Inclusivity in the age of deception: avoiding the Scooby Doo trap

Scooby Doo fans always had one puzzling question. If it really was Mr Smith the Janitor, then how the hell did he fly through the sky, dematerialise and throw lightening bolts at Shaggy? When they pulled his mask off it was always a disappointment. How did one person orchestrate such a terrifying show? 

The internet and social media is much like this. What looks genuinely terrifying at first can be a Mr Smith somewhere armed with nothing more than a troll farm – a modern day Wizard of Oz. Because, it’s possible with technology and troll farms, to make yourself sound a lot more significant than you are. What looks like a pile-on or blow up can sometimes be orchestrated.

We know this because of the number of troll and bot farms operated in Russia. They take real census data and mobile numbers and mix up the names then register them. According to one estimate on TwiX, fewer than five per cent of the registered users are bots, but they account for up to 30 per cent of the content.

Most brands plugged into the internet now want inclusive messages to reflect the much larger addressable audiences they now serve. But there are those that may feel excluded by all the inclusiveness. If you’ve been the dominant group for years, and then other groups are elevated to the same status, there are some who just won’t like it. Whether this is a real or perceived grievance is moot. It’s these issues that troll farms will target.

What characterises these internet insurgencies is that they look at least like a large number of people. But in reality, they could be one disaffected person. It’s becoming increasingly hard to tell bot from not. A backlash against a brand can be started by a frighteningly small number of actual people.

It works like this: a majority hold a firm view. A minority decides to say something outrageous to that group. Because everyone lives in their own bubble, the majority react loudly. Thus, the minority view is amplified and others with that minority view are encouraged to come forward and say more outrageous things. And so we go round the loop. Of course, the media and social media companies have an interest in encouraging usage of their platform. Conflict sells popcorn.

Quite a few major brands have chosen to take a political side. These include the RSPB, JCB, Budweiser, Wetherspoons, etc. It may seem a good idea in the short-term. But, like everything, what goes up can also come down. Or go sideways.

The internet is not that interested in facts. It wants entertainment. It has no interest in validating truth (or restricting opinion, as it sees it). We’re now witnessing a load of new technologies which distort the truth to make the world look more exciting or completely different to reality. These include false news images, AI generated content, augmented reality and Dual Track video, where you get to choose the story you prefer. Even the humble iPhone photo app subtly confections reality, pretty much without you noticing.

It all leaves comms professionals with a dilemma. If our policy is diversity, how do we deal with divisiveness? Do I address what looks to be the loudest audience or what I know to be the largest one?

And this is where research is becoming essential on message development. You can’t always discount the outrage. Sometimes, it can be real. It’s just not enough anymore to think that something might be common sense or not controversial. We increasingly live in a bubble where what seems totally normal to one person might be outrageous to another. This is where imagination comes in. The modern professional needs to have the imagination (or the hinterland) to suspect when a message might suddenly backfire.

Making these calls is both an art and science. It needs technology but it also needs judgment. What’s clear is that we need to beware Scooby Doo syndrome.

They could easily get away with it if it wasn’t for us pesky kids.

 Chris Lewis is CEO and founder of Team Lewis.