Air India’s chief executive, Campbell Wilson, finds himself under scrutiny as observers highlight striking parallels between his message following the Ahmedabad Boeing 787 crash and American Airlines CEO Robert Isom’s address in January. Social media users have pointed out near-identical phrasing and structure, triggering accusations of plagiarism and raising concerns about authenticity and leadership response.
Wilson’s video statement, released on 12 June from Ahmedabad, opened with expressions of sorrow and swiftly moved to details of ongoing relief efforts. He said, “First and most importantly, I would like to express our deep sorrow about this event. This is a difficult day for all of us… we are actively working with the authorities on all emergency response efforts.” The similarity to Isom’s January-scripted speech—following a mid‑air collision in Washington—has provoked comparisons down to identical sentences and tone.
Online, commentators debate whether the alignment reflects standard operating procedure during crises or a lapse in genuine leadership. One user on X argued it “could and must be multiple things,” noting standardised communications protocols, while others saw the replication as undermining sincerity.
An aviation-focused blog highlighted the issue of context. While Isom’s speech referenced both civilian passengers and a military helicopter, Wilson’s statement omitted casualties on the ground, including victims at campus hostels—a conspicuous absence that critics say hints at reliance on a template ill‑suited to local realities.
Critics also point to the timing and delivery. Wilson interrupted a flight to lead the response, underscoring his personal involvement. Still, detractors say the speech’s calcified delivery—perhaps aided by teleprompter—gave it an impersonal feel. An aviation blog remarked that while the message was calm, “it was basically a word‑for‑word copy,” leaving observers questioning whether it reflected Air India’s values or a PR shortcut.
Industry insiders note that airlines often rely on pre‑written crisis communication scripts, many aligned across carriers and crafted by specialised agencies. A source familiar with such protocols said that communications teams typically pull from approved templates to ensure speed and consistency—however, most agencies emphasise tailoring to each incident.
The public reaction has been mixed. Some defend Wilson’s approach as a standard crisis response, appreciating his prompt engagement. Others emphasise a growing expectation for leaders to deliver distinct, situation‑specific statements, especially in tragedies marked by unprecedented domestic human impact.
As speculation grows regarding whether Air India’s communications were outsourced or drafted under pressurised conditions, the airline faces scrutiny not only for technical failings leading to the crash but also for its post‑crisis handling. The controversy adds another layer of reputational challenge to an organisation already navigating operational failures and national grief.
Nationals Moved to Safety: India Airlifts First Group from Iran 