Introducing The New Rules of The Networked Age

This is an edited version of the speech I gave at the launch of MHP’s Guide to The Networked Age, a response to a world of growing polarisation and tribalism, developed with Dr Tali Sharot and her team at The Affective Brain Lab:

We are not here to wring our hands about The Networked Age. It is the age we live in. The world corporations, institutions and leaders operate in.

We need a response, not a sermon.

This is not about good versus evil. Although it is about people who think the world is like that.

Our world is driven by tribes of mostly good people, mostly doing what they believe is right, but who often believe the other side is mad or bad.

Scepticism protects us from corruption, but it also damages the trust civil society needs to function.

So we have spent the last year with the ABL working out what is, not what ought to be.

The Guide we have published today is a detailed description of what is happening and what communicators can do about it.

As we have heard, we all have innate psychological biases — they are impossible to overcome fully.

Biases are not just what other people suffer from.

In fact, the better educated you are, the better you are at using digital tech to reinforce what you already believe.

Viewpoint diversity provides the best protection against bias and groupthink.

But while digital technology gives us access to an infinite range of viewpoints, it is also encouraging us to sort ourselves into tribes, diminishing diversity and creating more volatile group dynamics.

This digitally-fuelled tribalism is changing everything and it is the key to navigating the Networked Age.

The Guide contains recommendations for how brands, organisations and leaders can adapt in fields ranging from Health to Capital Markets.

Most importantly, we have developed three universal New Rules of Influence.

They are things that many of us in this room already intuitively understand, but every day, communicators flout these rules to their cost.

At MHP, these rules shape how we look at challenges.

The first New Rule of Influence is…

Who you are is as important as what you do

To engage with the tribe, you must be part of the tribe.

Organisations and individuals must still ‘do the right thing’ but character, values and motivations are more important than ever before if you want a fair hearing.

That may mean fundamentally reforming who you are as a business:

• As Unilever has done with its Sustainable Living Plan
• As Novartis has set out to do by linking bonuses to ethical practices

Or it can mean signalling your values to align you with one tribe or another:

• Starbucks closed its stores for racial bias training to broad approval from its progressive fanbase
• While Greggs’ ‘Gregory & Gregory’ campaign did a great job of signalling to people who think hipsters try too hard

It can also mean picking an enemy. But it’s risky:

• Nike appears to have gambled correctly that standing against Trump is a net win for their brand
• LucasFilm decided to make villains of ‘basement dwelling manbabies’ and succeeded in tanking Star Wars when loyal fans rebelled
• Jeremy Corbyn’s 2018 conference speech was described by journalist Alastair Benn as being “full of emotive othering” of media and big business. Whether that will translate to the tribes beyond the hall remains to be seen

To pull it off, you really have to understand the tribes you want to be part of and avoid making assumptions.

Finally, this rule puts more pressure on leaders than ever before. Competence too is table stakes. Leaders must also embody the values of the organisation they represent.

• Uber’s reputation rebuild could not easily have happened had CEO Travis Kalanick remained in post — the culture he represented was too toxic for customers and stakeholders alike.
• Meanwhile, the fact that Deliveroo founder Will Shu still rides for the company has helped to dampen some of the furore surrounding their role in the gig economy and the terms they offer their employees
• And retailer BooHoo’s rapid ascent was hastened by the charisma of its CEO Carol Kane, whose personal journey chimed with the fast-fashion company’s challenger status

The second rule is…

Influencers and Passions spread ideas

It is no revelation that influencers have influence.

But there is an increasingly heated debate in our industry about who influences and how effective influencer marketing is. So there are some key points to make:

Firstly, it is the individual who matters most — whether journalists, celebrities or leaders. People follow people. Increasingly, this is where trust is held, as institutional authority has declined.

Organisations will become less relevant in terms of share of voice, while the company they keep will become more important.

Secondly, networks are not egalitarian. Conversations are dominated by the few, not the many.

The power law applies: The first most influential person in any conversation is disproportionately more influential than the second. Micro influencers still matter, but if scale is what you need, go big or go home.

This means Kendall Jenner and KSI can keep putting their prices up…

Thirdly, the most passionate and outspoken voices travel furthest and fastest.

Networks don’t reward moderates or nuance. Anger, joy, certainty. These are the qualities that move around networks. Facts without emotional narratives don’t get very far.

This is elevating strident and confident voices, often at the expense of accuracy.

And it means that formal corporate speak must go if you want to cut through.

Fourthly, we follow and engage with people like ourselves — or the people we aspire to be.

The evidence is in. The “experts” debate started by Gove back in 2016 has been settled.

Research by Tali and her team shows that given a choice between following someone with a proven track record or someone with similar views to our own, we tend to choose the latter.

The job for communicators is to put forward people who are expert and likeable to the audience they’re talking to.

Finally, in The Networked Age, we are all PR people now — sharing the things that we think make us look good.

When creating content, we must think about how it will make people look smart, cool or compassionate if they share it. How will it chime with the values of their tribe?

The third rule is…

Arguments are never won, outcomes are

This rule met the most resistance internally when we discussed them at MHP.

“But we DO win arguments!” They said. “It is our job!”

However much evidence we provided about the biases that prevent people from changing their minds, our colleagues wouldn’t accept it.

And thus, we proved rule three…

Of course, you can convince people with facts and reason.

But if they’ve already made up their minds to the contrary, you can’t tell people they’re wrong and expect them to change.

Motivated reasoning is an incredibly powerful force. When people are confronted by something that contradicts their world view, their first response is: Do I really have to believe this? And they will fight back.

And if you Google hard enough, you can find ‘evidence’ to support any position.

As psychologist Steven Pinker pointed out:

“People are embraced or condemned according to their beliefs, they have an incentive to hold beliefs that bring the greatest number of allies, protectors, or disciples, rather than beliefs that are most likely to be true.”

In other words, tribalism again. It suits us to believe the same things as our tribe.

But, the good news is that tribes do change their ideas all the time.

Perhaps the most pertinent example of how ideas can change within tribes even relates to The Networked Age itself.

In 2011, progressives were thrilled by the potential of digital technology to hold power to account, from the Occupy Movement to the Arab Spring. Ideas deserved to be free, and freedom of speech was the great disinfectant!

In 2018, this same tribe now believes social networks are empowering extremists and populists, that freedom of speech is a convenient cover for the alt-right and that ideas deserve to be deplatformed.

The values of the tribes didn’t change. Their worldview didn’t change. But the ideas changed wholesale.

In 2011, a communicator wanting to make the case for greater social media regulation, would have been better off working with progressives to curb fascism in the West than ringing alarm bells about destabilising the status quo.

So, communicators need to understand the values of the tribes they’re talking to and frame their case in ways that align with their worldview.

We must listen and identify areas of common ground. Friends influence each-other.

But perhaps the most important implication for communicators is to act before an idea becomes sacred to the tribe…

To make a case before the counter-argument has become accepted wisdom and dissenting voices are marginalised.

If you wait until an idea becomes an issue to be managed, you have already lost the argument.

Leaders must be brave, speak up and early — in other words, they must lead.