Showing posts with label Public Diplomacy 2.0. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Public Diplomacy 2.0. Show all posts

Saturday

Advanced media societies are vulnerable to 'influence' from abroad

Eight years ago, The Public Diplomacy Blog talked about a strategic mismatch between  advanced media societies and the developing ones. The argument we made was that with free and open social media, developed nations with high levels of media penetration, become vulnerable to "influence" from abroad, including from not so advanced media societies.


"Putin used cyberwarfare to poison American politics, to spread fake news, to help elect a chaos candidate, all in order to weaken our democracy"
Friedman further states,
"We should be using our cyber-capabilities to spread the truth about Putin —just how much money he has stolen, just how many lies he has spread, just how many rivals he has jailed or made disappear — all to weaken his autocracy"
The truth is, IT'S NOT THAT EASY!




In the blog post, Web 2.0 in Public Diplomacy - a strategic mismatch, in The Public Diplomacy Blog in 2009, it was argued that,


"...if we look at developed economies like US or Europe, internet penetration and usage are high. So, for lesser countries with the capability and knowhow ... it will be a lot easier to influence Europeans or Americans in a focused way with mass out reach. 

In a way, the strategic advantage actually lie with these countries rather than the developed West when it come to Web 2.0 Public Diplomacy.

Being on the wrong side of the digital divide may be beneficial for these states.

To illustrate further, we all know about Iran "twittering away" few months ago... but these twitterers are very minuscule and do not form the huge popular support base for conservative Ahmedinejad. (Read my blog post "Public Diplomacy & Social Media" in June, 2009.)

For Iran, it is easier to reach and attempt to influence an American audience rather than for US to reach Iranians via Web 2.0. Naturally, the tactics have to be different and a realistic assessment of Web 2.0 potential has to be made for each country."

... and we all know by now that this is exactly what Russians did to the Americans isn't it?  So, it may not be as easy for Americans to undermine Putin's autocracy simply because of the nature of media consumption in Russia. But the Americans did well with their ant-Soviet propaganda during the Cold War, so we would have to wait and see!




Sunday

Public Diplomacy 2.0: Social Media's Spiral of Silence

A major insight into human behavior from pre-internet era studies of communication is the tendency of people not to speak up about policy issues in public—or among their family, friends, and work colleagues—when they believe their own point of view is not widely shared. This tendency is called the “spiral of silence.”
                The above was quoted in a report published in August, 2014, by the Pew Research Center and Rutgers University. The report was a the result of a survey of conducted by these institutions that "sought people’s opinions about the Snowden leaks, their willingness to talk about the revelations in various in-person and online settings, and their perceptions of the views of those around them in a variety of online and off-line contexts." (as quoted in the report).

            According to the authors of the report, the key takeaway from the survey, and as cited by the New York Times later, was the finding that social media seems to have "diminished rather than enhanced political participation." Social media seems to be silencing debates by encouraging a "group think mentality" where people restrain from expressing opinions within their social networks, for fear of social exclusion, if they perceive that their network may not share their opinion. As per the theory of "Spiral of Silence" it reflects a dominance of the majority point of view over a minority's.

(Source: communicationtheory.org)
               This survey can potentially burst the social media bubble among Public Diplomacy fraternity. For PD practitioners who are in countries or focusing on countries with restrictions on media, the dominant view of looking at social media as the alternate platform for a more broad based engagement the finding hopefully would encourage a "re look" into their strategy.

              I look at this as primarily an opportunity to introspect and assess the real impact of social media in the process of political mobilization and dissent.

  1. Is there self censorship and group think in social media debates?
  2. Will a minority group be vocal against a majority group on social media platforms?
                The second question is more interesting I guess, as internet is known for it's unshackling tendency and its ability to disrupt. When we apply it in the context of the Arab Spring, as most experts rush to establish the correlation, what we may be overlooking is the fact that the Arab Spring was the rage of a powerless majority against a an elite minority that controlled all power. Maybe that's the reason why the spiral of silence did not occur in Egypt and social media was highly effective in mobilizing dissent.

         A different point of view, as seen in the Columbia Journalism Review, stated that,

"A hesitancy to share online could actually be a valuable restraint for someone who would otherwise have shot an unthinking opinion into the digital ether, safe in the knowledge their network of followers would agree with their views."

"... When the web is saturated with opinions on the news, restraint and thoughtfulness—regardless of whether followers agree or not—matter too."

Pew Research Center findings on Social News Consumption

News consumption is becoming a community activity. It is becoming social. We have seen this happen and know that it will gradually change the way we try to understand our world.

