Dr Mohamed Kirat
By Dr Mohamed Kirat
Whether we like it or not, rumours are becoming part of our life, the life of organisations and the life of society as a whole. Rumours are part of the communication sphere surrounding each one of us.
What is a rumour? An unverified bit of information about something of importance to a group. It is like news in every way except that it is not verified. It may or may not be true. It may be spread by word-of-mouth, fax, electronic mail, Twitter, Facebook, or any other communication channel. It is often introduced by the phrase ‘‘I heard that”. Rumours arise and are believed when official information is lacking or is considered unreliable. The golden rule is that rumours spread in the absence of information. Rumours can be avoided if companies recognise the need to provide sufficient information as early as possible in the life of a disruptive event.
But to prevent rumours, it is helpful to first understand exactly what a rumour is. In “The Psychology of Rumor,” Allport and Postman define it as follows: “A rumor, as we shall use the term, is a specific (or topical) proposition for belief, passed along from person to person, usually by word of mouth, without secure standards of evidence being present. The implication in any rumour is always that some truth is being communicated. This implication holds even though the teller prefaces his tidbit with the warning, ‘It is only a rumor, but I heard…”. The most important element of this definition is that a rumour exists in the absence of secure standards of evidence but is taken by the recipient to be true. In the presence of secure standards of evidence, a rumour will not arise. For this reason we cannot always tell whether we are listening to fact or fantasy. When employees know what will happen next, what the worst case is likely to be or that the worst is in fact over, they are less likely to believe rumours or look for hidden meanings. In short, ambiguity provokes anxiety, and anxiety prompts rumours. Allport and Postman observe, “Unguided by objective evidence, most people will make their prediction in accordance with their subjective preference.” Conversely, absence of ambiguity reduces anxiety and in turn diminishes the strength of rumours. For crisis communicators, the challenge is to help clients and employers summon the courage to disclose the objective evidence that helps people move beyond their subjective preferences.
It is regrettably common for management teams in a crisis simply to dismiss the rumour mill’s significance or to insist that employees pay no attention to rumours. This is counterproductive. It is precisely when people are feeling vulnerable that they need reassurance. A challenge facing nearly every organisation in a crisis is the circulation of rumours that, unaddressed, can cause significant reputational harm — sometimes even more harm than the crisis itself. The best way to face a rumour is to provide stakeholders and the general public with news, information and details of the organisation’s activities and programmes. Rumours are particularly challenging because it is hard to figure out where a rumour started, how it is gaining momentum and where it might end. Once started, rumours can spread among employees, customers, suppliers, lenders, investors and regulators. Rumours can feed other rumours, and when they hit the media, they are formalised and seen as accurate renderings of reality.
If the rumour is about malfeasance or inappropriate activity, it commands a high level of credibility. Rumours arise from uncertainty, from the absence of context and concrete information by which those affected by a crisis may understand its significance.
Because crises are characteristically uncertain, rumours are a fact of life in crises. The good news is that preventive and remedial actions are possible, allowing professional communicators to minimise or even to stop the damage from rumours. Effectively preventing or controlling rumours requires an understanding of the psychological and sociological factors that drive people to listen to, pass along and believe rumours. One of the defining elements of rumours is that they are not static. As a rumour passes from person to person, it tends to change through processes that social psychologists call levelling, sharpening and assimilation.
Participants in rumour transmission have an investment both in the content of the rumour and in the status that transmitting the rumour conveys. In particular, some people see retelling a rumour as a status-enhancing activity. The French sociologist, Jean-Nöel Kapferer explains, “By taking others into his confidence and sharing a secret with them, the transmitter’s personal importance is magnified. He comes across as the holder of precious knowledge, a sort of front-runner scout — creating a favourable impression in the minds of those he informs.” As a rumour changes with each telling, there is a reason for each transmitter to modify, or assimilate, the details of the rumour in ways that increase his or her status. Indeed, rumours cannot continue without exaggeration. This process is called snowballing, where the rumour’s importance grows with each telling. Snowballing is the only way for a rumour to last. It is a necessary condition of rumour persistence.
How we deal with rumours? And how should they be handled? This is the big challenge that every organisation is facing today. There are several ways and strategies to handle rumours. Countering the lies with data to the contrary is often the quickest way to sever the association between the brand and the rumour. Before doing this, incontrovertible proof should be available. In some cases, telling consumers that a rumour is false can reinforce belief in the rumour; they remember the rumour but forget the disconfirming evidence. Given that denying a rumour can backfire by giving it even more life, consider remaining silent until the rumour dies of its own.
Remember, not all rumours mentioned on social media sites catch fire and spread. Instead of going into immediate denial mode every time negative whispers crop up, you can choose to monitor rumours closely on the Internet or elsewhere and decide which ones require intervention and which ones will simply wither on the vine.
Rumours are there to last. Whether we like them or not, they are part of our life. Companies and organisations of all kinds have to develop techniques and strategies to handle rumours on a daily basis and in a professional and systematic manner.
Kirat is a Professor of Public Relations and Mass Communication at the College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University.
