Information Source Pt. 1 PDF

Information Source Pt. 1 We have shifted towards social media as information sources. E.g. Current events and news, politics, crisis & risk events, health, reviews (think: perceived value of user-generated content) SM and information Social media allows for two-way communication, unlike trad...

Information Source Pt. 1 We have shifted towards social media as information sources. E.g. Current events and news, politics, crisis & risk events, health, reviews (think: perceived value of user-generated content) SM and information Social media allows for two-way communication, unlike traditional media sources. Overcomes the information inequity that exists in traditional media sources. Study examining perceived credibility Channel Credibility & Obtaining Political Information (Johnson & Kaye, 2015) ○ 15-point scale to measure perceived channel credibility ○ Comparing traditional media and social media ○ Participants rated all media as moderately credible: We still don’t rate SM as credible as traditional media sources, but to a small extent. Traditional media had the highest rank, but only moderately credible. ○ They strive for fair and unbiased stories, but do not measure up to these standards Social media was rated as less credible than traditional media ○ Used SM in addition to traditional media for the full, unbiased story. SM & political news consumption – Pew Research Center 1 in 5 US adults get their political news primarily through social media, esp. amongst young adults. However, reliance on SM can be problematic because those who depend on social media for political news have lower political knowledge than most other groups.  ○ SM users most likely to have heard conspiracy theory that the pandemic was intentionally planned. (Evi of lack of political knowledge) SM as an information source The negative impacts of using SM as an information arise due to the credibility of this information and how they process this content. Credibility “The extent to which one perceives information to be believable, accurate, and fair.” Credibility issues arise regarding user-generated content on SM. Credibility is not inherent in the medium, it is based on user perception. Perceived information credibility predictive of: ○ Degree of information processing ○ Attitudes ○ Behaviours Information processing: Elaboration Likelihood Model Identifies two routes to information processing & explains how people are influenced by messages. **Both motivation and ability must be high for the central route to be taken. Central Peripheral High message elaboration–active Low message cognitive processing elaboration–”surface-level” thinking More lasting attitude change, less Temporary attitude change, subject subject to counterarguments. to change through future persuasive Focuses on strength of argument, messages. evidence Focuses on “peripheral” factors like source attractiveness, number of arguments presented, emotional appeal. Motivation “A person’s desire or willingness to engage in deep thinking about a message.” Influencing factors: 1. Personal relevance: directly relevant to person’s life or concerns 2. Need for cognition: natural tendency in some people to think and solve complex problems, thus they are more likely to carefully evaluate arguments. 3. Accountability: individuals feel the need to justify their decision or understanding later, their motivation to process information deeply increases **Motivation: High → more likely to engage in the central route processing.  Ability “Whether the person has the cognitive resources and necessary information to understand and evaluate a message.” Influencing factors: 1. Distractions 2. Prior knowledge: individuals more knowledgeable about the topic are better equipped to critically evaluate the argument 3. Complexity of the message: message of high complexity or difficulty in understanding, people may not have the cognitive ability to engage with it fully. Thus, may rely on more peripheral cues. **Ability = high = central route, when ability = low = peripheral route. Information processing and credibility We oftentimes use mental shortcuts (peripheral cues or heuristics) to determine the degree to which we want or need this content. We oftentimes rely on perceived credibility to filter out which info to pay attention to: 3 dimensions of information credibility: ○ Medium ○ Message ○ Source Medium credibility Decline in trust in traditional media ○ Used to be considered credible and reliable due to the rigorous & unbiased process one goes through when creating a story. ○ However, funding issues (e.g. reliance on advertising for revenue) and strategically pushing agendas (e.g. biased reporting) to sway public opinion. Therefore, many have resorted to using social media platforms as an alternative or additional information source. Factors we consider when examining medium credibility: Visual content Suggests individuals are likely taking a peripheral route during info processing. Platforms rely heavily on visual content. How do visuals influence credibility of information-processing: 1. Users tend to trust polished, professional-looking content: a. High-quality images associated with reliability and accuracy. b. Of course, not reflective of actual truthfulness of the info. 2. Images and videos can trigger strong emotional reactions. a. Transportation (of the viewer into the situation) b. Creates an emotional impact that reduces users’  ability to critically evaluate the credibility of the content. c. Consequently, people may trust or share info without verifying its accuracy. Example: COVID Vaccines Don’t Make You Magnetic Moderating content Role of SM platforms in moderating content becomes more significant. Introduction of fact-checking systems on platforms: Labels for disputed content and algorithms that downrank misinformation. Yet, these studies show that these efforts can have mixed effects: Some users perceive fact-checks as biased or censorious, especially in politically polarised environments. Pennycook & Rand (2020): Simple accuracy nudges on social media (asking users to consider whether the info is true before sharing) can reduce the spread of misinformation. ○ However, people are already entrenched in particular ideological bubbles so even such nudges may not be effective in changing behaviour. Algorithms Platforms use algorithms to curate content. Reinforces users’ existing beliefs → echo chambers and filter bubbles. Users are primarily exposed to information that aligns with their current worldview. Effects on credibility: Narrowed perspectives as users see less diverse viewpoints. Reinforcement of misinformation or biased content (more deeply entrenched in dangerous/ wrong ideas?) Perception of credibility increases for information that confirms users’ beliefs, even if it’s from questionable sources. Bakshy, Messing, & Adamic (2015) examined FB users’ exposure to news content: Users were more likely to encounter ideologically aligned news due to recommendation algorithms, creating a self-reinforcing loop, where exposure to opposing views decreases. As a result, credibility perceptions for differing viewpoints are diminished. Channel reliance Channel reliance has a positive relationship with credibility. Johnson and Kaye, 2014: The more we need to depend on a particular source for info, the more we perceive the info from it to be true. Reasons: 1. Familiarity and comfort: More use of a specific source, more familiar and comfortable with it. a. The more we believe it is reliable because we have used it over time and it has become part of our routine. 2. Confirmation bias: Relied-upon source + consistent alignment  with our beliefs or provides self-relevant news = more likely to trust. a. This bias reinforces our perception that the source is credible. Implications of channel reliance: 1. Media fragmentation: Individuals gravitate toward different media sources → development of a narrow, focused trust in those platforms, even when information from other channels could be more accurate or balanced. 