Typhoon Calamity puts Social Media Dynamics to the Test
Facebook and Twitter have been used quite effectively during this typhoon crisis we’re having. These social media tools have clearly amplified the efforts to inform, alert, and respond more efficiently and rapidly than before.
But as Lilit Reyes writes about in his blog post, there has been a significant stream of inaccurate and misleading information along with truly credible and relevant tweets, posts, and status messages.
The danger, as he points out, is that the same powerfully viral effect of these tools makes it as equally efficient in spreading false information and outright hoaxes.
The Dynamics of Social Media
As I frequently point out, social media is founded on crowd based content (a.k.a. conversations). Furthermore, since it seems that social media is becoming a permanent part of 21st century society, it would be good to be aware of its dynamics.
1. Social Media is viral. The network effect makes it possible for information to reach a vast audience at a dizzying and uncontrollable velocity
2. The value and credibility of information is directly proportional to the source’s social influence (or Social Capital). One’s decision to post, re-post, tweet, and re-tweet is quickly determined by the audience based on who originally posted it plus the crowd’s prevailing mood, adrenaline, and basic common sense.
3. Conversely, one’s Social Capital improves or is diluted over time depending on the value of information you dish out. Obviously, a continuous flow of conversations is needed to establish Social Capital.
4. The responsibility to correct, clarify, and even debunk content lies with the crowd itself. Being viral, it either continuously propagates with value added along the way, or it burns out as its value diminishes and is no longer re-posted.
I’ve Got an Itchy Trigger Finger
With that in mind though, it would indeed be ideal to have the information verified before setting it loose.
In crisis situations however, the time one takes to evaluate before sharing is greatly reduced because of the sense of urgency.
Moreover, in Facebook, the tendency to automatically trust information occurs most of the time because of the nature of the network. My guess is that 80% of one’s immediate Facebook network is composed of friends deemed credible enough to believe.
At best though, the decision to propagate unverified information during such situations can only follow another rule, it is best to err on the side of caution.
