Category Archives: Political Science

Disinformation Warfare via Social Media

Posted on by

Psychological warfare (PsyOps) has long been the domain of militaries around the world for decades. Now, these tactics are becoming the domain of radical activist groups and in some cases governments in the world of digital diplomacy. We are entering a new age of “disinformation warfare” where people and organisations are learning how to create “perceptions” and misdirect people, governments, law enforcement and corporations. This is the new asymmetrical communications environment. And it is going to make life a little bit more challenging.

Government & Stakeholder Relations Case Study
A couple of years ago a client’s PR agency contacted us based on some comments in a print news media article. They wanted us to look at social media and online channels to see if anything was being said about their client online. Their client was attempting to get legislation changed in their favour (they are in the extractive resources sector.) Within an hour we discovered that the eco group they’d been working with was creating false content opposing them through online channels. From doctored pictures to falsely edited videos and suspicious seeded news media comments, their supposed ally was working to defeat them. It was quite an eye opener for this client.

This is Not The Domain of Multinationals Either
If you’re reading this thinking that this only happens to multinational corporations (MNC’s) or global affairs, think again. It can be happening in your State or Province, city or town. Often times, individuals or organisations may not even realise they are conducting Disinformation Warfare tactics, but they are. In the marketing world, it might be referred to as online reputation management. But it goes beyond that to government relations, legislative issues, municipal elections or referendums.

The Battle of Perceptions
In political communications there are two key terms; 1) astroturfing and 2) sockpuppeting. Both are designed to alter perceptions to show support or opposition. This is done through manipulation of content whether it be text, audio, images or video. Usually, the manipulation is quite subtle and  untraceable (at least when it comes to sockpuppeting.)

The Trust Mechanism of Reliable Sources
People tend to trust the views and opinions of friends and family first. In marketing terms, research has shown that 76% of people trust a product recommendation from a friend than an advertisement. This translates beyond marketing into every day life. We trust our friends, family and close circles more. This relates directly in social media. If we see content posted by friends and family in our trusted networks, then it is highly likely we will trust that content. This is somewhat anecdotal, but we have enough research case studies to be a strong indicator that this is so.

Playing on Trust Mechanisms
It is these trust mechanisms that clever communicators (political parties, religious groups, activist groups, rogue governments etc.) understand very well. The objective is to manipulate peoples perceptions, in small and large part. Sowing a seed of doubt is the basic objective.

Is It Disinformation Warfare that Prevalent? Do You Really Need to Care?
This kind of activity can be very subtle. For many traditional businesses such as waste disposal, mining, local manufacturing, pulp companies…the results are what speak for themselves. Unfortunately we’ve done the post-mortem analysis for a number of traditional sector businesses and governments that show them after the fact what happened in social media. How perceptions were changed and when. It is an uncomfortable reality. Here is a website that helps organisations learn misinformation tactics as an example.

The Upside of Opportunity
In some cases however, we’re able to show clients what is happening early enough. They can then take actions to turn a negative into an opportunity. But it is a risk to businesses and governments that needs to be not just in the marketing teams realm, but that of stakeholder relations, the C-Suite and policy makers within government.

What Not To Expect From Social Media in 2013

Posted on by

There are, as usual, many a pundit pontificating on the great things to come in the social media landscape of 2013. So we decided to be a bit more realistic…we are after all, analysts and researchers. We like to poke holes in things. So. Will 2013 be an incredibly exciting, exhilarating and over the top explosion of all things social media? Sorry, but not so much. But it won’t entirely be boring either.

What Not to Expect From Social Media in 2013 | Apps to Services

Really Cool New Apps & Services: Perhaps the last biggest exciting app for social media that came out in 2012 was LeadSift, which looks very promising as that final answer on how business can monetize social media. Other than that, right now, things are looking rather bleak for 2013. The penultimate of social bookmarking is Pinterest, not much more to add to that really is there?

Exciting New Gadgets to Connect With? No: Perhaps, hopefully, just maybe, RIM’s new Blackberry10 OS with its Hub and Balance apps will make for some very useful ways for mobile connectivity to social hubs. Actually, RIM seems to be the only exciting gadget with integrated apps out there. Some anticipate Apple will release a TV, but TV sets that integrate social media and content are not new. Samsung, Sony and Panasonic have all been there, done that and are still losing money. Besides, they’re just connector devices with nothing really compelling behind them. CES is coming up in January but none of our team are drooling in anticipation; a mention around the office tends to generate a “meh” kind of shrug. It will be the “Year of Features” added to existing gadgets, but nothing much more. An iPhone5S? Yawn says the market.

