For this media analysis, we don't want to look at an interview. In fact, we want to do the exact opposite and look at a statement.
Watch this statement, being read out by Thomas Cook's chief executive, Peter Fankhauser. Again, just to point out that we're not making a judgement on the story - Thomas Cook, Peter Frankhauser, the workers etc - we are impartially examining a statement given on a major news story.
It has been a real struggle of late for Thomas Cook and we can only imagine the anxiety and distress that the former workers of the company are going through.
However, we thought that it was important to look at Peter Fankhauser's statement, as it contains some important media training techniques.
First of all, the structure. He structured the statement well. He started with the news, went on to sympathise and thank those affected - workers, customers, suppliers - only mentioning himself briefly at the end.
That shows empathy towards those that are affected. The order of thanks was important too, in firming up that empathetic stance. The workers - they are the thousands of people who are starting the day without a job, the customers - they are the hundreds of thousands of people who are either stranded or now have to start rearranging their future travel plans, and the suppliers.
He didn't make the mistake that BP CEO Tony Hayward made back in 2010. Talking about the effect of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, Mr Hayward said "There's no-one who wants this thing over more than I do. I want my life back". Bad move. Talking about how such a huge disaster is inconveniencing you is not the way to gain the sympathy, support or understanding of the press or the public.
It would have been like Peter Frankhauser beginning the statement by saying "I'm really tired, actually. I've not been sleeping that well recently - and I'm grateful that I can now stop worrying about it all". How horrendously insensitive would that be?
Let's not fool ourselves, though. Peter Frankhauser won't be financially affected himself - he's reputed to worth about $15bn - but if he came out with a nonchalant or unconcerned attitude, no-one would care about the statement and he would just be painted as another uncaring billionaire.
He paces the statement well too. He doesn't rush it, but delivers it in a meaningful, sombre way which reflects the tone of the news that he's having to share.
One final point to make too. As he finishes and begins to turn away to walk back into the office building, a reporter asks "Do you take personal responsibility?" - he did the right thing by not answering.
Let's look at why. Normally, we tell our clients that they should always answer the question that they've been asked - but this is one of the times when it's okay not to answer.
First of all, it's likely that the press would have been told beforehand that Peter Frankhauser wouldn't be taking questions and we're sure that he feels he's covered all of the important pertinent information that's needed right now.
There should definitely be a more 'emotional' interview with Peter Frankhauser at some point, where fingers can be pointed and blame can be laid - but this wasn't the time.
Also - if he had answered one question, that would have started an avalanche of questions and he would still be there now, answering them. In all honesty, he probably wouldn't have had the information to hand to answer the vast majority of them, and that would have left us all feeling a little dissatisfied.