The news that Oxford Dictionaries has declared ‘post-truth’ its 2016 international word of the year shows the impact it has had. But there is no reason why this cannot apply as much to business communications as it has to recent politics. Unchecked, it will become how we communicate all the time.
We can tell ‘post-truth’ through it appeals to emotion and personal belief which have a more powerful influence than the facts.
The danger, if it is one, is that all organisations like to use methods that have worked for others. The theory being that ‘if it has worked for them, it might work for me’. In the case of ‘post-truth’ that success is undoubted through political campaigns not least the EU referendum and in the US presidential elections.
It is not that the concept is new, politicians throughout the ages have been happy to appeal to emotion but ‘post-truth’ increasingly seems to fly directly in the face of evidence. Indeed, evidence that doesn’t fit is dismissed as ‘biased’ or ‘flawed’ rather than a reasoned argument taking place. Purveyors of ‘post-truth’ give their own evidence that cannot be backed-up. Critically, it the speed that the ‘post-truth’ is able to gather momentum and resonance through a changed media, especially social media, and cultural landscape has helped it rise in importance.
But a ‘post-truth’ approach has become more prominent because of what has happened before. People’s mistrust of politicians, business and the ‘mainstream’ media has increased. This isn’t a left / right issue but one of a lack of trust built up over many years.
So what have been some of the main ‘post-truth’ events?
- Stand by your stats – there was widespread criticism about some of the financial figures used in the EU referendum campaign, by both sides. However, it was the figure used by the Leave campaign about the amount paid by the UK into the EU that caused most controversy. Putting a figure on the side of a bus, promising the money would be spent on the NHS just compounded the ‘post-truth’ approach. Plus the bus used the NHS logo further trying to show that the number was real.
- It’s not just about information – there were constant cries for ‘facts’ during the referendum campaign but arguably the tactics that seemed to win more support for the Leave campaign were when they showed their passion and determination. They resonated with the issues being raised across the country and played on the fears surrounding them, particularly where it came to immigration. So the appeals were emotional as well as factual.Trump worked a similar approach. Listening to the fears and play those back at the electorate but with a simplistic solution. That fits with a ‘post-truth’ approach.
- The ability to display many-faces – not in a Game of Thrones style but there was a not a single version of Leave or a single version of Donald Trump that emerged during the campaigns. This both broadened their respective appeals and made it more difficult to pin down. They could be all things, to all people. Whilst this was a strength in the campaigns, and in helping them to win, it has the potential to be a major weakness where it comes to delivery as no-one really knows what Leave looks like or what Trump will actually do.
- The ‘bubble’ – the US has long been used to complaints about Washington insiders but the UK equivalent, the Westminster bubble, came to prominence in the EU referendum campaign. The bubble was used as a shorthand for politicians not understanding anything that goes on outside of Parliament and being detached from the lives of ordinary people. This also came through in complaints about Remain representing ‘the elite’ and ‘the establishment’.
- Don’t be afraid to be controversial – controversy is used to highlight an issue and show difference from the other side of the argument. That ties in the disruption, anti ‘political correctness’ of the elite. These controversial views then also help the media campaign. The views get you airtime. The media need controversies, outrage and something to help fill their airtime / column inches / home page. The views can cut through and, in effect, outweighs balance. Then add in a dose of social media and direct communications then Use the media, it gives them something to cover.
Unless challenged ‘post-truth’ will become accepted practice with evidence and experts being consigned to history.