2. Polarisation: [Context: Politics] When different media outlets cater to different viewpoints, people who rely on one channel may become increasingly isolated from alternative perspectives and more entrenched in their belief that their chosen source is credible. Message credibility Traditional factors in assessing: 1. Argument strength: Extent to which one perceives the argument to be convincing or valid. a. “Valid” arguments → more strong, positive attitudes. 2. Information quality: Fitness for use of the information provided (how relevant, accurate, or objective is the information) 3. Inclusion of evidence: Links to studies or credible websites “Changes” due to social media–Interaction metrics and social endorsement: ** Traditional factors are still considered, with the addition of interaction metrics (likes, shares, retweets, comments, trending)/ social endorsement. Act as social proof that influences perceptions of credibility ○ Content that garners more interaction metrics is often perceived as more credible because it appears popular, regardless of the actual accuracy of the information. Also a “collaborative filter” that directs attention to popular topics, reducing skepticism and increases credibility. Virality Viral nature of SM enables false information to spread rapidly, outpacing corrections or fact-checking efforts. ○ Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral (2018) found that false information spreads faster & reaches more people than the truth on Twitter–fake news spreads six times faster. Users are also less likely to verify the credibility of these viral posts because: ○ Information overload: Constant influx of content → high volume of information we must process (which we often rely on heuristics) ○ Novelty and emotional appeal: Fake news often contains shocking/surprising details → triggers strong emotional responses → prompts sharing behaviour without verifying accuracy. Emotional appeal overrides critical thinking skills. Source credibility SM lacks professional gatekeepers (e.g. professionals, scientists, journalists, etc.) to monitor posted content. ○ So, anyone can easily distribute content that has been altered, manipulated, or includes false information to large audiences. Therefore, content consumers rely on “gate-watchers” or those in our network who choose to filter out “less” credible and promote “more” credible content. (Often also referred to as opinion leaders). Three elements of source credibility 1. Expertise/competence: the degree to which the message receiver believes the sender to know the truth. 2. Trustworthiness: the degree to which the message receiver believes the sender will tell the truth as they know it. 3. Goodwill: the degree to which the message receiver believes the sender has their best interest at heart. We tend to look at the “source” when determining the credibility of its information Serving as a heuristics or mental shortcut. However, there can be multiple sources of the message with SM: ○ The original creator of the message: e.g. news outlets, politicians, public figures, experts ○ Those in our network broadcasting the message: e.g. FB “friends”, followers, etc. Source identity The source’s perceived reputation is critical in whether users believe the information.  Users are more likely to trust information from influencers, celebrities, and blue-check verified accounts on SM: ○ Viewed as more credible due to their social status or perceived authority, even if their qualifications in the topic are unverified. Trust in these sources is often swayed by likes, shares, & follower counts rather than their actual expertise: ○ Metrics that reflect popularity can lead users to assume that high engagement equals credibility. Network influences People are more likely to trust information shared by friends, family, or people in their social network than by unfamiliar sources. ○ Esp. true for platforms where users are more likely to see content from their social circle–e.g. Facebook The closeness of the relationship between the user and content sharer plays a significant role in credibility judgments. ○ Trust in the relationship often extends to the information that they share with you. ○ Individuals might not critically evaluate the content because they trust the individual who shared it → spread of misinformation within social circles. ○ Also influences the credibility of the original creator of the message: **These effects are amplified when we perceive this individual to be an opinion leader or an influential member of the network (e.g. those central to a network, social media influencer, politicians, etc.) Information overload Due to this, we rely on trusted others (aka opinion leaders) to help filter out this information and focus on what is important. ○ Problematic because they might not be experts in the topic of discussion, yet have a lot of clout (Think: Nicki Minaj and vaccine hesitancy) In News We Trust? Examining Credibility & Sharing behaviour of Fake News (Stefanone, Volimer, & Covert, 2019): Study design: 207 participants were randomly assigned to read news articles containing factual or false info, and one of three political frames (balanced, right-leaning, left-leaning) Examining: ○ Main: Credibility and sharing of fake news  ○ Environmental: Distraction level (study completed alone or with distractions), screen size (phone, tablet, or computer used). ○ Individual: Political interest (how connected or concerned individuals are with political news coverage), religiosity (frequency of attending church or religious meetings) Results: What influenced perceptions of credibility & sharing behaviours? ○ Perceptions of credibility did influence sharing behaviours, regardless of condition. ○ Religiosity is a positive predictor of credibility (perhaps engage in heuristic processing, trust in the hierarchy) ○ Political interest is a positive predictor of sharing behaviours and credibility did not matter. ○ No effect on distraction level and screen size.  Information Source Pt. 2: Risk Communication “The effective exchange of information between experts, officials, organisations and people about a harmful and/or potentially harmful event.” Goals: Inform the public about risks Persuade people to take proactive measures Build and maintain trust with the community Protect the people How government entities communicate with the citizens about a risky situation. Helps individuals made timely decisions to reduce negative impacts that threaten one’s health, economic, or social well-being. E.g. Public health warnings, disaster evacuations, terrorism alerts. Principles of effective risk communication 1. Transparency: Always provide clear, factual, and up-to-date information 2. Timeliness: Deliver information as quickly as possible to ensure people can act 3. Accuracy: Ensure that the data & information shared are verified to prevent misinformation. 4. Trust-building: Consistent, honest communication builds public trust. Traditional risk communication Via mass media → confident that it reaches a wide viewership ○ Sets the agenda for us ○ However, there are framing and dialogue issues (“why are you telling this story in this way?”) → one-sided info, no way to communicate between the mass media and the reader and ask follow-up questions. Social media Via social media: Allows the creation and exchange of info from individuals all over the world ○ Individuals are both content consumers and creators ○ Two-way, synchronous communication (also with experts, govt. entities) ○ Quick and easy dissemination of real-time information ○ Increased interactivity and democratization of information (double-edged sword). Effective risk comm on social media 1. Message framing: Framing in ways that reduce anxiety while still conveying the seriousness of a situation (common approach) → protective action approach.  2. Visual communication: Use of infographics, charts, & videos is more engaging, better understanding compared to text-heavy message. a. Best for information that need to be disseminated quickly, information that can be communicated straightforwardly. 3. Narrative-based approaches: Storytelling; personal testimonies or scenarios of individuals affected by risks → more persuasive and engaging on SM platforms a. Statistics dull down the impact and minimise the extent of the risk, making it less persuasive. Who uses SM in risk situations? SM streamlines information which helps people to adapt to the situation. 