about the thing underneath every scandal, every messy headline, every viral pile on trust. That's it. That's the whole game, because before the headline hits, before the statement drops, before the public reacts, something else happens first. Trust breaks, and once you start looking at stories that way, everything changes. You stop chasing the loudest detail. You stop getting distracted by the drama, and you start asking a better question. What actually shifted here? What changed? What was the moment where this went from? Normal two, not okay. That's what I look for every time because headlines don't create crises. They expose them. So this episode, I wanna walk you through three stories. Very different on the surface, different people, different stakes. Same problem. Trust was either never there or it broke and no one handled it correctly after the fact. Let's start with Sheriff Chris Nanos. Now, I'm not here to break down the case itself. That's not my lane. I watch the communication. I watch the Crisis, and in this case, more specifically, the press conference. Because if you do this work long enough, you know there are moments when someone walks up to the microphone and tells you everything you need to know before they even finish speaking. And that's what this was, the press conference aired back in February, right at the peak of this case. The Nancy Guthrie story competed right at the same time as the Olympics, and it really is incredible. How much it took over the news. And now here we are over a month and no Nancy Guthrie and a sheriff and no answers. We still see Sheriff Chris Nanos pop up in the news. I've done a couple posts about this guy because that press conference was incredibly revealing to me right from the outset. Nanos did something that I see at every press conference where the organization, the office at the head of whatever's happening, the disaster, the issue, the crisis, they show exactly how much fear they have. The mask slips. It's when they've lost control of the narrative and they want it back, but they're not gonna tell you they've lost control of it. They have to blame someone for losing control. So it's usually when they do this, they blame the press. They tell the reporters in the room that all the chaos is their fault, and we can't focus on the case because of the press. They're asking too many questions, they're doing too many things. You're reporting on stories that don't matter. That's the job of a reporter. When they go there and they are covering your story and it's a press conference, they're showing up, they're following your rules. What they do with that information is on them. But if they're a part of a credentialed press organization, they will follow the rules which are followed with simple journalism ethics. If they get it wrong and they work for a credentialed outlet, they'll be called out for it. All anyone would have to do is call an editor and say, change that article. That's wrong. The editor would say, prove it, and they could prove it. That's why when people complain about the press, it's always the biggest tell. Also, at this press conference, there wasn't a clear reason for it. The only news he was dropping at that time was that the reward was increasing. Other than that, there wasn't anything new that was coming out of it. There wasn't anything. He announced whatever it is he had to announce. Then he brought over the FBI special agent in charge. He started saying some things and then it came back to him. And then they went back and forth a little bit and then they opened it up to questions from the press. And in the beginning he said, I'm only gonna take one or two questions. And then he was there for like another 45 minutes. So it shows a lack of organization and that matters more than people think, because when you call a press conference without substance, you're not informing. You are exposing yourself, and that was the tell. Whenever a public officials starts scolding reporters, it usually means one thing. But last time we tried this, it was just kind of chaotic, people yelling. So I'd ask that, um, you just kind of be patient with me. Pay attention to the questions asked. 'cause sometimes you guys wanna ask the same question twice and you're gonna get the same answer. So help yourself get, get what you can outta this, I'm gonna give you one question and, and a follow up. Okay. They don't have control. Then he keeps showing up, more interviews, more appearances. Always him. No one else in his department, just him. That's another tell, because now I'm asking, is this leadership or is this ego? Is this clarity or is this someone trying to control a narrative that's already slipping and now that's why this past week we're seeing recall efforts, and here's the part that people miss. That's not the beginning of the story. That's the result. The trust didn't break this week when the news reports and not many anymore saying that no one knows where Nancy Guthrie is. It started well before that, right at the beginning of the investigation. Chris Nanos mismanaged it from the beginning. It did not look like he was working with the FBI. There were too many leaks. He did too many interviews. It was as if he was more focused on how he appeared to be an investigator rather than being the investigator. When the news broke that Nancy Guthrie was missing, and we first heard from the Pima County Sheriff, that's not the beginning of the story. That's the result. Trust didn't break last week because we still can't find Nancy Guthrie. It broke a lot earlier. Now let's talk about Oprah and listen, I grew up with Oprah when I was a teenager. A lot of us did. I was a big broadcast girl. I liked Oprah. There's history there. There's goodwill, but goodwill isn't permanent. What we're seeing now is a different Oprah. She's more transactional, more click driven, less grounded in a clear value system. And that shift. People feel it. Which brings us to the Kristin Cabot interview. Let's just say the quiet part out loud. She wasn't there to be a thought leader. Oprah didn't wanna know anything deep from the woman who was at the center of the cold play viral video. That's the reason why she was there, because she went viral. Either they're having an affair or that's the currency. Now I have empathy for Kristin Cabot. She was the woman that Coldplay highlighted at Gillette Stadium with her boss, CEO, one of two Andrews. Going viral like that. Ooh, that's brutal. And people can be cruel. It was a mistake. Mm-hmm. I shouldn't have been out with my boss. Mm-hmm. But it wasn't a mistake that I deserved to die for. Disproportionately cruel. That part is real. That's where I have deep, deep empathy for Kristin Cabot. But that cannot be the whole story. And right now it is. The narrative keeps coming back to people Judge me, people got it wrong. The public doesn't understand all the things that I went through. In December, she did an interview with Lisa Miller from The New York Times. It was the same narrative except this time it was all about the public shaming ritual. I said in my live last Friday, I don't know who's helping. Kristin Cabot. It could be just friends. It could be a friend who works in, and I have air quotes here, public relations. It could be a friend who's a lawyer. I know this in my work, that other people will interfere with someone going through a crisis recently with someone going through a viral crisis. They were telling me all the different suggestions that people were giving them to manage this viral crisis. And she