By Dr Mohamed Kirat
Whether we like it or not, rumours are becoming part of our life, the life of organisations and the life of society as a whole. Rumours are part of the communication sphere surrounding each one of us.
What is a rumour? An unverified bit of information about something of importance to a group. It is like news in every way except that it is not verified. It may or may not be true. It may be spread by word-of-mouth, fax, electronic mail, Twitter, Facebook, or any other communication channel. It is often introduced by the phrase ‘‘I heard that”. Rumours arise and are believed when official information is lacking or is considered unreliable. The golden rule is that rumours spread in the absence of information. Rumours can be avoided if companies recognise the need to provide sufficient information as early as possible in the life of a disruptive event.
But to prevent rumours, it is helpful to first understand exactly what a rumour is. In “The Psychology of Rumor,” Allport and Postman define it as follows: “A rumor, as we shall use the term, is a specific (or topical) proposition for belief, passed along from person to person, usually by word of mouth, without secure standards of evidence being present. The implication in any rumour is always that some truth is being communicated. This implication holds even though the teller prefaces his tidbit with the warning, ‘It is only a rumor, but I heard…”. The most important element of this definition is that a rumour exists in the absence of secure standards of evidence but is taken by the recipient to be true. In the presence of secure standards of evidence, a rumour will not arise. For this reason we cannot always tell whether we are listening to fact or fantasy. When employees know what will happen next, what the worst case is likely to be or that the worst is in fact over, they are less likely to believe rumours or look for hidden meanings. In short, ambiguity provokes anxiety, and anxiety prompts rumours. Allport and Postman observe, “Unguided by objective evidence, most people will make their prediction in accordance with their subjective preference.” Conversely, absence of ambiguity reduces anxiety and in turn diminishes the strength of rumours. For crisis communicators, the challenge is to help clients and employers summon the courage to disclose the objective evidence that helps people move beyond their subjective preferences.
It is regrettably common for management teams in a crisis simply to dismiss the rumour mill’s significance or to insist that employees pay no attention to rumours. This is counterproductive. It is precisely when people are feeling vulnerable that they need reassurance. A challenge facing nearly every organisation in a crisis is the circulation of rumours that, unaddressed, can cause significant reputational harm — sometimes even more harm than the crisis itself. The best way to face a rumour is to provide stakeholders and the general public with news, information and details of the organisation’s activities and programmes. Rumours are particularly challenging because it is hard to figure out where a rumour started, how it is gaining momentum and where it might end. Once started, rumours can spread among employees, customers, suppliers, lenders, investors and regulators. Rumours can feed other rumours, and when they hit the media, they are formalised and seen as accurate renderings of reality.
If the rumour is about malfeasance or inappropriate activity, it commands a high level of credibility. Rumours arise from uncertainty, from the absence of context and concrete information by which those affected by a crisis may understand its significance.
Because crises are characteristically uncertain, rumours are a fact of life in crises. The good news is that preventive and remedial actions are possible, allowing professional communicators to minimise or even to stop the damage from rumours. Effectively preventing or controlling rumours requires an understanding of the psychological and sociological factors that drive people to listen to, pass along and believe rumours. One of the defining elements of rumours is that they are not static. As a rumour passes from person to person, it tends to change through processes that social psychologists call levelling, sharpening and assimilation.
Participants in rumour transmission have an investment both in the content of the rumour and in the status that transmitting the rumour conveys. In particular, some people see retelling a rumour as a status-enhancing activity. The French sociologist, Jean-Nöel Kapferer explains, “By taking others into his confidence and sharing a secret with them, the transmitter’s personal importance is magnified. He comes across as the holder of precious knowledge, a sort of front-runner scout — creating a favourable impression in the minds of those he informs.” As a rumour changes with each telling, there is a reason for each transmitter to modify, or assimilate, the details of the rumour in ways that increase his or her status. Indeed, rumours cannot continue without exaggeration. This process is called snowballing, where the rumour’s importance grows with each telling. Snowballing is the only way for a rumour to last. It is a necessary condition of rumour persistence.
How we deal with rumours? And how should they be handled? This is the big challenge that every organisation is facing today. There are several ways and strategies to handle rumours. Countering the lies with data to the contrary is often the quickest way to sever the association between the brand and the rumour. Before doing this, incontrovertible proof should be available. In some cases, telling consumers that a rumour is false can reinforce belief in the rumour; they remember the rumour but forget the disconfirming evidence. Given that denying a rumour can backfire by giving it even more life, consider remaining silent until the rumour dies of its own.
Remember, not all rumours mentioned on social media sites catch fire and spread. Instead of going into immediate denial mode every time negative whispers crop up, you can choose to monitor rumours closely on the Internet or elsewhere and decide which ones require intervention and which ones will simply wither on the vine.
Rumours are there to last. Whether we like them or not, they are part of our life. Companies and organisations of all kinds have to develop techniques and strategies to handle rumours on a daily basis and in a professional and systematic manner.
Kirat is a Professor of Public Relations and Mass Communication at the College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University.