1. Individuals: the general public 2. Communities: groups connected through various means (geographic areas: grassroots, share expertise, values, norms, interests & experiences: e.g. the academic community) 3. Organisations: structured groups that are responding to, affected by, or external to the event (e.g. red cross, salvation army) 4. Governments: Federal, state, & local & governmental agencies (e.g. CDC, WHO) 5. Media: Flocking to new media to ensure their accounts reach the people Advantages 1. Provide and receive preparedness info/warnings: helps people prepare themselves for the risk. a. Content is shared to various channels, so we can receive the same information without following the source directly. 2. Signal and detect events: Through individual users’ posts to SM, not just organisations centered around detecting potential events a. E.g. 2011 Virginia Earthquakes: Information about the disaster spread faster than the earthquake shockwaves. 3. Send and receive requests for help a. Issue of info credibility on SM during risky events. b. Humans’ general care for one another: Less likely to spread misinformation with malice c. Additionally, other users can stamp down inaccuracies (if enough people are tuned in and participating in the discourse) d. With mass participation, false rumours that begin to circulate have the potential to be quickly corrected by knowledgeable people. e. E.g. 2011 Japan Earthquake: Individuals could send out tweets that were direct requests for help, improving the efficiency of rescue efforts. f. Scholars pushing for help centers to monitor SM to identify emergency requests for help. 4. Inform others about one’s condition: If the level of destruction is great, individuals will need a place to check in and let others know their condition. a. E.g. 2015 Paris Terrorist Attacks  5. Document and learn what is happening: A lot of uncertainty during a risk situation a. Real-time accounts of events on SM allow people to obtain info quicker 6. Sentiment and behavioural analytics: RIse of big data analytics, researchers can now use SM to monitor public sentiment and identify trends in behaviour. a. E.g. sentiment analysis, network analysis, geolocation tracking. b. Researchers can now gauge public emotions, detect emerging risks, and tailor communication strategies accordingly. c. E.g. Wang et al. (2019) used sentiment analysis during the Ebola crisis to measure public fear and panic, enabling authorities to adjust their risk messaging to address concerns more effectively. 7. Provide and receive response information: Response information comes first. a. What needs to be done to help the situation b. SM can quickly update and provide a constant stream of coordinated info about what is happening and what is needed, help people conserve their resources c. Develops an awareness as well for outsiders. 8. Provide and receive support: a. How they can actually help (providing tangible support) b. SM can provide quick and consistent updates (since news is fast and always changing) about what is taking place and what is needed to raise awareness about an event to motivate individuals to volunteer or donate. c. Research: No of SM messages about Haiti earthquake increased, so did the no. of financial donations. d. Connect with others to obtain other forms of social support (e.g. emotional) to help overcome mental/health issues e. E.g. Mass shootings at Virginia Tech (2007) and Northern Illinois University (2008): 9. Express emotions: Convey their concern about those affected, to mourn and memoralise those lives lost during an event. a. E.g. Memoralising the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings. 10. Tell and hear stories: Stay engaged with efforts related to event and exchange stories of personal involvement. 11. Discuss causes, implications, and responsibility: How to prevent it from reoccurring a. SM can connect these individuals to help develop a solution 12. (Re)connect community members a. There is much to deal with when returning home after a tragedy. b. SM can help reconnect these members while also forging new community connections. c. E.g. Hurricane Katrina Disadvantages 1. Information overload: SM platforms become flooded with information–which can blur the picture of what is actually happening and how individuals need to respond.  a. Results from various groups of people all attempting to report on the event. 2. Social amplification and attenuation: a. Social amplification (viral SM content can escalate minor incidents into perceived crises, increasing public … b. Social attenuation: Critical risks may be “drowned out” by unrelated popular topics, limiting their reach and impact. c. Due to algorithms which prioritise engagement: platforms highlight content based on interaction, not necessarily on importance or factual accuracy. d. Result: Sensational or emotionally charged posts spread faster, while essential information can be overshadowed. e. Examples: i. COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation: Isolated reports of adverse vaccine reactions went viral, causing public fear and vaccine hesitancy (Escalation of minor incidents) ii. Hawaii False Missile Alert (2018): Warnings of an incoming missile were ignored or missed by residents as social media focused on viral entertainment and celebrity news (Drowning Out Critical Risks) 3. Less dependence on experts: Increased reliance on the exchange of views and opinions on events from trusted SM platforms & “gate-watchers” or opinion leaders a. Individuals use heuristics to determine what information is important or relevant to themselves and the event. b. Less reliance on experts & one-way information (e.g. health experts, official safety reports): can lead to the potential increase in presence and transmission of misinformation. 4. Misinformation: a. The Internet does a good job of diminishing the rumours, but… i. Info is still out there and correctors are unsure of who has been re-educated successfully or not: replicability and persistence issue 5. Liability: Individuals believe they should receive assistance if they have indicated via SM that they are in need of help a. No formal system in place despite the belief that there should be emergency centers to monitor SM b. So, who becomes responsible for unanswered requests for help? Who is responsible if someone obtains misinformation that could potentially be harmful? 6. Digital Divide: certain individuals may not be able to access information (e.g. have the knowledge or motivation) provided by social media during an event. a. E.g. the elderly, mentally disabled individuals without access to the Internet, or certain generations preferring one SM channel over others b. May get the information way later than needed (urgency during emergencies) or not all the information to give the full, nuanced picture.  Business pt. 1 Advertising/Marketing Social media has evolved significantly over the years to also become crucial business tools. But how does SM affect business strategies and what are the benefits and challenges of this? Importance of SM for businesses today (1) Tremendous reach and accessibility: Over 5 billion people use SM, providing businesses with access to large volumes of customers. (2) Direct interaction: SM allows for real-time interactions between companies and customers, enhancing brand loyalty and trust. (3) Cost-effective marketing: SM provides a novel and cost-effective way to reach large audiences and measure performance quickly (compared to traditional forms of marketing). Marketing “Activities to promote and sell products/services–from market research to product design and positioning.” Strategy: To identify, reach, & satisfy customer needs. Key focus: The customer–ensuring products/servies meet their needs and create an overall proposition that attracts them. Forms of marketing: advertising, public relations, sales strategies, content creation, priving, distribution, etc. Influencer marketing Brands partnering with influencers to tap into their ability to shape the public’s perceptions of the brand and motivate buying behaviour. ○ Research has consistently found that influencer endorsements yield a higher return on investment (ROI), esp. when compared to celebrity endorsement. Influencer partnerships occur when brands collaborate with those who have established credibility, expertise, or popularity within a particular field ○ Thus, gaining access to the influencer’s audience to promote products or ideas Psychological factors that lead to the success of influencer marketing Many are basic communication and psychological principles (think:interpersonal communication & persuasion) 1. Social proof “Tendency to follow the action of others in an attempt to make the correct choice” (e.g. Asch’s conformity study)  When consumers seel a well-liked Operates through: influencer endorsing a product, they infer that the product must be of 1. Conformity bias: Mimicking the behaviour of someone they respect/admire, serving as a high quality or value because shortcut to making trustworthy choices. someone they admire is using it 2. FOMO: Audiences may feel left out if they don’t follow suit, encouraging purchases 2. Parasocial relationships “One-sided relationships where a viewer feels a close, personal connection with an influencer, despite limited or no real-life interaction.” Seeing them as “friends” → Operates through: trust, receptivity in their recommendations. 1. Trust & familiarity: Sense of intimacy when influencers share about their lives; feeling that influencer understands their needs, making E.g. Lifestyle influencer shares endorsements feel like genuine reccs. morning routine with a specific 2. Emotional investment: Emotional bonds → support brand of coffee → brand taps for products that an influencer is passionate about, into followers’ connections, due to a sense of loyalty and commitment to their making them more likely to try choices. that coffee brand. Celebrities are known for being mysterious, hiding certain aspects of their identity. Whereas influencers share all aspects of their lives and gain from this by establishing a sense of intimacy with their followers, which facilitates stronger loyalty in their followers (to buy products they promote) 3. Authority and expertise Influencers establish authority by specialising in specific areas (e.g. fitness, technology, fashion) When they endorse a product Operates through: within their domain, their followers view their opinions as 1. Expert power: People trust experts because they believe these individuals have the knowledge to expert advice, increasing the make informed recommendations. product’s credibility. 2. Halo effect: A positive perception of the influencer can extend to the product/brand they endorse, E.g. Tech reviewer with leading to favourable opinions without critical expertise in electronics examination. recommends a specific smartphone brand → followers  trust the product based on the influencer’s perceived expertise. 4. Reciprocity “Tendency to return favours or feel obligated to respond to someone who has offered a benefit.” Influencers give audiences Operates through: value and followers feel inclined to reciprocate (entertainment, 1. Obligation to reciprocate: Viewers feel inclined to tips, etc.), so brands capitalise support the influencer by buying the product, on this by influencers provide especially if the influencer offers them special deals giveaways, exclusive (Think: Balance & equity) discounts, or content that 2. Gift-Like Effect: When influencers provide a adds value, fostering a sense valuable discount of recommendation, followers feel of goodwill that encourages it is a form of generosity that invites reciprocal purchases loyalty. 5. Emotional resonance and storytelling Influencers often engage in storytelling, which heightens emotional resonance with their followers. Stories make product Operates through: endorsements more memorable & relatable, tapping into 1. Emotional priming: Influencers use stories to evoke emotions that drive buying emotions (vs rational thought), making followers decisions. more receptive to product messages. 2. Memory retention: Audiences remember the product better when it is associated with a story, especially if it aligns with their values or goals. Advertising and public relations Both serve to have the public view a brand favourably, but the way either do it happens differently. Advertising Public relations Nonpersonal communication of info usually The strategic communication process that paid for and persuasive in nature about builds mutually beneficial relationships products, services, or ideas by identified between organisations and their public. sponsors through the various media. Focuses on building relationships with key stakeholders to shape and frame public perceptions of an organisation. One-way communication: sell Two-way communication: building products/services relationships and trust Traditional Advertising One-way communication, overt persuasive attempt. Traditional ads: TV, billboards, magazines, radio, newspapers Online ads: Not so different from traditional ○ Direct mail ads (spam) ○ TV/radio ads on YouTube, Spotify, streaming services As individuals spend more time using CMC tools (like SM), advertisers are spending more money on digital ad campaigns. ○ Often reducing ad buys on traditional channels. Data analytics and personalization SM platforms provide analytic tools to track engagement, reach and demographics. Examples: IG–Likes,Comments, Shares, follower demographics, impressions, YouTube–Watch time, views, traffic sources, subscriber growth. Enables the ability for personalised marketing by analysing customer preferences and behaviours, businesses can deliver tailored ads and recommendations. Happens through narrowcasting. Narrowcasting “Targeted or niche marketing/ deliberately targeting a narrow audience.” Spending more money on ads directed toward specific individuals to target the “right” demographic or psychographic (i.e. those that are most likely to have an interest in their product or service) More effective than broadcasting ads to a large number of individuals. Been around for a long time (with specific channels: TV networks, radio shows like Bravo v.s. ESPN viewers), but social media makes it easier for companies to do this ○ We provide so much info on social media for businesses and advertising companies to create an idea or profile of you to market more effectively to you. Narrowcasting example: Selling protein powder Target: Men who want to n=bulk up and look like models in ad Strategy: Place ads in the target demographic’s most frequented places. ○ Trad. ad: At or outside gyms, fitness events. ○ Digital ad: ESPN Youtube channel, online streams of sports events.  Narrowcasting and social media Data mining: “Collecting info about a person by looking at their online activity.” E.g. User-generated content on SM platforms identifies you. ○ Frequent visiting of wedding content + jewellery websites → identifies you as a woman in your mid-20s. Our interpersonal relationships are also telling of us and our interests (e.g. friends with many women in their 20s, also signals that we are likely women in our 20s → can push ads marketed to women in their 20s) Companies can build a profile of you by looking at this data. ○ Sending you ads about wedding rings, as you are more likely interested in them than other groups. Large amounts of personal info on SM make it easy for advertisers to narrowcast: ads can be targeted and displayed to a very small and particular subset of receivers. ○ Explains why we often see ads that are very specific to ourselves. Research suggests that targeted ads are very effective–higher click rates than broad, undifferentiated ads → suggesting higher cost is worth it as it provides a higher return on investment. Much of SM platforms’ primary income is from advertising revenue (roughly 98% of Meta’s revenue is generated from ads) Hence, these platforms have developed complex (but easy-to-use) tools to target specific audiences and users, which increased their ability to narrowcast much more effectively than they could offline or in traditional ads. Artificial intelligence Use of AI is starting to transform the way we narrowcast: highly accurate audience segmentation, predictive analytics, personalised recommendations Machine learning models analyse data and track engagement metrics to refine