Edelman, the largest independent public relations firm in the world by revenue, found itself having to re-examine its procedures after two episodes that generated unwelcome media attention. The first involved the agency’s response to a survey of large public relations agencies, conducted by The Guardian and an organization called the Climate Investigations Center, about representing clients that deny climate change. The second incident, less fraught than the first, was centered on a blog post suggesting that the suicide of Robin Williams represented “an opportunity” for a national conversation about depression.

Image Richard Edelman Credit... Edelman

The Guardian, in an article on Aug. 4, reported that Edelman, unlike many of its competitors, “did not explicitly rule out taking on climate deniers as clients,” and included a sentence that read, “An initial response to C.I.C. from Edelman inadvertently included an internal email which said: ‘I don’t believe we are obligated in any way to respond. There are only wrong answers for this guy.’ ” The article was illustrated with what was described as a screen grab of the conversation inside Edelman showing that the email had been written by Mark Hass, who was at the time United States president and chief executive of Edelman. He left the agency last month.

The Guardian published a follow-up article on Aug. 7 reporting on a subsequent statement on the Edelman website in which the agency said it “fully recognizes the reality of and science behind climate change” and does not “accept client assignments that aim to deny climate change.”

Two related articles by Brian Merchant were on the Motherboard channel of Vice, one on Aug. 5 castigating Edelman and one on Tuesday about a telephone call from Richard Edelman, president and chief executive of Edelman, to Mr. Merchant, during which, Mr. Merchant wrote, Mr. Edelman told him that Edelman had “fired” Mr. Hass “in part because of that stupid note he wrote” and describing Mr. Hass as “the ham-head who filled out the questionnaire to be a little, uh, slick.” (Earlier, in a blog post, Mr. Edelman said that the agency “did a poor job of filling out” the questionnaire.)

That, in turn, brought online articles questioning Edelman from publications like O’Dwyer’s and PR Week because, when it was reported in April that Mr. Hass would leave the agency, his departure was described by Edelman as his stepping down rather than as a dismissal. “It wasn’t the best interview I’ve ever seen,” said Steve Barrett, editor in chief of PR Week, referring to Mr. Edelman’s conversation with Mr. Merchant. “It certainly wouldn’t be in line with the media training they give their clients.”