Psychology and its place in PR Back in 2014 as a first year, new to the world of PR I discovered how Edward Bernays, 'the father of public relations,’ was heavily influenced by the work of his uncle, Sigmund Freud. I learnt how he used his uncles framework to influence public opinion, and create some of the most groundbreaking (and morally questionable) campaigns of the 20th century. However, teaching moved on and Bernays was pushed to the back of my mind. This was until recently when I began to research topics for my dissertation proposal, keen to devote the next year to something interesting, challenging and a little bit different, I once again started thinking about psychology and it's place within 21st century PR. My research took me to an article featured in the New York Times in 2012, written by Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter Charles Duhigg, entitled 'How companies learn your secrets.' The article, which I very much recommend, looked into the work of Andrew Pole, a statistician for american discount retailer Target. Pole was asked by two colleagues from the marketing department how they could figure out if a customer was pregnant, even if she didn't want them to know. The article explains how Pole devised a "prediction score" based on the purchase of 25 products, which successfully did just that. The prediction score worked so well that Target even 'worked out' a girl was pregnant before her own family did! However, with this great discovery came ethical complications and serious questions as to where the responsibility lies for PR professionals. The main goal of a public relations professional is to communicate information to an audience, a skill which undeniably demands the need for persuasion. This requires an understanding into how people react to certain stimuli, essentially how the human brain works - from the colour of the copy to the channel used to convey the message. PR draws on psychology, and by applying the theories to your campaigns you may well achieve the edge over your competition. Below are two examples of psychology applied successfully in PR: Nudge theory - This theory argues that a carefully designed cue, using positive reinforcement and indirect suggestions, can influence the motives and decision making of individuals, as, if not more effectively than direct instruction. The theory is often used in the public service sector, with David Cameron setting up a ‘nudge unit’ to enable the government to design environments that make it easier for people to choose what is best for themselves and society. Priming - This theory claims that peoples subsequent behaviour can be altered if they have first been exposed to certain sights, words or sensations. Meaning, peoples behaviour varies if they have been ‘primed’ beforehand. An example by american psychologist Daniel Kahneman in his book ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow,’ was that people were more likely to fill in the gap in SO_P as SOUP rather than as SOAP if they had heard or read the word EAT immediately before. In other words, we make decisions based on the information given to us.
However, the question remains as to what matters more, a successful PR campaign or ethical practise? And where do we draw the line? As my research continues I will aim to find out where the balance lies between the two and blog about my findings.
The Role Of Social Contagion Within Social Media During my exploration into the links between psychology and PR, I came across a book called ‘So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed,’ by Jon Ronson, an award-winning author, documentary maker and journalist. His book explores the nature of public shaming, tracing it back to it’s primitive roots and revealing what he believes to be the motivations behind it. In turn, he looks at the theory of crowd behaviour, which is often referred to as 'social contagion'. The subject of public shaming and in particular the theory of social contagion, which is where ideas or beliefs spread through networks in the same way that an infectious disease would, fascinated me. The theories can be traced back as far as the 1890’s with Gustave Le Bon writing his book ‘The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind’, which explored the characteristics of crowd psychology. During the 1920’s, Bernays wrote of modern society as one where “the masses” were becoming bolder, and progressively more threatening to customary interests of order, believing the masses sense of entitlement was growing. This was the beginning of what we know today as social contagion. Jon Ronson’s book brings these theories into the 21st century, looking at some of the most well known internet shaming's to date. Including PR executive Justine Sacco, the author of an arguably ill-thought out tweet, whose horror story is enough to make the most hard skinned Tweeters blood run cold, it was certainly crude and insensitive, but did it justify the events that followed? Then there is Max Mosley, whose story fell in stark contrast to that of others, most likely due to his reaction upon being shamed. Instead of hiding, or giving in, he instead fought back, successfully suing the newspaper who printed the story, in turn earning public respect. At first Mosley told Ronson he believed this was because he refused to feel ashamed, therefore breaking down the shaming cycle. However, after some thought Ronson deduced an altogether different explanation, telling Mosley, “Nobody cared! Of all the public scandals, being a man in a sex scandal is probably the one to hope for.” To which Mosley replied: ”I think you’re spot on.” The book gave an insight into the vicious nature of the ‘internet mob,’ and whilst often terrifying, it was also captivating. It seems that the public assumption is that nobody is going to punish these people, so it is our job as users of social media to do it ourselves. However, as Ronson repeatedly reminds the readers, the punishment often far outweighs the crime. Since the ‘Twitter Revolution’ social media has vastly altered how the world responds to a crisis. Information is spread much faster than ever before, and to a much larger audience, in turn social media has become one of the most influential tools in shaping human behaviour and attitudes, but it holds its pro’s and con’s. Yet with this comes the danger of a
‘group thinking’ mentality, with users following a group opinion rather than independently evaluating the information on offer. This often leads to ‘extreme states’ where normal people can act in ‘unnatural’ ways. So what did I learn from the experiences of those shamed? 1. Never underestimate the power of social media - Whether it be a tweet or a blog post, these tools help to build your personal or professional brand, and offer more opportunities than we ever used to believe possible. However, with this huge opportunity comes great risk, many people (and companies) have fallen foul of this, just look at SeaWorld! 2. Think before you tweet - Social media began as an innocent way of communicating with others, exchanging information and creating new connections. Yet this has changed significantly in recent years; the positives of the internet have become at times its greatest downfall; we now live in a society where the only safe things to post seem to be inspirational quotes and cat videos. As Ronson points out in his book, through the example of Adria Richards and #Donglegate, being the shamer can also have a hugely negative impact on your on and offline life. 3. Internet content lives forever - This is an important point which Ronson covers in depth. Even with the legislation around ‘The Right To Be Forgotten,’ search results still haunt the online lives of those shamed, even years after the scandals have, on face value, died down. The book explores the work of one reputation management company, who attempt to bury existing online content for one of those shamed by adding new material in an effort to push the shaming articles further down the search results. However this is by no means a quick fix, requiring time and money. 4. Social media increasingly blurs the line between opinion and fact - The line between reality and fantasy and fact and opinion, plus the huge amount of information overload we cope with on a daily basis, mean that the lines have never been more blurred. The communication landscape of social media has undoubtedly changed, and the view of opinion as fact seems to be more popular than ever. This means both individuals and companies have to utilise extreme caution whilst communicating through social media, bringing to an end the freedom of speech we once enjoyed online. 5. Get the (correct) message out - Keeping quiet will only increase speculation, so by composing a strategic response you can show the audience that you are aware of their concerns. Case in point is PR executive Justine Sacco, who unknowingly slept through a 11 hour flight to Cape Town whilst Twitter went crazy, trending #HasJustineLandedYet. By the time she landed her name had been tweeted more than 30,000 times and the hashtag almost 100,000 times. Had she been able to respond earlier this may not have been the case. I will leave you with a quote from Bernays book Propaganda, in which he speaks of crowd behaviour, saying: ”If you can influence the leaders, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you automatically influence the group which they sway. But men do not need to be actually gathered together in a public meeting or in a street riot, to be ubject to the influences of mass psychology. Because man is by nature gregarious he feels himself to be member of a herd, even when he is alone in his room with the curtains drawn. His mind retains the patterns which have been stamped on it by the group influences.” (Bernays, 1928)