by Ed Harrison
PhD Researcher at Bath University's Applied Digital Behaviour Lab
As we approach a pivotal year with elections across over 40 countries, encompassing more than half the world’s population, there will be a lot of talk of mis- and disinformation. This comes as artificial intelligence has supercharged efforts to destabilize democracies, reduce trust in institutions, and negatively impact the health of the online information ecosystem.
One question that will be crucial for the communications industry is how misinformation affects its broader objectives and practices. For some organisations, the impact will be direct, as their brand or communications become caught up in false narratives or online manipulation. Prominent recent examples include Eli Lilly’s stock price falling after a fake account announced the brand would make insulin free; users sharing AI-generated pictures of a false “satanic collection” from clothes outlet Target; and Reddit users and bots contributing to the collapse of Credit Suisse. For instances of direct misinformation and online manipulation impacting organisations, advanced social listening, and crisis monitoring can begin to address some of these challenges.
However, for other organisations whose messaging, brand perception, and topics of interest are not (currently) impacted by direct misinformation, it may seem difficult to know if or how it may affect them. For these organisations, I would emphasise they are not immune. In order to understand how it impacts their objectives and practices, it will be important to consider its indirect impacts on the information ecosystem and the broader societal trends that are perpetuating the phenomenon.
Academic scholarship has framed the “indirect” impacts of misinformation for brands as those stemming from the implications of consumers being exposed to a “misinformation environment”. The result of this can be a “mistrust mindset”, where “mistrust in the source of misinformation spills over and activates a mistrust mindset that impairs subsequent brands and products’ evaluations”. In other words, while brands may not be directly impacted by misinformation, they are operating in a misinformation environment that directly impacts consumer behaviour.
Consumers are also operating in an environment of declining trust across a wide range of social pillars. This includes declining trust in institutions, government, and the media; increasing use of social media as a source for news; and increasing polarization online and the growth of online networks with high partisan animosity. These trends are reshaping the media landscape, as well as how individuals consume, trust and allow news and information to impact their decisions. For those organisations not directly impacted by misinformation, viewing the phenomenon within the context of these societal changes can give them a greater framework for understanding its impacts.
So how will these broader societal trends change the media landscape, consumer and user behaviour, and communications objectives and practices?
One of the overarching trends that has been both the cause and effect of mis- and disinformation has been declininglevels of trust in traditional media, and the growing use of social media as a news source. This has allowed increased online manipulation of the information ecosystem, the proliferation and spread of misinformation, and bred further distrust in traditional media outlets and institutions.
What does this mean for communication teams, with the chance of these trends accelerating in 2024? It may mean reassessing target media outlets and platforms or audience engagement strategies. It may also mean reviewing and recalibrating measurement and evaluation frameworks to ensure they are truly measuring impact. For example, are measurement frameworks currently placing too much weight on traditional media, or not fully capturing discussion across social media, or the full spread of news on messaging and video platforms?
With social media becoming an ever-present player in the consumption of content, embedding advanced social listening and social data from a wide range of social platforms may be one of the key shared objectives of communications teams for 2024. This acts as a preventative measure against the effects of direct misinformation, but also remedies the broader shifts in trust and news consumption, which may accelerate in 2024.
Another key trend that will continue to impact the communications industry is the growth of online networks whose in-group identities are shaped by partisan animosity. In other words, this means groups of users who are shaped and motivated by their opposition to political issues and groups, in a world where almost everything is political. Pharmaceuticals come up against toxic debates on vaccines and the influence of big pharma; tech organisations are up against issues of privacy and digital surveillance; energy organisations are up against climate issues; retail is up against issues of sustainability; and so on.
Why is this important? Some have spoken of the opportunity for brands to lead the way on communicating with the public given they top the charts (p. 10) for trust when compared against the media and other institutions. This remains an opportunity for organizations. However, it is important to note this will need to be done within the environment of hyper-vigilant online networks, in a time when evidence has shown trust in business is also declining (p. 8), and with evidence suggesting consumers are still distrusting of brands taking a stance on social issues, most notably issues of sustainability.
How should these risks be mitigated? With declining levels of trust in corporations and brands, deeply embedding trust as a communications objective, where it is not already, may be essential for some organizations. Secondly, audience intelligence – alongside social listening – should be further embedded into broader decision making to mitigate the risks of partisan online networks causing negative PR backlashes. Mapping out different user bases and stakeholder groups’ ideological positioning towards societal issues, alongside their size, scale and reach, can help prevent these backlashes and improve more effective and targeted messaging.
In summary
The relationship between misinformation and broader societal trust is complex. While it is both a symptom and a standalone cause, viewing misinformation as a standalone phenomenon makes it hard for organisations to develop a framework of understanding for how it impacts them. When viewing it as a set of broader societal trends, organizations can begin to understand how it may impact their objectives and practices. This will vary widely across organizations. But with such a big election year ahead, where there are new technologies available to hostile actors seeking to sow distrust, and with layoffs to social media platforms’ trust and safety teams, you will be reading a lot about the impacts of mis- and disinformation in 2024. If your organization is not the victim of direct misinformation, it may still affect you.
This expert article is part of:
Leave a Comment