audience profiles Predictive modelling: AI anticipates future actions of users–predicting what content, products, or ads will likely resonate. Enhances targeting: AI can adjust ad placement in real-time, optimising ad spend. Automated ad campaigns: AI helps automate ad placements, scheduling, and budget allocation for maximum reach among niche audiences–increases efficiency. TED video: “What will happen to marketing in the age of AI?” We dont exactly reduce the work we do, we make the work longer with all these productivity tools invented. Generative AI: next big productivity revolution Marketing is traditionally right-brained work ChatGPT improves right-brain performance of marketers by 40% More content → more personalised content But also, content overload. Tired of content chasing you that all sound the same (generative AI builds upon existing work)  Need to grow a left AI-brain: Reskill and reorganise teams to build solutions and tools that help marketers do their jobs better (e.g. decision making based on what creative was working and why, based on the pool of ideas generated by the right brain AI/generative AI) XX training content on current trends and data But also need to identify the true differentiators and innovators and train them to use AI well: Make fast prototypes, develop ideas faster “Choose their brain”  Business Pt. 2: Public Relations “The strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organisations and their public.” Focuses on building relationships with key stakeholders to shape and frame public perceptions of an organisation. Two-way communication: building relationship and trust Goal: influence the public’s attitudes and behaviours (same as marketing & advertising, just occurs a bit differently) Dialogic communication SM provides environments facilitating interactivity, unlike traditional mass media. PR practitioners can increasingly engage in spaces where they are both the sender and receiver of messages. → Two-way model of communication used by PR practitioners to co-create and negotiate relationships, rather than just manage them. Once info is online, the public is free to engage with, respond to, & further share it. ○ Users can interact directly with the organisation and each other, online public relations efforts are far more collaborative than offline PR efforts. → Both organisations and the public are considered equal contributors to the design and success of persuasive messaging. Relationship development PR emphasises the development of relationships, which takes time and communication to develop meaningful relations with one another. (Think: Development of interpersonal relationships offline; the onion model) Pre-SM: PR efforts were very one-way, releasing carefully crafted statements to the public. Now: Two-way exchanges, which are essential to foster the perception of relationship development and to help achieve organisational goals. ○ Successfully applied, organisations can increase the sense of… Closeness (sense of a strong connection) Immediacy (sense of urgency or excitement about the message) Consumer behaviour intentions of the public–$$$ Example: How Fortune 500 companies’ use Twitter (Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010) ○ 61% used Twitter for dialogic purposes, others only used it for one-way communication. ○ Companies who responded to users via Twitter were almost twice as likely to have users interact with the company on the platform later on. More positive interactions + stronger brand loyalty (constant income for the company) More interactive approach could lead to better customer relationships and overall brand reputation.  ○ Utility of SM and PR: Helps manage relationships with public and monetary benefits for company. Disabling comments Some organisations tend to disable comments to prevent negative or counter-brand messages, off-topic feuds amongst users, etc. Example: Boeing 737 MAX airplanes crashed in 2018 and 2019, resulting in hundreds of casualties. ○ Worse decision: Disabled comments on Twitter and Facebook, avoided directly engaging with the public on safety criticisms, and focused on posting corporate statements than addressing comments directly. ○ Came off as not being willing to communicate with the public. Disabling comments also decreases the collaborative spirit of SM (“you don’t care”) and the ability of the public to engage with the company. Also prevents others from saying GOOD THINGS (which can do good in the face of a crisis) (Think: Value of user-generated content) Ultimately limits the brand’s interaction with its public. Hayes and Carr (2015): When companies disable comments, there is… ○ A loss of trust in the brand ○ Stronger negative attitudes toward the brand ○ Lower purchasing intention Greater engagement from a brand with the public → stronger brand-public relationships. ○ Shows care for the consumer. Note: Companies with a strong brand community can restrict their info flow as they can rely on their strong & loyal community. (E.g. Apple) Why not disable comments?: Brand-public interaction is the power of SM (dialogue between the public and practitioners) Opportunity for relationship-building and dialogue between the public and practitioners. Invite users to create or share content, especially content that favours the brand. Benefits of this two-way communication: 1. Perceived immediacy & closeness with its consumers: Unlike static webpages of old PR campaigns, social media provides opportunities for real-time interaction with the brand and other users. Research: Following a brand on SM platform can increase the perception of a relationship with the brand. ○ Just seeing other people’s positive experiences with the brand evokes a good impression, even if you don’t engage in that interaction. (“I know they would if I ever needed help.”)  Why people follow brands on SM: ○ Research: Interact, not learn about the brand (either to send messages to the brand’s corporation or to talk to others about the brand) → helpful when trying to influence the public’s perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours. Covert et al. (in press) How organ procurement organisations use social media – are they taking advantage of SM affordances? Research: Most nonprofit organisations use SM to disseminate information rather than engage in dialogue → triggered prof’s research. The issue about organ donation: ○ Taboo to talk about this process ○ If featured in the news/tv, it’s often negative Method: Content analysed 52 OPOs’ social media habits and messages. ○ Focused on: Types of messages and message effectiveness (measure by the engagement to the messages) I-C-A framework: Information, Community, and Action ○ Information: Messages mirrored traditional mass media (one-way communication; event highlights, news, facts, reports) ○ Community: Messages meant to build a relationship with the audience (two-way communication; recognition & thanks, acknowledgement, responses to messages) ○ Action: Messages call for audience members to do something (volunteer, donate, advocate, seek our more info Results: ○ Types of messages that were more likely to increase audience engagement: Community: Likes and comments Action: Shares ○ Audience engagement had more persuasive power Followers feel more connected to the organisation (bond) Helps to achieve the organisation’s goals – engagement, advocating for the organisation to others. 