A recent research by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation explored the characteristics of news consumers and the size of their population across 11 social networking sites. The research was conducted in the United States.

The research – “News Use Across Social Media Platforms” – found that the primary social networking sites where users also consume news are Reddit, Twitter and Facebook, in that order. But when looked at in terms of the percentage of the total U.S. population , Facebook seems to be dominant, surprisingly followed by You Tube. The report states:
“Facebook is by far the largest social networking site among U.S. adults, and with half of its users getting news there, is also the largest among U.S. adults when it comes to getting news. As discussed in an earlier report, roughly two-thirds (64%) of U.S. adults use the site, and half of those users get news there—amounting to 30% of the general population. YouTube has the next greatest reach in terms of general usage, at 51% of U.S. adults. Thus, even though only a fifth of its users get news there, that amounts to 10% of the adult population, which puts it on par with Twitter.”

The report also finds out the access to traditional news sources is still there and states that,
“YouTube, LinkedIn and Google Plus news consumers are more likely than Facebook and Twitter news consumers to watch cable news. Twitter news consumers are among the least likely to turn to local and cable TV.”

The demographic analysis reveals that news consumers on Twitter are more likely to be younger than other social networking sites, LinkedIn news consumers tend to be college educated and higher earners while Facebook news consumers are more likely to be female.

It would have been more interesting to also understand how news selection happen in social networking communities keeping in mind aspects of ‘virality’, conversations and engagement. News on social networking sites may often be consumed on the basis of prominence it may enjoy in a certain community. In the process, sometimes the not so significant news may become important with community action – a trend that should not be encouraged. It also has the potential to promote news that traditional outlets might choose to ignore or play down – a trend that can become empowering. For practicing communicators, social news consumption seems to be the next minefield to navigate!

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur


Social Proofing and Public Diplomacy

Much has been written about the US State Department spending USD 630,000 to "buy millions of Facebook 'likes' on it's Facebook page. A story by AFP in the Indian newspaper Mint reported the following,
"A scathing report by the department’s independent watchdog took the coordinators of its social media outreach policy to task saying it needed to “direct its digital advertising to specific public diplomacy goals ...
The report by the Office of the inspector general found that two advertising campaigns launched in 2011 and 2012 cost some $630,000 with the “goal of building global outreach platforms for engagement with foreign audiences by increasing the number of fans... on four thematic Facebook properties.”
Many in the bureau criticize the advertising campaigns as ‘buying fans’ who may have once clicked on a post or ‘liked’ a photo but have no real interest in the topic and have never engaged further.."
While the idea of directing tax dollars to buy Facebook 'likes' may seem atrocious to many but the criticism is not fair. While the amount spent may be debated, but the buying of 'likes' reflects the State Department's astute marketing sense and aggressive style - which is good. It also shows an understanding of the concept of 'social proofing' that matters in digital marketing,
"an attempt to guide user behavior by showcasing social influence. Facebook ‘Like’ is the most common example"
A higher ratio of Facebook Likes implies higher influence, popularity and more often than not influences others to explore. People are more likely to engage with a page that has already received large perceptible acceptance. 

While some may feel that the ideal scenario is to build the fan page organically; it is time, effort and resource intensive and promoting the page can take much longer. Also, keep in mind that it is dependent on posting meaningful content ... and achieving the level of streamlined collaboration that is required to source content within a bureaucracy, and the vastness of the State Department, would have made organic growth difficult.  Nonetheless, by making its page dynamic and reaching out to a larger group, specific public diplomacy goals would have been realized by more engagement. 

Similar to 'Likes' on Facebook,  Twitter following is another example of social proofing. See the following infographic from social selling university on the practice of buying Twitter followers. Do I see Obama?




Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Wednesday

Being Hyperconnected


“The illiterate of the 21st Century are not those who cannot read and write but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.”  Alvin Toffler  in Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth, and Power at the Edge of the 21st Century
          I am often reminded of Toffler’s famous observation when I see the rapid disruptions in the world of communications. It’s becoming difficult for comms pros to keep pace, to consult clients and remain relevant in an industry that is constantly forcing us to learn, relearn and unlearn.
       ‘Hyperconnectivity’ is one such trend and is going to define the future. What it essentially refers to is a paradigm shift from ‘going online’ to ‘being online’ – a coming of age of the internet; the reality of a parallel virtual universe.
  1. Complex media environment: We need to be agile and alert. It is increasingly becoming a complex media environment. We need to be adept at communicating ‘in’ and also ‘across’ different platforms being aware that the message will be consumed differently and conveyed further increasingly differently.  It’s complex where there are numerous apps, different screens, different devices, different formats and add to it the customized narratives for each. While we talk content, it’s interesting to realize that the monopoly over content by prominent individuals and conglomerates have been completely broken. A good story can be told by anyone, anywhere with great impact. Managing narratives have become difficult and this brings me to my second point of  target audiences.
  2. Demanding  Audiences: Our audiences demand more, and along with the story we need to deliver an ‘experience’. Interactivity is important, so is the format and experience of consumption, and we have to take care of all, knowing fully well that a story that isn’t credible won’t last long.
  3. Audience Fragmentation: Audiences have access to multiple sources of information. Loyalties switch across platforms depending upon the format and experience across platforms and there can be 'multiple loyalties'. Multiplicity of platforms actually means audiences are getting divided into smaller groups and the same group of people might exhibit different behaviors across different platforms. This brings me to my third point.
  4. Measurement Difficulties: How do you make sense of all this? I am not too sure of accuracy levels of current data analytics and to what extent are they effective when it comes to some sort of predictive modeling simply because of the overwhelming number of variables that are coming into play. Will be glad if any reader can enlighten here…
  5. Monetization difficulties: How do you monetize what you create? How do you protect what you create from being duplicated? While we talk of content marketing and content being king, content actually seems to have become real cheap thanks to over supply! You should read this interesting piece (if you haven't read it already) in The New York Times, that talks of the Slow Death of the American Author.

Critics in India often argue that this reality is not relevant for India. Given the weak broadband & data storage infrastructure, including the huge digital divide, any talk of internet enabled media doesn’t necessarily find takers among all media practitioners always. I wonder if we can move in any other direction though. 

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Monday

The Mindset of Indian Bloggers

I talked about the emergence of blogs in India as a form of commentary in my previous posts. Earlier, I was of the view that maybe the presence of a free press and proliferation of media platforms have in fact relegated bloggers to the background, unlike in societies where there are limits to freedom of expression. This is true especially in the space of "issues" where the ability of bloggers to influence public discourse happens to be limited. Nonetheless, niche blogs in the space of culture, technology, marketing and business do wield significant influence today in India and, as professional communicators, we engage with this lot quite a bit. In fact, we encourage brands to engage with bloggers all the more, simply because their influence permeates across different social networks

In this context, the latest executive report from MSLGROUP India that tried to gauge the mindset of bloggers - towards brands, media and technology. The ‘2012 Indian Bloggers Mindset Survey’ shares insights on how bloggers are shaping opinion, how brands are engaging with them as well as the opportunities and challenges before brands when it comes to building relationships with these key digital influencers.

Among the key findings of this survey are
  • Facebook and Twitter are emerging as the top preferred social platforms to connect with bloggers in India. Google+ is the (non-Facebook, non-Twitter) social network bloggers spend the most time on, while Pinterest is fast emerging in popularity
  • CSR campaigns are the most recollected digital campaign
  • Conventional brand ambassadors like Aamir Khan, Sachin Tendulkar, Amitabh Bachchan and Shah Rukh Khan, still make for the favourite brand ambassadors
Kudos to the team of Karan Bhujbal, Tanay, Nikunj, Radhika, Ragini, Deepti, Anamika  who conducted, compiled and completed this survey!


2012 Bloggers Mindset Report from 20:20 MSL

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur






Sunday

@IndianDiplomacy posts on Twitter

India's Ministry of External Affairs' (MEA) is known to be quite active on Twitter compared to other ministries. The ministry also used Twitter quite productively for the evacuation of Indian nationals from Libya during the NATO led war.

@IndianDiplomacy currently has 26, 774 followers with 1,855 tweets posted till date. Indian diplomats and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), as well, routinely tweet on foreign policy matters now. As one of the followers, I  receive regular updates from the ministry on my Twitter feed. One can't help but notice that most tweets remain in the form of notifications or announcements and are primarily in the 'broadcast mode'. While this is not bad in itself, in order to leverage Twitter, or for that matter any digital platform, it helps to switch to the 'engagement mode' where an action or a response is sought to a post and more and more two way communications happen. It may be a good idea to personalize it a little bit and not make it look like an information window of the government. While one may find lot of interesting information or updates, most of the times one may get the feeling 'so...why should I care?' This  is the question @IndianDiplomacy should seek to address. What is also required is better usage of hashtags and even some basics such as usage of bit.ly etc.

I personally think former Foreign Secretary and current Ambassador to United States, Ms Nirupama Rao is doing a fabulous job on Twitter. Not only her posts have a personality but the tone and overall nature of tweets are very engaging. Her Twitter handle is @NMenonRao. How do we add personality to a Ministry? That is another interesting challenge altogether.

