Quiet Trendsetters: people less likely to be vocal about their attitudes and opinions, highlights both the use of and distrust of social media.
Why it matters?
The results have implications as politicians ramp up their use of social media going into 2020.
Boredom or curiosity but both with caution.
Many turn to social media out of boredom or curiosity about what friends and family are up to. A few say they only log in when they are seeking specific information. However, these Quiet Trendsetters also see a dark side to social media and agree caution is needed when using these platforms.
No fame-seeking and less impact from “influencers”.
Politicians eying 2020 runs can feel confident that Quiet Trendsetters will accept their social media use – this group understands their need to use social media as one more tool for outreach. However, they accept it as a means rather than an end. So candidates must stay on message and not appear to be fame-seeking.
Another caution is that, collectively, Quiet Trendsetters are less trusting of what they see on social media and than they may have been in the past and appear to be less impacted by the “influencer” model. To reach this population, social media engagement must be completely authentic.
Yes, it’s a first attempt. Yes, it should be taken very cautiously.
But yes, it has merit.
Typing and writing.
The way you type and the words you use show a level of lie or truth, from your standpoint. While recording and analyzing the typing part sounds more like a lie detection test, the word used are, in fact, much more accurate.
TrustedOut uses a similar method.
As mentioned, TrustedOut uses extensively machine learning. In this previous post, we explained how machine learning is the basis of our classification. For taxonomy or how to spot how a media is perceived on the internet.
The How and What: Mixing attitude and expertise.
Now, imagine you mix an attitude, such as lying or being blunt, or positive, or sarcastic and a taxonomy classification, and you mix two or more classifications based on machine learning. And you get the how and what…
According to VisionCritical: “trust [in Media] among the informed public in the U.S. plunged 23 points to 45, making it the lowest of the 28 countries surveyed. The collapse of trust is driven by a staggering lack of faith in government. This fell 14 points to 33 percent among the general population, and 30 points to 33 percent among the informed public. [Numbers are for the USA]”
63% can’t recognize journalism from rumors.
“The 2018 Trust Barometer found 63 percent of respondents don’t know how to tell good journalism from rumor, or whether a respected media organization had produced a piece of news. But the public doesn’t rely solely on news media organizations to stay informed. We also use search engines and social media. The irony is that these platforms—once hailed as the future of media—are hurting too. The rising distrust of traditional media comes at a time when social media giants such as Facebook are facing intense scrutiny about their role in spreading disinformation. The Huffington Post recently announced it would no longer rely on unpaid bloggers.”
Gaining trust: demonstrate [media] brand clarity of purpose and core values and be transparent with all policies and procedures.
“Board and staff members need to adhere to these ethical standards as, in effect, they are the brand and only they can elicit consumer trust,” he [Director of brand agency Hulsbosch, Jaid Hulsbosch] says.
To do this, a corporation and its brand needs to be determined to demonstrate brand clarity of purpose and core values and be transparent with all policies and procedures”
Profiling Media Brands to secure trust in analytics and brand safety.
Brand values for any business, including Media, are the foundation of trust for customers, readers. Understanding them is the solution to secure trust in analytics support for strategic decision making and totally secure advertiser’s brand within a campaign.
“58 percent of Californians think the tech industry should be “more regulated,” up from 46 percent in 2018. An even larger group, 68 percent think the tech industry has been “under-regulated” rather than “over-regulated,” up from 62 percent in 2018 and about 59 percent in 2017.”
Level of trust in marijuana dispensaries and growers—44% and 43%. Trust in social media—33%.
Failure to protect data and lack of privacy.
“Among employees, privacy and security were the top worries. Of 11 possible concerns about the tech industry—from increasing housing costs and income inequality to a possible tech bubble collapse—57 percent of workers said their primary concern was “failure to protect from data security threats,” tied with “lack of privacy/my data is shared too much.””
Gonna be ok.
“For “tech” as a whole, 61 percent of respondents said they had a high level of trust that the industry would do what’s right. For “startup companies” and “the sharing economy,” the figures were similar to the pot industry—47 percent of respondents said they trusted companies in those sectors to do the right thing.”
High expectations for an outsize impact.
“Sixty-seven percent of respondents said tech leaders should be doing more to improve California. Given the industry’s outsize impact, 81 percent said tech should do more to improve local issues, up from 75 percent in 2018 and 76 percent said tech leaders are obligated to do more on societal issues, up from 71 percent last year.”
Get information from traditional Media, Conversation on Social Media…
A recent study published in Oxford’s Journal of Communication (and available here) shows some very interesting links between the impact of losing a local newspaper and the increase of bipartisan (left or right) votes. Here are our takeaways:
Newspaper Closures Polarize Voting Behavior
Missing local news has a negative impact on political outcomes
“Local news sources are not merely suffering in this new marketplace—many are disappearing for good (Hindman, 2009; Shaker, 2014). As newspapers close, other local media are not emerging to fill the information gaps, with negative impacts on important political outcomes”
Less local news, less regard on local politics.