The Next Facebook: Sorry, but Google+, while it is awesome in our view, is not going to replace Facebook. Neither is any other variant out there. It will take something quite powerful for people to give up their network connections/personal address book. We just haven’t seen anything innovative enough and no matter how pissed people get at Facebook, they aren’t leaving in droves, despite the latest furor.

So What Won’t Be Boring in 2013?

People: What we can expect is interesting and sometimes exciting ways in which people use the technologies. From political and civil actions through to silly memes and consumerism. That’s what will be interesting. We expect to see some interesting new uses and content come out of Africa, India, the Middle East and other developing nations. In the Global North, look for people to start getting a bit more serious with civil society issues as well.

Analytics: This may be the year things get interesting, but we aren’t holding our breath…other than what we’ve go in store to release this year. Enough said.

Governments Will Get Interesting
If you thought all the SOPA action was fun and the proposed bills in Canada and the UK parliament got people riled up, it’s going to get a little nuttier  this year. Issues around content paywalls, broadband fees and metering, privacy laws, patents and freedom of speech will bubble and spark all year.

Conclusion
While it may not be an exciting year for awesome new gadgets to lose our cool over and give the tech journalists vast amounts of speculative fodder to get paid for…it should be an interesting year in how we start really using these tools. We anticipate a number of dribbling hangers-on type services will likely fade away as Series A funding starts to dry up or demand more commercialisation. Remember, its how people engage in social media that really makes it interesting…how the adopt and adapt the various tools, sometimes in ways never anticipated, such as Twitter. Speaking of Twitter, the other thing we can expect to see is the top tier players like Twitter, Google, Facebook and Pinterest etc., start to consolidate their online territory through acquisitions and lawsuits. Tech lawyers will be very happy this year.

So 2013 is not the year of “tech and apps” but the year of people and laws, civil society and entrenchment.

Unions & Social Media Engagement Ranked

Posted on by

In October of 2011 we introduced our first ranking of the primary unions engagement in social media in America and Canada. Today we provide an update just over a year later. It’s only natural that unions would adopt these technologies – they understand grass-roots organising very well. In the case of AFL-CIO in America and IBEW in Canada, these unions can help businesses, governments and other organisations understand the highly effective use of these tools. Almost all of the unions in the USA and Canada increased their presence in the primary social media channels, although some smaller unions seem to have either not increased their presence or decreased enagagement.

Social Media Use by American Unions
Certainly the AFL-CIO remains the leader in usage of social media, with IBEW close on their heels. The biggest leap forward came from IUPA who seem to have put on a push to engage and consistently update content in social media channels. Interestingly, IAFF declined in overall engagement, but was the only union to decline. Most of the others either made small steps forward or stayed the same. As a union may have stayed the same, it does not mean they didn’t actually progress – they may very well have found that the level of engagement they have works well given available resources and the overall quality.

Social Media Use by Canadian Unions
Canadian unions really jumped in with both feet in 2012 it would appear. ACTRA, representing actors made the biggest leap with content and overall engagement. ACTRA has also been exceptionally good (like IBEW in Canada) at creating content across multiple channels. Both CWA and TWU decreased a fair bit in their engagement. They reduced the amount of content and remain disengaged with online members; this may mean they haven’t yet found operational value to engagement and may not have the financial and human resources. It is not a reflection on the union itself. CUPE and PSAC saw definite gains in their use of social media as well.

Summary of Social Media Use by Unions
What we can definitively see is that unions have understood the power of these tools above many businesses and governments. They have set social media policies and internal governance in their use of these tools and are effective in their implementation. They also excel at engagement with their members, enabling members to share and upload their own content such as videos and images. The main form of content unions have found works (we estimate) is video and images, of which extensive use has been made. Another important aspect to recognise here is that unions understand that social media are not just about kids, since their members are skilled working adults.