Some useful resources:
Suggestions/Critiques welcome

-- Madhur

Understanding the Indian Digital Consumer

I attended a talk recently by business analyst & strategy consultant, Mr Mohit Chhabra, (currently, Business Head at Skillment Edu) on the rise of the digital consumer in India. Mohit, who is also closely associated with TED gave his audience great insights on the digital revolution that is sweeping the country aided by the penetration of mobile phones in India. Contrary to the general perception that social media/digital platform is an urban phenomenon what emerged during the talk and discussions was that the growth of the digital medium in India will, in fact, be pushed by demand from rural India. According to Census projections of 2010, Government of India, there are 164 million households in rural India - 70% of the population - and this group loves their mobile phones!

There are 3 Indias according to Mohit:
  1. The Metropolitan India
  2. Rur-ban India
  3. Deep Rural India (the group that loves their mobile phones the most.)
In a really interesting example, it was demonstrated that while consumers in India rarely pay (or prefer to pay) for their own education but when it comes to entertainment, have no qualms in spending. In 'deep rural' India, there is a huge demand for entertainment and it has been found that the favorite entertainment device for rural India is the mobile phone. This demand for entertainment according to Mohit will drive adoption of social media and rise of the digital consumer in India. Communicating to 'deep rural India' digitally is more effective if it serves this most important demand - something that communicators must be aware of - the plank of entertainment. I have included Mohit's presentation below:

Indian digital consumer
Suggestions/Critiques welcome.


-- Madhur

Indian bloggers for PD practitioners to engage... ?

My friend, a certain Mr X, member of the diplomatic corps in New Delhi, asked if it makes any sense to engage bloggers in India. Mr X apparently is being prodded by the 'higher ups' in his country to reach out more to bloggers in India; and my friend believes it is important, but, not so important. 

To my 'why' he gave an interesting insight.

Apparently, the free press (militant, vitriolic, opinionated and commercial) and proliferation of media in India makes it unnecessary, unimportant. It's unlike the Middle East where blogs are an outlet to discuss and debate in the absence of a free press. Blogs are influential in countries where there is no space for a public discourse. (?)

If we look at the Indian blogosphere there are indeed very few that are authoritative or 'referred to' blogs in the 'issues' space. For many Indian bloggers the interest areas range from personal hobbies, lifestyle and  professional topics. 


Classification of blogs in India
by www.indiblogger.in

At the end of our chat I understood where Mr X was coming from. I promised to find him a few!

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur


Public Diplomacy and the new media landscape

            Public Diplomacy practitioners today deal with a dynamic media landscape. Enabled by technology, ways and means for media production and distribution has changed rapidly. Coupled with this is the decline in revenues, resources and  credibility of traditional corporate media giants worldwide. Media today is localized, customized, fragmented, often real time in its distribution, while it is more inclusive, cross cultural and diverse in its production. Besides, there is no longer an 'official credible source,' it can be simply anywhere!

(Jake Horowitz, Co Founder, PolicyMic)
     A new media project in this context is PolicyMic. Founded by Harvard and Stanford grads, Chris Altchek and Jake Horowitz, this website is an online platform for news and debate on policy for the younger generation by the younger generation. The portal claims that it stands for the spirit of debate to counter partisanship in traditional media and facilitate, "real conversations about real issues." 

         I spoke to Jake Horowitz and Hanqing Chen, Assistant Editor, PolicyMic, to understand the project better.

        "There is a lack of representation of young voices in media," said Jake. He said content at PolicyMic focuses on young people's perspective on issues. The content can range from head-to-head debates, opinion pieces, enterprise reporting, multimedia stories all produced by a new generation of voices. "PolicyMic offers real engagement from multiple perspectives all across the world," he said.

      The website currently boasts of nearly 400 writers contributing from more than 20 countries around the world, including from countries like Estonia, Latvia, South Africa and the Middle East. 


      There are four writers from India and Jake said that the Lok Pal Bill was a topic widely discussed on the portal. 

          PolicyMic's attempt to build engagement is unique. 

       The more a reader/contributor participates by responding to articles, sharing ideas and receive endorsements on contributions, the more 'mics' (credits from others) one can accumulate  The more 'mics' one accumulates the more one can do or say to develop an audience and eventually become a 'PolicyMic pundit'.  


                 "We are trying to make Twitter meet The Economist" said Jake. 


              "It is designed to be a little like a video game where they have to comment on stories and have to be voted in order to move to a different level. In each level, you can do more and say more," he said.