“Another emerging literature details negative consequences of declining local news. Where local newspapers are weaker, people know less about their representatives and subnational governments and turn out at lower rates (Hayes and Lawless, 2015, 2018; Kübler & Goodman, 2018; Shaker, 2014), and municipal governments spend less and borrow at higher rates (Gao et al., 2018; Yazaki, 2017). ”
The Nationalizing Media Environment and Political Polarization
Less news opinions creates more, national-based, bipartisan decisions
“Declining access to quality local news is harmful to voter behavior and responsive governance, leading to more corruption (Arnold, 2004; Besley, Burgess, & Prat, 2002; Campante & Do, 2014; Strömberg, 2004) and lower voter turnout (Schulhofer-Wohl & Garrido, 2013). In the absence of quality local news options, Americans may rely on partisanship and national news to inform their political decisions (Hopkins, 2018; Trussler, 2018).” A relative reduction of local news in the media marketplace may result in less exposure to local news and more regular exposure to national media, with significant effects on engagement and partisan voting (Clinton & Enamorado, 2014; Hopkins & Ladd, 2014; Hopkins, 2018).
[Split-ticket voting refers to when a voter in an election votes for candidates from different political parties when multiple offices are being decided by a single election, as opposed to straight-ticket voting, where a voter chooses candidates from the same political party for every office up for election. – Wikipedia]
Less local news mix local and national matters.
“Our findings connect the literature on the polarizing effects of the changing news environment to scholarship on the negative democratic consequences of the decline of local news: just as adding the internet or partisan cable news to the media environment can influence voting behavior, removing a local news source from the marketplace may polarize the choices citizens make”
So, now, what?
We wrote on Jan 17th, the post below announcing Google, Facebook, and now the Knight Foundation have reach a whooping $1B financial support quality journalism and for local news…
Quality journalism is mandatory for democracy and vital to Media brand values. The foundation of TrustedOut Media profiling to provide sources Analysts will define as their need and trust in Business Intelligence, Advertising and PR.
Age predicts behavior better than any other characteristics (even party affiliation )
Researchers at New York and Princeton Universities, through their recent surveys, are saying older users shared more fake news than younger ones regardless of education, sex, race, income, or how many links they shared. [source: The Verge]
7 times more fake news sharing
“But older users skewed the findings: 11 percent of users older than 65 shared a hoax, while just 3 percent of users 18 to 29 did. Facebook users ages 65 and older shared more than twice as many fake news articles than the next-oldest age group of 45 to 65, and nearly seven times as many fake news articles as the youngest age group (18 to 29).”
Profiling media sources…
“It won’t be easy: how to determine whether a person is digitally literate remains an open question. But at least some of the issue is likely to come down to design: fake news spreads quickly on Facebook in part because news articles generally look identical in the News Feed, whether they are posted by TheNew York Times or a clickbait farm.”
… to build trust.
Profiling sources so limit fake news spreading is similar, in logic, to profiling sources to limit misleading intelligence. We call it “Corpus Intelligence” and will focus on B2B solutions. In production end Q1 2019.
The Aspen Institute and the Knight Foundation recently released a report on a commission they organized about Trust, Media and Democracy. While coming from America, we believe most can apply wider.
If you don’t have the time for the length report, this medium page is very interesting. Here are our takeaways in the light of our previous posts, regrouped in 3 main categories:
10 ways to rebuild trust in media and democracy
Before starting up, we can not resist to simply cut and paste the introduction paragraph: “Our nation is experiencing a crisis of trust. We believe that reliable news is vital to our democracy, but many of us can’t name an objective news source. Concern about “fake news” is high, but we can’t agree on what that means. We can’t even assume every American is operating under the same set of facts. We retreat to polarized political tribes and don’t want to listen to anyone outside them.” – Superbly written and so much in alignment with what we believe and the motivation to create TrustedOut.
Of course, the purpose here is not a posture of “we know better” but rather than copycatting what the article says, simply note we wrote about most of those points and thus, are in agreement with them.
Can’t resist just cutting and pasting the very first sentence here “Consumer trust is a vital and a key differentiator for publishers in a competitive environment. Fostering trust, prioritizing consumer rights and offering transparency of data practices is more important than ever before for premium publishers.” from this article from Digital Content Next
So, unsurprisingly, we loved this article. Here are our takeaways:
Gap between trust in traditional and social media is now at an all-time high.
The US and Canada and European markets also registered significant trust in traditional media and search compared to social media. Trust in traditional media is at its highest-ever historical level at 65% in US and Canada and 60% in Europe, trust in search at 61% and 59%, respectively. However, rust in social media in both markets is at 34%.
The percentage gap between trust in traditional and social media is now at an all-time high of 31-points in US and Canada and a 26-point gap in Europe.
In terms of political differences, consumers who identify as Republican voters show only 33% trust in media compared to 69% of Democrats voters.
#MeToo shift from the “mass population” to the “informed public
Further, more women, think that the #metoo movement, (plus 23 percentage points year-over-year) than men (plus 18 percentage points) shift from the “mass population” to the “informed public” segment.
CEO to take the lead. Don’t wait for government!
People are also looking to leaders to take charge and initiate change. More than three-quarters (76%) of respondents report that CEOs should take the lead on change rather than waiting for government to impose it.
First priority: equal pay. Last: fake news
Specific needs for positive change include: equal pay (65%), prejudice and discrimination (64%), training for jobs of tomorrow (64%), environment (56%), personal data (55%), sexual harassment (47%) and fake news (37%).