Methodology
To assess use, we first collected data from across all unions in the US and Canada. From here we parsed down the data and analysed which unions a) used the most channels, b) what was their influence and authority (our own algorithms and 3rd party tools such asKlout for verification), c) frequency of communications and d) participation with audience. These primary points were compared between 2010, 2011 and 2012 (30 November.) There was statistical variation allowance for populations in each country and unions size to enable more accurate comparions. Based on the above criteria, we assigned a “rank” from 1 to 9 with a 9 being very engaged and 1 being hardly engaged at all (perhaps just 1 or social media channels with little active use.) The data provided herein is the aggregate of that collected for client research projects and does not provide confidential information given to clients.

Note: There are other unions that are engaged in social media channels. We assessed the most prominent unions in terms of volume of content, overall engagement and presence in cyberspace (not just social media.) If you think we missed something, let us know.

The Board, Social Media and Liabilities

Posted on by

Today, what happens in social media or more aptly, cyber space, can directly impact a board and how a company is governed. Here are just five ways your company may be impacted. Are you ready?

1. Directors Liability: A crisis, such as when JetBlue passengers were stranded for hours on the tarmac or the major oil disaster in the G u l f o f M e x i c o, often will lead to widespread public discussion online. Increasingly citizens are using social media tools to organize protests and gather information which can be used in future litigation against responsible parties. Board members need to react to crises quickly and efficiently. Monitoring social media channels can help better assess risk and potential outcomes, and permit tailored responses to real concerns.

2. Union Organizing: Unions are making very good use of social media tools. A board not paying attention to social media chatter may be blindsided by a rallying attempt at their company. One for which they could have been prepared.

3. Whistleblower Crises: It may be that employees in a company have concerns that they feel are not being addressed. Monitoring social media channels may elucidate such issues and allow management to respond before a whistleblower feels the need to go public online. Awareness of chatter on social media sites will allow companies to better understand employee issues and take appropriate and timely action before crises hit.

4. Legislative Impact: Activist groups opposed to a company’s operations (i.e. oil & gas sector) are using social media tools to mobilize communities and to build potentially damaging cases against a company. These protests can result in legislative changes that block a proposed project. Be aware of opposition demands and  citizen concerns by monitoring social media channels – this will allow you to undertake public education programmes or perhaps to alter certain practices before projects get halted.

5. Stock Price Volatility / Insider Trading Claims etc.: An individual – intentionally or not – could post information online that leads to a sell-off or drives a sudden hike in buy activity, resulting in an investigation. Before such an incident can damage your firm and /or the reputation of board members monitor what is being stated and discussed about your firm on social media sites.

The challenge to successful business is often just being aware of what people think of you – are employees content, are communities supportive and are social and environmental issues seen as being addressed? Awareness allows us to respond before crisis hits – don’t get left in the dark, embrace social media, use these channels to get your message out and listen to what is being posted.

US Presidential Election | The Trust Factor

Posted on by

While the pundits of news media declared Mitt Romney the “winner” of the debates on October 3rd 2012, and certainly the Romney spin doctors are in a glorious tizzy, we noted something interesting as we watched the debate unfold – comments related to “trust” around the two candidates. So we decided to take a look at what American’s thought about Romney vs. Obama on the issue of trust. Sure, Mitt was slick and on the offensive, and according to some was offensive.

NOTE & CAVEAT: MediaBadger is a private Canadian company. The company does not work for any American firm that is monitoring the US elections. The company has a strict policy of not working for any political party in any country worldwide. This analysis is completely unbiased, is not paid for by any company, individual or political party or third-party in any way whatsoever. The analysis herein is done entirely on an entertainment and informational purpose. No money whatsoever was received for this analysis and the information herein will not be sold to any person, persons, governments or corporations now or in the future.

The Trust Factor
As the graph below shows, although Mitt Romney may have seemed to have won the debate, what was in doubt was the trust factor. As can be seen, Obama still maintained his lead in terms of words around trust. Romney was often stated to be: confusing, misleading, distrusting, contrite, smug or arrogant (words via Twitter and blogs.) Whereas Obama had words such as kind, meaningful, trusted, honest, humble, deprecating.

 

The Gender Factor
Then we get to gender. Seems Obama is the choice of women over men. This was interesting and we’ll let you decide what you want to take away from this analysis. We’re not a company that gets into analysing political minutae in the USA, but we wonder what the voter turnout on male vs. female might be?