Uploaded August 2024 | Updated September 2026, 1 week ago
The Short and Long-Term Effects of Covid Messaging and the Difficulty in Communicating Risk; Who Controls the Messaging and How It Can and Has Been Exploited by Various Groups, State Actors and Others - Bob Menna
-
Disclaimer: This session was delivered for the 2023 ICSA Conference. The speaker of this session does not speak on behalf of ICSA as an organization.
-
Abstract: Communicating risk, whether regarding cults, health emergencies, extreme weather events, climate change, pollution, and more, presents challenges and can sometimes have unintended consequences. In light of the ongoing COVID pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) led the global response using various influence techniques that, while generally effective, also contributed to the emergence of divisions and mistrust among different individuals, groups, and even healthcare professionals.
These divisions were exploited by multinational media conglomerates, politicians, policymakers, fraudulent practitioners, state actors, and intelligence agencies. Some of the methods of influence used included shunning, creating new labeling to define people and groups, controlling the information flow, using imagery to alter behavior, and reinforcing a consolidated narrative that did not allow much room for public discussion on alternative narratives.
Similar to the dynamics observed in high-demand groups, dissenting views were strongly discouraged and actively censored.
This talk aims to prompt conversations about how our society responded to these influences, specifically focusing on the communication of perceived risks and how this may impact future crisis communication.
These divisions were exploited by multinational media conglomerates, politicians, policy makers, quacks, State actors and intelligence agencies. Some of the methods of influence used included shunning, creating new labeling to define people and groups, controlling the information flow, using imagery to alter behavior and to reinforce a consolidated narrative that did not allow much room for public discussion on alternative narratives.
Much like in a high demand group, dissenting views were strongly discouraged and even actively censored.
This talk will encourage the conversation about how we as a society responded to the influences at work, in particular the communicating of the perceived risks and how that might effect the continuing communication of crises in the future.
The Short and Long-Term Effects of Covid Messaging and the Difficulty in Communicating Risk; Who Controls the Messaging and How It Can and Has Been Exploited by Various Groups, State Actors and Others - Bob Menna
-
Disclaimer: This session was delivered for the 2023 ICSA Conference. The speaker of this session does not speak on behalf of ICSA as an organization.
-
Abstract: Communicating risk, whether regarding cults, health emergencies, extreme weather events, climate change, pollution, and more, presents challenges and can sometimes have unintended consequences. In light of the ongoing COVID pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) led the global response using various influence techniques that, while generally effective, also contributed to the emergence of divisions and mistrust among different individuals, groups, and even healthcare professionals.
These divisions were exploited by multinational media conglomerates, politicians, policymakers, fraudulent practitioners, state actors, and intelligence agencies. Some of the methods of influence used included shunning, creating new labeling to define people and groups, controlling the information flow, using imagery to alter behavior, and reinforcing a consolidated narrative that did not allow much room for public discussion on alternative narratives.
Similar to the dynamics observed in high-demand groups, dissenting views were strongly discouraged and actively censored.
This talk aims to prompt conversations about how our society responded to these influences, specifically focusing on the communication of perceived risks and how this may impact future crisis communication.
These divisions were exploited by multinational media conglomerates, politicians, policy makers, quacks, State actors and intelligence agencies. Some of the methods of influence used included shunning, creating new labeling to define people and groups, controlling the information flow, using imagery to alter behavior and to reinforce a consolidated narrative that did not allow much room for public discussion on alternative narratives.
Much like in a high demand group, dissenting views were strongly discouraged and even actively censored.
This talk will encourage the conversation about how we as a society responded to the influences at work, in particular the communicating of the perceived risks and how that might effect the continuing communication of crises in the future.
