Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Higgins states that once a false perception is established online, it's nearly impossible to change minds. His team rushes to inject verified information into the public discourse within hours of an event to counter inevitable disinformation and shape the conversation.

Related Insights

Instead of reactively debunking false narratives, brands can "pre-bunk" them by making verifiable information readily available to large language models. This proactive approach conditions the AI with the truth before a crisis, making it less susceptible to spreading misinformation.

The arrest of Nima Momeni, a tech professional known to Bob Lee, completely contradicted the dominant narrative of a random street crime. However, the initial, incorrect story shaped global perceptions of San Francisco, highlighting that facts struggle to undo the damage of viral misinformation.

The most dangerous spread of misinformation occurs on private channels like WhatsApp, often called "dark social." This content can go viral for hours before public-facing monitoring tools detect it, meaning by the time a brand reacts, significant reputational damage may already be done.

During the GameStop saga, Robinhood's factual explanation of a risk management decision was drowned out by the more compelling, false narrative of hedge fund collusion. This shows that in a crisis, a captivating story, true or not, will always beat dry facts in the court of public opinion.

Effective crisis communication requires pausing to understand the full situation before acting—"go slow to go fast." This prevents backtracking. During this pause, map out all stakeholders, including third-party voices like analysts and partners, who can help shape the market narrative alongside your own transparent messaging.

When facing intense public scrutiny, leaders must appear calm and measured, even if panicking internally. Afterwards, it is crucial to clarify your position quickly and concisely. This allows you to control the narrative and avoid creating a new, negative news cycle.

Initial reports during a crisis create a "fog of war" and are almost always inaccurate. Reacting immediately based on this faulty information leads to damaging mistakes. It is better to acknowledge the situation publicly, then pause to verify facts before issuing a full response.

During a crisis, transparency is more valuable than certainty. It's better to communicate early and often with the information you have, even if that means admitting you don't have all the answers. People value truthfulness, and saying "we don't know yet" is a valid and crucial update.

Effective social media teams can spot "the hordes forming at the social gate" and neutralize a controversy before it explodes. By having a pre-planned response and acting quickly, a brand can de-escalate a situation, making potentially major crises completely invisible to the public and press.

During a crisis, a simple, emotionally resonant narrative (e.g., "colluding with hedge funds") will always be more memorable and spread faster than a complex, technical explanation (e.g., "clearinghouse collateral requirements"). This highlights the profound asymmetry in crisis communications and narrative warfare.

Factual Narratives Must Be Established Within a 2-3 Hour Window During a Crisis | RiffOn