Deepfake and social, perceptions trump reality in new crises

Thirty seconds of silence to break the endless stream of shouted statements or cheering. This is the counter-current choice adopted by Calm, an American meditation app, during its updates on the recent US presidential consultations. At the peak of the polarisation of opinion for one of the most divisive election rounds ever, this platform chose to broadcast thirty seconds of absolute silence as an advertising message on the main American TV channels tuned in to the election outcome.

This is nothing new. Already in 2020 Calm had surprised everyone by broadcasting a video with the sound of rain over images of wet leaves on trees. An extended spot on YouTube: eight hours of video that reached 58 million views. A brilliant stunt that allowed it to climb the App Store charts, as TechCrunch pointed out. But for brands, a presence in the most sensitive political stages is to be handled with caution, even sipped. A caution that is reflected in the facts and stems from the need to stem potential reputational crises. Recent research by Forrester showed that 82% of big spenders on television campaigns avoided advertising in recent weeks and during the countdown.

A fear that shows a lack of courage or extreme lucidity? The answer lurks between the folds of budgets, as McKinsey has photographed. Boards of directors have called for an 8% reduction in marketing expenditure and up to 10-20%. Reducing it during tough times - and election times are tough - may hinder growth but is inevitable, writes Forbes in a piece with the emblematic title: how to master advertising in an election year.

Beyond elections, one fact is certain. Continuous exposure to social and platforms puts companies at risk of potential crises that are based more on perceptions than actions. It is sentiment that is to be measured. In the current crisis dynamic, it is no longer what is actually happening that counts, but what stakeholders believe is happening. "This shifts the axis from fact to perception to interpretation, which is formed within broad digital conversations and follows emotional and social rules and logic rather than rational and consequential ones. In the time marked by social, corporate crises have been genetically transformed: from being completely media-driven processes, triggered and fuelled by journalists, they have become the result of the collective interpretation of a fact. Social media bring something happening to the attention of a large number of people. These same people start talking about it digitally, expressing their own judgement. Crises today are broad conversations that reflect a negative collective interpretation of a fact, an emotional reaction. For the media, the news is not the fact that triggers the conversation, it is the conversation itself and the reaction of the public,' says Daniele Chieffi, lecturer in digital public relations theory and techniques at the Salesian University Institute of Venice and author of 'Reputational crises in the times of the Infosphere' for FrancoAngeli. At stake is an increasingly subtle difference between reality and perception. Nothing is as it seems any more. "People react, make choices, take positions on the basis of their beliefs. In this context it matters what the audience and stakeholders believe has happened because this guides their reactions and directly impacts companies, entities, personalities. You no longer need a serious fact, an incident, a scandal, to trigger a crisis. It is enough that one does not like what one does,' Chieffi points out.

But the risk increases with technological evolution that jeopardises reputational capital. Thus, crises evolve in the social tam-tam, fuelled by photos, videos and audio artfully created to distort reality. In 2024 alone, the postal police have already obscured more than 470 websites promoting investments generated with deepfakes, as Sole24Ore has already reported. Among these online scams, the most widespread was the one fraudulently using the image of Eni CEO Claudio Descalzi. According to Deloitte's estimates, in the United States alone, financial losses caused by deepfakes will rise from an estimated $12.3 billion last fiscal year to an estimated $40 billion by 2027. The World Economic Forum, in its report presented in Davos, highlighted disinformation as the number one danger to which institutions, companies and individuals are exposed. "Today, all crises are fuelled by Ai. Not the generative one, but the one that governs platforms, the famous algorithms. If these systems detect a growing interest in a topic, they will tend to propose it to more and more people, feeding the negative flow. All this will contribute to increasing the volume of the conversation to the point where it becomes relevant. This is why the best strategy for dealing with a crisis must be thought of before, i.e. when it is not there. Crises today have a mass psychological, emotional dimension: it is what is seen and the meaning that is given to it that drives them, not the information itself. Managing a crisis means acting on the perception of one's audience, putting in place everything necessary to transform a negative perception into a positive one. More than informing, you have to convince,' Chieffi concludes. From facts to interpretations, trying to keep calm. Yuval Noah Harari also writes: in a world flooded with information, lucidity is power.