2. Incorporated brand into consumers’ social identity Talking about or sharing favourable experiences with a brand increases individuals’ social identification with the brand (e.g. Yelp reviews, blog posts about the brand, sharing a photo of the brand, creating TikTok about the experience with the brand). Social identification can lead to brand loyalty. ○ Ensures long term success and longevity of your company by having “forever consumers”/ “die-hards” ○ Brand identity becomes your consumers’ social identity Customer retention v. acquisition: ○ Retaining customers is more cost-effective than acquiring new ones – repeat purchases, referrals, and UGCs. ○ Harvard Business Review (2022): x5 more costly to acquire a new customer than retain an existing one–need for a loyalty driven approach. ○ Cheap way of engaging in marketing and advertising, because you already have fans who are actively advocating for you. Brand communities where consumers get together and share their love for the brand. Brands continually seek to develop the community by establishing an online space for fans to interact or encouraging/seeding a community. ○ “Community forums” or fan pages help brand maintain individuals’ active associations with the brand. Place for these fans to embrace their social category (shared experiences with these particular products) ○ Builds salience and relevance of that social identity in their minds → automatically going to this brand without considering other options (because it is part of their identity) When brand identities are active in members’ minds: There is strong association between ○ Engagement in a brand community → subsequent attitudes → purchasing intentions toward the brand. ○ Lower opportunity for other brands to steal these companies from you. Example: Nike Run Club and J Opportunity to talk about the products we’re purchasing Allegiance to the company with a platform created by the company for you to express your identity Example: J Crew apparel sponsored famous blogger “J Crew Aficionada” Helped legitimise the blogger and the blog’s followers as a semiofficial community of the J Crew brand (Farris et al., 2014) Social listening Brands can benefit from monitoring brand communities (aka social listening), which are often the source of new ideas or thoughtful critiques in UGCs.(opportunity for improvement too) Cheaper version of market research that might be more meaningful as well Example: ○ “J Crew Aficionada” identified J Crew’s need for a maternity line ○ Lego frequently draws ideas for new building block projects from designs constructed by fans and brand community members in Lego’s virtual online sandbox All this data just from listening, so a brand needs to engage in dialogic communication and social listening. Strategies for building brand loyalty 1. Consistent and authentic brand voice How to implement: “Talking to the same person”  Consistency in messaging, tone, & values Develop a unique brand voice, reflect core helps to establish trust & brand recognition. values, & maintain this tone across all SM posts, stories, interactions, etc. 2. Engage through conversational Use SM channels for responsive customer marketing service, answer questions, resolve Customers want to feel heard and complaints quickly, & show appreciation for feedback. valued–two-way communication helps humanise the brand and enhances loyalty. Journal of business strategy (2023): Brands that adopt conversational marketing techniques see a 33% increase in customer retention rates. 3. Foster community through Encourage customers to post about their user-generated content (UGC) experiences, create branded UGC strengthens community bonds and hashtags, & repost customer content to acknowledge their loyalty. showcases customer satisfaction authentically. (Think: Impact of influencer marketing > celebrity marketing) Other practical techniques: Instagram: Visual engagement and community ○ Storytelling with stories and reels (BTS content, product tutorials, or customer testimonials) Twitter/X: Real-time engagement ○ More text-heavy ○ Customer service and support: Quick responses to inquiries or complaints ○ Brand personality: Engage with trending topics, use humour, and interact with followers. TikTok: Building loyalty and short-form video ○ Creative content: Use trends and challenges to connect with audience in an entertaining way ○ Influencer partnerships: With relatable influencers to establish brand presence and loyalty among followers ○ Educational content: Post tutorials, DIY tips, or product “how-to” videos that add value and showcase expertise.  Business pt. 3: Data Privacy Study in 2019, Pew Research Centre: 50% of Americans knew about the Cambridge-Analytica scandal. The public were less comfortable with companies using their data for research purposes to improve society than to develop new products or help improve their fraud prevention systems. Benefits of the new social media app outweigh the concerns over data privacy Why Took FB So Long? Cambridge Analytica: Build psychological profiles based on people’s Facebook data → used by political parties to tune their campaign messages to potential voters - Violated FB terms of service because he sold the data to labs rather than using it for academic research. - Their extent of influence on election results is questionable, esp. as time has passed. FB features/operation: - Driven by apps: Lax data policies to draw data developers - Potential data leaks - Privacy risks might not be clearly communicated or understood by users. - “Interdependent privacy”: FB friends sorta determine one’s level of privacy. - Tagged photos, liked photos, comments on posts - Persistent of social media, one cannot delete what has been leaked. - FB Ad system: No restrictions on sending ads to people based on any “targetable” attribute Overall argument: More concern over this method of sorting people based on ther FB profiles. - Various uses: Politics, marketing - But also, is the problem that a researcher violated FB’s terms of service or that FB has created a system where such data was intentionally collected? A Privacy-Focused Vision for Social Networking FB has historically focused on facilitating more open sharing than being privacy-focused. 1. Private interactions 2. Encryption 3. Reducing permanence: Not keeping messages or stories for longer than necessary 4. Safety 5. Interoperability: Use any of our apps to reach their friends, to communicate across networks easily and securely. a. Like Telegram? Where you could message and call people without needing their contact? 6. Secure data storage: Site won’t store sensitive data in databases with weak records on privacy and freedom of expression, **Ultimately, FB did not promise that they won’t track data anymore, but that they promise to “protect” their users’ data from hackers or other with bad intentions. Privacy “...the claim of individuals, groups, or institutions to determine for themselves when, how, & to what extent information about themselves is communicated to others.” Privacy has always been an issue but with SM, this is not only an interpersonal issue (data scraping/mining, big data, targeted advertising, etc.) Need for privacy 1. Privacy helps us manage our social interactions and avoid conflict a. Self-disclosure is necessary for relationship development. b. However, disclosing the right amount of depth & breadth is crucial. 2. Maintain a sense of control, autonomy, and self-identity a. Lack of privacy means that individuals are unable to engage in self-discovery without outside influence and criticism. b. Crucial toward understanding & shaping one’s identity (e.g. self-actualisation, figuring out who you are and who you want to be) Privacy Boundaries “Desire to keep certain info from certain people” Not about shutting others out, but a process through which we control our boundaries. Open boundary: Willingness to grant access to private info; process of revealing Closed boundary: Info that is private & not accessible; process of concealing & protecting Four States of Privacy (Westin, 1967) 1. Solitude: Separating oneself from others to be free from observation (e.g. living in remote areas) 2. Intimacy: Secluding oneself to only a small group of individuals to achieve a closed, relaxed, and frank relationship (e.g. close friends, family, significant other) 3. Anonymity: Freedom from identification and observation in public places (e.g. those well-known in the public eye lack this) 4. Reserve: Limiting the amount of public information available–only possible through the cooperation of those around them (e.g. indicating to your social network what is ok and what is not ok to tell others) Privacy Management Theory A roadmap of how individuals navigate privacy (5 core principles) 1. Individuals own and have a right to control their private information. 2. Individuals control their private information through privacy rules.  3. When others are told or given access to another’s private information, they also become owners of that information. 