(Hanqing Chen, Assistant Editor, PolicyMic)
"The idea is to find a fun system with the smartest contributors," added Hanqing.

        "Success and prestige on our site won't be driven by how loudly you speak, but by how thoughtfully you participate. We believe in debate, and we've built features that allow you to challenge others you disagree with," claims the website in its 'About Us' section.

       Hanqing said that comments on contents are received every 6 to 7 minutes on the website which is reflective of its potential to influence.
          
    From a PD perspective, Jake believes that the portal is an effective "cross boundary" discussion forum on policy and international affairs. 


     These are early days for PolicyMic, as its founders focus on creating a stable revenue model and source funds. However, media such as these offer both an opportunity and a challenge to PD practitioners. While in terms of reach and targeted engagement it can promise a lot; the challenges are in monitoring, crafting messages and responsiveness.
                  
Suggestions/Critiques welcome.


-- Madhur




Saturday

McKinsey report: One-third of the global population connects to the internet everyday

The McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) and McKinsey’s Technology, Media and Telecommunications practice's report - ‘Internet matters: The Net’s sweeping impact on growth, jobs, and prosperity’  has come up with interesting  India related findings. This reinforces the importance of the medium to boost commerce, exchange, conversations and progressive political and social values. The report stated that, in India, Internet contributed five per cent to the growth of gross domestic product (GDP) in the last five years, two percentage points higher than the average three per cent for BRIC economies. Significantly, it also stated that,
"India and China are strengthening their position in the global internet ecosystem rapidly with growth rates of more than 20 per cent..."
Talking about the growth of Internet, the report states,
"Since the 1990s, internet has grown leaps and bounds with about two billion users worldwide now. This number is growing by 200 million each year. This means, almost a third of the global population connects to the internet every day and almost $8 trillion a year is spent through e-commerce... 
 ...India leads the growth component of the McKinsey Internet Supply Leadership Index. For example, Bangalore registered 50 patents to 200 in fours years, compared to Singapore which took six years to cross this threshold"
The report has established a clear linkage between internet and growth and has recommended that policymakers push for increased internet access and usage. Crucial to achieving this is a strong public-private partnership. We would definitely see more and more people getting online now, even in India, and this is a medium that would eventually become dominant for business, politics and human interactions. Hence it is important for public diplomacy practitioners to accept the medium as pervasive and strong on influence, and, in a world dominated by corporate media, sometimes it can be more credible and an effective platform for an alternate point of view.  

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

There's more to social media than Facebook and Twitter!

I was at an international PD conference yesterday speaking on the "Role of global media and how strategic communication can strengthen Australia-India relations." This was at an international conference - "Public Diplomacy in Theory and Practice: Culture, Information and Interpretation in Australian-Indian Relations" - organized by the Alfred Deakins Research Institute, Australia and Rajdhani College, Delhi University, India. The conference is being sponsored by the Australia India institute and the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Government of India. 

During my talk, I emphasized the role of conversations in shaping perceptions today and the potential of social media. It was interesting to field lot of questions, after my talk, that bordered on cynicism towards social media and the sphere of influence of web enabled platforms. In this gathering of academics and policy wonks, what I could not help notice was that social media was broadly understood to be 'Facebook' and 'Twitter,' and, the limitations of the these two social networking platforms to influence and engage. 

Conversations in social media do not necessarily happen on these two platforms. There are numerous other areas where debates are being shaped, opinions formed and perceptions created. Simplest example, that comes to mind, is the space for reader's comments on news websites. This is where people take action on news, engage in debates and express opinions. Consider the article below that generated 477 comments on the issue of violence against Indians in Australia. This is The Economist and not even a newspaper from Australia or India. This is an example of social media enabled conversation that can shape perceptions. How do we manage such conversations?




Regrettable facts

Thuggery mars a burgeoning friendship

Australia and anti-Indian violence

See article

Readers' comments

Reader comments on this article are listed below. The 15-day commenting period for this article has expired and comments are no longer being accepted. Review our comments policy.

1-20 of 477

EliasX wrote:
Jun 18th 2009 4:48 GMT
The Economist, like other media, fails to mention what kind of Lebanese-Australians are apparently attacking Indians in Australia.
Officialdom calls this a “law-and-order” issue, and the Indian press rants about “racism” in Australia. No one, it seems, is asking what kind of Lebanese these assailants are.
Are they Christians? Or, more likely, are they Muslims? The Indians are mostly, one would assume, Hindus. Maybe this is a religious issue? Muslims, given Islamic tenets regarding polytheists and idolators, have a long, sordid, intolerant, and murderous history of “Hinduphobia.”
Older Posts Home