heard from lawyers and people who worked for brands and did social media and friends, and every single piece of advice that this person going through a viral crisis got was wrong. And I see that often in my work. There is a reason for legal advice. There is a reason for someone who understands internet culture, understands publicity, but if their job isn't to. Make sure that your reputation is solid, then don't listen to them because that's not what they're doing. They're just giving their opinion. And when it comes to a reputation, you do not wanna rely on someone's opinion. You want to rely on their experience. For Cabot, she leaned so heavily on how people reacted to that viral video that she's missing the point. The trust didn't break. How she was treated. Now, Kris and Cabot is not a public figure. I mean, she is now from an infamous point of view, but certainly when she went to Gillette that night, she wasn't well known. The narrative where she continues to blame the public, where Oprah blames the public, where the New York Times blames the public, it's not the jokes that cause the problem. It wasn't that the internet was too messy because it is messy. The problem was professional. She was the head of hr. She was involved with her CEO. That's the issue. And no amount of storytelling, no amount of detail, no amount of styling up. That image fixes that contradiction. You don't rebuild trust without naming the thing that broke it. Now, let's talk about A, B, C, because this one bothers me a lot. Taylor, Frankie Paul. Many of you probably saw the video or parts of the video that resurfaced last week. She was a part of this season's bachelorette casting. It was supposed to start last Sunday counter programming to March Madness. You know what happened? Was already addressed in 2023, but the video now is resurfacing. I posted something on TikTok. I'll clue a link in the show notes about it where I was reading all of the statements and breaking them down. When I posted it to TikTok, I was getting a lot of comments or some comments from people, young women I would assume, who follow the Secret Lives of Mormon. The television show on Hulu, they were sick enough for her. They said she already took accountability. She already talked about it. Why does she need to do it again? Understandable, fair question. But when there's a new version of the story. And in the case of last week, the video was released. People could see it. It was a bad video of Taylor losing it on Dakota. Father of a child. There's a child in the room, you hear the crime, she's throwing chairs. It's a really, really bad video, and it's a bad look. It is very serious and accountability does matter. So it's good that she's taken accountability for everything that's happened up to this point. But right now, with her being on the Bachelorette or supposed to be on the Bachelorette, it does need a response from her. This is where you cannot leave silence. You can't have a spokesperson come out and say, well, Taylor said something three years ago. Three years ago, it was a different story. Could have been the same video, but it's still a very different story because A, B, C, and the Bachelorette production invested $2 million an episode on this season. There's one episode in the can. One was getting ready to be edited and there were branding deals, you know, trade-offs. This is a lot of money, $2 million an episode, and they are scrapping the entire season. That is an enormous amount of money, but also there's a lot of relationships there. A lot of editors are gonna lose work. There are a lot of brand deals, a lot of trade-offs where different brands will buy into the program. So whenever you see a contestant go on a date, do you ever see them get on a plane or go to a certain hotel or to a certain location? There's usually brand deals. There's usually money exchanged in that. And then I saw some scuttle online saying that A, B, C might sue Taylor because of what happened. They better not do that because A, B, C knew exactly who they were casting, and so did the audience. My take on this, it wasn't just risky to cast. Taylor, someone who is part of a franchise on Hulu, and part of the success of that program is the messiness of the relationships, particularly with her, and I mentioned this on the live last week, I watched The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives. Not every single episode, but I watched a number of them with my daughters. And in one episode where she went home and she was speaking to her mother, and I don't think it's her father, I think it was her mother's husband. It could be a stepfather, but the exchange she had with her mother was so sad. And I said to my daughters, Taylor is damaged. She should not be on the show. And it is no surprise why she would end up in a trauma relationship after trauma relationship after trauma relationship. That video of her and Dakota is not surprising at all. And there's so many layers to it. Not only on the surface watching it, it's disturbing, it's triggering, I'm sure for many people, but for people who have been there, they could certainly recognize what's happening underneath the surface. Taylor obviously didn't just walk into the room and decide that she's gonna blow up and start throwing chairs. Dakota did something to provoke her. There were cheating allegations. There are a lot of things going on that provoke the needle, and then she just lost it and exploded. And then what does Dakota do at that moment, knowing that a child's there? So everything about this video is about how could Taylor do this with a child there? Well, you know what? How could the father pick up the phone and start filming? And still provoking the mother while the child was there, the child got hurt. He is just as culpable as Taylor is. We in the internet world, cannot be all caught up in what those two did without looking at the bigger fault line. And that is A, B, C, because this wasn't just risky to cast her, it was exploitative. And that's the difference between messy reality television and someone. Whose trauma is visible and whose instability is visible and then extending the franchise around it and then Disney acting all surprise in their statement saying, we will be canceling the season of the Bachelorette and we wanna focus on the family. That is a very clinically cut and dry statement. There's no support for Taylor, there's no support even for the family other than calling it the family. And this isn't just bad luck. For Disney. It's a business model. Where was, okay? So that statement to focus on the family. Where was that judgment earlier? You don't get to profit from instability and then distance yourself from the consequences. So what do all three of these stories have in common? A leader who confused visibility with control. A media icon, chasing relevance instead of values and a network exploiting instability and calling it entertainment. Different stories, same break. Trust didn't break at the headline. It broke before it. And if you are leading communicating behind building anything public facing, this is the part you need to understand. You cannot out message a trust collapse. You can repair it, you can rebuild it, but only if you're honest about what actually broke. That's it for today's episode of the PR breakdown. If this changed how you look at headlines, share it with someone who needs it. Come back next week because we're gonna keep doing this, looking past the noise and getting to the real story. That's all for this week. Bye for now.