PR Attack: Reality and Paranoia
Bringing discredit upon public people, companies, branches (as it is being done both globally in terms of dangerous food and under conditions of the current trade war between Russia and Ukraine), cities, regions, and states by means of a purposeful information attack has been a traditional instrument in conflicts at various levels for ages.
Not always negativity in the information space is a definite sign of somebody’s evil scheming. In the majority of cases negative information appears naturally – as a result of words/actions and/or their interpretation.
Unfortunately, the conspiracy theory is so close to the world-view of elites (business, political, intellectual ones) that their conspiracy committed representatives are inclined to make a mountain out of a molehill. I would venture to suggest that the fact of being under cyber attack contributes to boosting many people’s self-rating: look how much THEY are afraid of me, these people say, “I am so very macho”. In reality it turns out to be not a fact but a creation of a very sick mind in the majority of cases. Or else people earnestly think that no traditional mass medium and no active blogger/“social network account holder” will not honestly react to downsizing, poor quality of goods or services, openly libelous or silly press releases. And will not consider a public person’s excessive enthusiasm about their personality to be tasteless showing-off.
That is why it is useful for all subjects working in PR and for all objects being promoted by PR to remember the rules how to identify an information attack.
1. One “toadstool” article in a printed or online medium or a TV and radio spot of the same kind does not mean you’re marked for death or being attacked.
2. The “toadstool” that has an objective basis is not necessarily a fruit of somebody’s ill will. It is a result of common (though rarely seen in our hard times) doing journalists’ job honestly. After all, imagine: there is something else left in the information space except denim.
3. “The negative” in mass media controlled by your natural enemies (your business competitors, political opponents, the hostile clan’s representatives) does not always testify that the attack started. Most often it is commonplace trolling, tickling your nerves, slow-moving hostilities. A kind of “gut check” – how the “target” will react, what steps the “target” will take. And a source of the customer’s vicious delight.
4. An attack seldom starts out of the blue like, “Let’s get Mr. X to roll today because I don’t like his face”. As a rule any structured PR rolling has a reason: either a real blunder committed by the victim or a combination of circumstances favourable for the aggressor – changes in the political situation or the market conditions.
5. An exception to the hypothesis of point 4 – the “target” behaves like a victim. If it is commonly known that any negative information in the media makes the victim go off into hysterics with smashing things, sacking PR experts on the staff, hitting the bottle or making a dope stopover, this person can be trolled even without a reason.
6. And now some alarm bells that testify: yes, you are in the crosshairs.
· The start of the attack on an August Friday night on the eve of a public holiday.
· Immediate spacing of the signal with the help of unscrupulous Internet media.
· Employing initially hostile media.
· A suspiciously orderly drama – an unnaturally prompt appearance of analytical materials based on blackmail, a chain of press events, too logical and structured in time, from the general to the specific or vice versa, a surprisingly close attention of the media to minor events.
· Active comments of unscrupulous experts.
· Attracting to the attack biased “VIP journalists” who specialize in investigations based on thick folders full of discrediting evidence against the target provided by their patrons.
· Etc.
I can go on with the list. But this is a column not a textbook. Let us discuss the logic of reacting to unappetizing things you can find about yourself in the information space.
First, keep calm. Bad PR is just an obituary. Ok, it is only for you (because you won’ read it), not for your descendants. The rest can be turned to your profit if you react correctly. That is why a fit of hysteria is a sign of your weakness and disconformity to the status of a public person.
Second, forewarned is forearmed. Have reputation risks auditing done, assess your potential aggressors’ “information weapons” arsenal – media resources, institutional resources, qualifications, experience and traditional methods of their PR team’s work.
Third, be a “hawk of peace” and keep your armoured train parked in the siding. That is, on the one part, you should have your own “information weapons” arsenal at hand. On the other part, from time to time you should conduct campaigns for enforcement of your potential aggressors to peace as nobody prevents you from informing the society about their antisocial behaviour from time to time.
And finally, one can ruin one’s reputation not only with negative information. One can praise a person or a company and other above-level bodies up till the society loses trust for them. One can post soviet-like, stand-offish and primitive odes to wisdom, kindness and fairness – the bigger, the more frequent and boring the better. A choir of “experts” can sing praises and hide a TV screen behind their lordly backs. Yet it will be known as elfing not trolling. Elves, they are mighty and kind, you see.
http://forbes.net.ua/woman/1356822-pr-ataka-realnost-i-paranojya