4. Co-owners of private information need to negotiate mutually agreed-upon privacy rules about how this info can and will be used. 5. When co-owners don’t effectively negotiate and follow the rules, boundary turbulence is the likely outcome. Boundary turbulence When co-owners of info feel that their mutually agreed upon rules have been violated, they lose trust in the co-owners of that information. ○ E.g. telling others your friend’s secret, private information being leaked about yourself to the public Motivated to reduce turbulence by re-establishing rules and coordinating boundaries Not always bad–can lead to stronger and improved relationships & cause individuals to critically think about the information they are communicating to others. Social Media and Privacy Psychological intimacy lulls SM users into a false sense of informational privacy. ○ Think: What type of info do we post online? Sometimes they are very personal and we are not thinking about how accessible this information is and how quickly it can spread to other people. Offline environments Social media Only thinking about those directly Self-disclosing to the “imagined audience” involved/physically present (typically a few (assume: others will not see this info, those individuals or small group) not salient in our minds when constructing this communication) SM is a “store-and-forward” technology, which captures, retains, and transmits info that users enter into the platform–others can access and use this information. ○ Think: Affordances of publicness, persistence, replicability, and searchability. SM threatens all 4 states of privacy Anonymity (freedom from public Never completely anonymous on SM identification) (E.g. IP addresses, geolocation, usernames, photos, Solitude (separation from others) having to put your email when you make an account) Self-disclosures happen on platforms with many other users, and are not free from the prying eyes of others. Reserve (limiting amt of public info Even if you choose to limit the info on SM, available) others can and will post info about you without your consent.  (E.g. Uploading photos from a party, storytelling, tagged pictures) Intimacy (secluding to a small group No absolute assurance that communication of people) with others is confidential. (E.g. SM platforms can collect and use your data for marketing/influence purposes–think: narrowcasting, changing public sentiment about politics) Digital footprint CareerBuilder Survey (2018): ~70% of employers check out applicants’ SM profiles as part of their screening process ○ 54% have rejected applicants because of what they have found ○ Less likely to examine LinkedIn (highly curated) than Instagram (more authentic) (Vozza, 2018) ○ Recruiters can discover information they aren’t allowed to ask during an interview (race, disabilities, pregnancy status, sexual orientation, political and religious views) College admissions committees scrutinise applicant’s SM profiles & have even revoked admittance bc of content (Singer, 2013) Ethical and legal concerns arise Privacy management strategies Despite the difficulties in managing privacy, we will still choose to use SM. Tradeoff between less privacy for SM benefits (nothing is free!!) ○ More social interaction, or even $$$ (influencer marketing) Scrubbing Self-censorship; simplest and easiest strat. Typically occurs when people enter a new context/stage of life. (Network ties not previously on SM have now joined and might be able to access certain types of info) Identity safety: Posted info can contribute to identity theft or allow someone to stalk a profile owner (self-protection) Relational triggers ○ Removing info regarding former relational partners ○ Removing info to avoid conflict ○ Fear of legal or disciplinary actions (e.g. negative posts about one’s place of employment–threatening or libelous content) Compartmentalisation Creating multiple online personas and performing a different identity for different groups. (e.g. multiple X/Twitter accounts–professional, personal, humorous) (e.g. private accounts)  “Anonymous” self-presentations; pseudonyms (e.g. “Finstas” or fake IG accounts to select followers However: Never fully anonymous as we can still be tracked (e.g. email, geotags, IP addresses–violates the terms & conditions of some platforms) Conversant privacy Practice of asking others in your social network to change their practices posted content or communication habits on SM (e.g. remove photos, make specific elements private, ask permission before posting) More of a preventive measure (Think: Persistent and replicability issues) Assuming Assume the risk of online disclosures; understanding that vulnerabilities disclosures can never fully be private or deciding that giving up privacy is worth some of the benefits of using SM platforms. Some make careers out of this (e.g. SM influencers, YouTubers, family vloggers, KUWTK) Alternative platforms Utilising platforms that emphasise the importance of information privacy However: Hard for new technologies to become mainstream (and who wants to use these applications if their social networks are not there?) E.g. Vero, the “authentic” social network ○ Photo & link sharing service with “simple & effective” privacy controls. Promised no advertisements, enhanced privacy, no algorithms ○ How can they earn money to maintain the app without selling something?  Entertainment Using social media platforms for fun, relaxation, escaping reality through games, trends, memes, videos to pass time. Traditionally, entertainment was consumed through TV, radio, cinema. Entertainment has changed in two ways: 1. Interactivity: Interact with others through SM, and exert a wide range of influences. a. E.g. video essay reviews, comment sections discussing and sharing – seeking opinions when deciding what content to enjoy. 2. Consumer choice: Users can choose what entertainment as compared to other types of content a. SM algorithms affect what users are recommended. S.M. Algorithms Gather user data to understand people’s habits and interests and provide content that users will want to see. Goal: Fulfil an individual’s need for entertainment, among others. Push content that brings joy to user ○ Entertainment content usually aimed at providing pleasurable experiences. ○ News and politics not very emphasised by algorithms (likely because they are upsetting) – algorithms leaning to push entertainment more. Complex relationship between user and algorithms Data trains algorithms, but algorithms are also responsible for pushing certain content (determining what we interact with on SM) ○ Creating a feedback loop: consuming content leads algorithms recommending similar content + algorithms influence users to desire similar content. ○ Leading to echo chambers existing on SM–users pushed content that reinforces their existing beliefs. Escapism “A behaviour employed to distract oneself from real life problems” Entertainment consumed on SM for escaping reality (providing diversions, relieving stress and boredom, social escapism) **Note: Regardless of valence, both forms of escapism have both benefits and drawbacks. Positive escapism Exploring new content which allows users to experience new things Negative escapism Trying to avoid discomfort or pain, using SM as a way to forget real life issues Excessive use → isolation from real world Effects of escapism through SM Addiction and problematic use: Overdependence on SM for escaping reality, ignoring real-life problems Unrealistic expectations: Social comparison (esp. upward social comparison) – due to the type of content on social media (e.g. vlogs encourage that upward social comparison to the highlights of others’ lives) Stress relief ○ Coping mechanism; regulating negative and distressing feelings (e.g. emotional venting) ○ Enjoyable entertainment → positive emotions via emotional contagion Social support ○ Being a part of online communities (e.g. fanbases) → social support from like-minded individuals ○ Kwon et al. (2013): Use of FB social relations had a significant and positive link to bridging social capital (weak ties). However, there is a significant negative link between using FB for escapism and bonding social capital (strong ties): Linking you more with new connections but not facilitating the development of deeper connections. Information seeking 1. Staying updated on current events or popular topics (X finding popular places to eat) 2. Fun to consume, making serious issues more palatable. 3. Helps inform others that are in our network: SM allows users to share what they have watched with their social networks. a. “I am up to date”/ “I am similar to you, we watch the same things!” → highlighting similarity → social support Social currency We often share things online for social currency (social capital) ○ Emotional support, financial support, informational support, etc. Sharing videos/memes can facilitate relationship-building and maintenance ○ Responses can stimulate “similarity” if individuals respond in kind ○ Similarity can lead to increased closeness and liking ○ Hyperpersonal model: Idealising message and senders, over attribution of similarity Humour (a type of entertainment content) “Communicative activity with positive emotional reactions by perceivers” (Martin et al., 2013) Four types of humour that vary in valence and target. Entertainment content is often fun to consume, making serious issues more palatable (e.g. satirical humour about a societal issue–SNL). Research: Humour is vital in maintaining one’s physical and psychological well-being (Martin, 2001) Positive humour (e.g. affiliative & self-enhancing): Effective in down-regulating negative & up-regulating positive emotions. Negative humour (e.g. aggressive & self-deprecating): Not as effective when dealing with emotions (Crawford & Caltabiano, 2011) Affiliative: Jokes that everyone will think is funny, to bring people together (e.g. puns) Self-enhancing: Jokes about yourself in a good-natured way Aggressive humour: Targeting others, put-downs or insults to others Self-deprecating: Targeting self, weakness Found on 1. Short-form video content: Quick, punchy videos that don’t require too much of our attention span. a. Trends and challenges (Humourous component, like using popular sounds in funny ways) 2. Long-form video content: Lengthier content, allows for greater storytelling (e.g. YouTube videos, Music videos) 3. Memes  a. Offline: i. Previously a biological term describing genetic replication ii. Now: Units of culture that spreads from person to person by means of copying or imitation (e.g. nursery rhymes, jokes, catchphrases, fashion trends) b. Online: An image or video (gifs) with captions that are rapidly spread by internet users with shared experiences. i. Altered from the original source to convey new content or ideas (typically humorous social commentaries). c. Memes and depression – Are depressive memes beneficial or harmful to depressed individuals i. Symptoms of depression are highly prevalent, affecting roughly 27% of the general population. ii. Akram et al. (2020): People with depressive symptoms oftentimes exhibit 1. Sustained negative affect, absence of positive affect 2. Cognitive deficits (e.g. impaired memory & executive control) 3. Behavioural deficits (e.g. social and interpersonal function) 4. Difficulties in emotion regulation iii. Studied: Compared individuals with depressive symptoms v.s. those with non-depressive symptoms on how they processed memes iv. Results: Depressed individuals rated depressive memes are humorous, relatable, shareable, greater potential to improve one’s mood. Depressed individuals–more benefits with a negative style of humour, humorous take on serious topics and provide a perception of “peer support” through affiliation with others experiencing similar symptoms. Humour works due to relatability 1. Shared cultural references: → relatable a. Used as a coping strategy b. E.g. self-deprecating humour makes fun of tough situations that others face too 2. Participatory in nature: anyone can create entertaining content on SM; through built-in tools in platforms. a. E.g. Anyone can make their own versions of challenge videos Parasocial relationships (entertainment aspect of it) Enhanced on social media through: 1. The potential for direct interaction with celebrities and content creators. (No direct interaction needs to be have for parasocial relationships to be formed) 2. Content creators are seen as more authentic, and more relatable 3. SM allows for the curation of personas – Creators can create personas that show their ideal selves a. Content or persona that is entertaining to viewers Combination of these three factors makes people more willing to be emotionally invested in their content. Impacts 1. Escapism: Viewers can immerse themselves in a creator’s world while on SM (e.g. storytime content) 2. Creates a sense of belonging and community: Tight-knit group a. Loneliness negatively correlated with perceived social support (more likely to find a community online) 3. Users getting too comfortable with celebrities and creators Storytelling SM platforms allow for digital storytelling 1. Wider variety of stories on SM a. Narratives no longer bound by professional writers or filmmakers b. Creators can present more relatable stories, like talking about their everyday lives (e.g. vlogs) 2. Content creators can present narratives in an entertaining manner a. SM platforms are often visual-based (e.g. TikTok and YouTube, the main component is visual) 3. SM allows for interactivity in storytelling a. Viewers can give feedback to creators about their narratives (e.g. leaving comments, responding to polls) Why do creators (and users) engage in storytelling on SM? Acceptance and attention–engaging stories are more likely to get engagement ○ Thus potentially earning more money. Regular users potentially gain more social support. Virality (Online communication context) Content that is extremely widespread. About the spread of the information or post, not about it being liked Virality =/= popularity. Think: Scalability affordance of social media Algorithms make things go viral on SM Think: Engagement prediction–the algorithm determines if the content is “engaging” and pushes it to a larger audience. E.g. FB uses a weighted avg. of likes, reactions, reshares, and comments. YouTube uses Watch Time. TikTok uses Likes, Shares, Follows, and What you watch.  However, virality is unpredictable. Only a small fraction of posts ever go viral and a lot of factors dictate if a post goes viral. Evoking high levels of emotions More likely to get shared, regardless of valence. More likely to click on videos that are considered heartwarming, humorous, and anger-provoking. Emotional responses with high arousal indicate to algorithms that content is exciting to users and worth sharing. Users’ perspective: High arousal also pushes people to action (retweet or reshare a piece of content). ○ Emotional contagion: Convergence of one’s emotional state with the emotional states of those with whom one is observing or interacting Impacts of virality 1. Give people a voice, esp. those who are unable to speak up otherwise. (e.g. #MeToo movement) 2. Drive societal change or raise awareness (e.g. ALS ice bucket challenge, in the Russia-Ukraine war; Ukrainian content creators used SM as a tool for communication) 3. Deindividuation: a phenomenon where people lose their sense of self and identify with a particular group, thus engaging in behaviour one would not typically do alone. a. Spurred on by anonymity and conformity b. Can cause serious issues like cyberbullying, cancel culture, cyber stalking–all because individuals act upon their (shared) emotions. Exam 2 review Peripheral → temporary change in attitude/behaviour Click rates for targeted advertising is higher because of narrowcasting (maximising resources, audience seeing your ad is interested in your product) (higher cost is worth it) Medium credibility → visual content → emotional/transportation Reserve (the 4 ways of privacy): the act of limiting the amount of public information available, often by indicating to one’s social network what is acceptable to share and what is not. Haitian earthquake (2015): Increase in no. of messages about the earthquake, increase in financial donations Credibility is inherent in user perception (you) Protective action Network influences on perception of credibility: FB ‘friend’ high credibility = high message credibility = high source credibility (focusing on WHO SHARES the message)