Kerstin Baker-Ash

The Medium's Message: How Bias Shapes Our Perceptions

I work in an industry where messaging is king of the universe; entire companies' marketing strategies hinge on getting out the right message to the right people at the right time. Consider post-holiday PPC ad copy from BMI Baby (an airline based in the UK). Their audience is largely made up of bargain hunters, so they play to that with compelling ad copy; their offer ends midnight tonight. It's not surprising that media news outlets pioneered the play to your audience model with a bias shaped collaboratively; Fox News appeals to people with a right-leaning persuasion, and people of a right-leaning persuasion flock to Fox News.

Certainly, my own bias informs how I view the world. While most of us would like to be considered open minded, it's difficult to extract your culture, nationality, religion and upbringing when adding perspective to any issue or project. When working in the travel vertical, I found that re-wiring my brain to say "car hire" instead of "car rental" took a bit longer than expected (thank goodness that didn't apply when I had to drive a car on the other side of the road, but that's another post). Of course, I have a uniquely Canadian need to tell anyone who will listen which actor in the movie is Canadian (answer: all the best ones), and I know that my North American-ness can ruffle some more proper British feathers from time to time. So that's a personal leaning, but when do major news outlets shelve bias or bring it out for all to see?

The situation in Israel and Gaza is hard to ignore. It is, with one exception (CCTV China), the leading story on every news channel I have access to in the United Kingdom. From channel to channel, the message differs significantly. Take Fox News as the first example. Generally perceived to be taking the side of Israel, Fox proclaims that Hamas militants have started firing fresh rockets into southern Israel:

France24 generally seems to be sympathetic towards Israel (I was surprised), with messaging that indicates Israel has strategically targeted Hamas' power base:

Moving a centimeter to the left, Sky News leads with a banner on UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon calling for an immediate ceasefire (although the correspondent was speaking live from Ashkelon):

Several times in the past, the BBC has been accused of rampant anti-Israel bias, often drawing fierce condemnation from other media outlets and journalism watch groups who have gone as far as accusing the BBC of a campaign to vilify Israel. Last night, while briefly mentioning verbally that Israeli action was a result of continued rocket fire into Gaza, the news ticker read that Israel was continuing its attacks on the Gaza Strip, suggesting to the casual channel surfer that there wasn't another side to the story:

On the far side of the pro/anti Israel bias, Al Jazeera was quick in its condemnation of Israeli military action by telling viewers that Israel was continuing its "assault" on Gaza for the third day in a row:

Of course, people don't expect pro-Israel reporting from Al Jazeera. They have sculpted their message for maximum audience outrage factor, and have fed their audience's pre-existing bias. Similarly, audiences don't expect Fox News to be pro-Gaza; they pander to a post-9/11 red, white and blue audience who generally vote Republican and are very tuned in to the perceived threat of terrorism. No news issue seems to polarize more than the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it's a good time to take a reading of the more centric news outlets and our own shaped bias from the news we choose to watch.

This post isn't supposed to be a criticism of Al Jazeera's anti-Israel bias nor is it praise for Fox's pro-Israel bias. It's more to enlighten us to the different ways things can be perceived depending on how our bias dictates our perception. It's something to consider when we shape our own messages, whether that be in business or in casual conversations or even across the blogosphere. I'm interested to see how much of our message is tailored to both medium and audience, and how we perceive to be perceived by the way we make our points.

Google Zeitgest 2008 - What Does it Mean?

So Google has published its 2008 Zeitgeist, letting us know what kinky things us netizens (time warp: 1998) have been searching for during the year. The interesting parts of the results weren't the terms that hit the top ten, but the terms that weren't on the top ten, especially in the UK.

First off, where's credit crunch? I stopped watching news reports more than once a week because I can't get away from the term, and yet it's not factored into the top ten results.  Maybe it's because we're bombarded with credit crunch this and financial markets that - we're sick of hearing about it and therefore don't search for it.  An interesting aside I found from the Times Online; the term credit crunch had been used in a report by the US Federal Reserve way before our time in 1967, so it's not one of those insta-hit catchphrases that a worried broker coined when subprime issues really started to become a problem. 

Of the top ten UK searches, I recognize 7.  Terms like BBC's iPlayer, the iPhone, and Barack Obama are hardly surprising results.  I have to admit that I've never heard of Friv, Cam4 and Jogos - although there's a reason I'm not linking to the latter two. It's worth noting that they're rising searches, and just like Sarah Palin might fall off the list for Google's 2009 Zeitgeist. 

iPhone fell one place from 2007, and only Facebook survived the year to still claim a spot in the 2008 list. What does that mean for social networking? It certainly doesn't signal doom and gloom, but I'd venture an opinion that it does signal the maturation of social networks (and following on from that, a hard audience to crack if you're creating a new social network - sorry, Hoff). 

If you get a chance, look back at some of the most popular search queries in years gone by. Five years ago, Prince Charles, Winnie the Pooh and Eastenders topped the popularity polls in the UK, while way back in 2001 (when the first Google Zeitgeist was released), search queries were naturally dominated by Nostradamus, the World Trade Center and anthrax.

There's nothing earth-shattering to be revealed in the Google Zeitgeist. It's meant to be a finger on the pulse of the world, and it's a pretty accurate one at that. Social networking, world events, entertainment and recipes for cupcakes and meatballs - pretty much sums up 2008, doesn't it?

An Interview from Mumbai

Mr Jan van Vriesland, Dutch Consul in Mumbai, was gracious enough to share his experiences and photos from the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Mumbai.  Below, he answers questions about security in the city, as well as his office's role in looking after citizens caught up in the attacks.

KBA: Generally, it would be great to get an idea of what your reality in Mumbai was on November 25th, and now on December 3rd.  Are there many changes to your daily routine because of increased security?

JV: Nothing much has changed, apart from extra security measures (police presence, blocked roads where we live etc.) our routine is pretty much the same as before the attacks.  

KBA: You live near to the Taj Hotel - were you aware of what was happening (i.e. could you hear/see anything) prior to seeing it on television or being called?  

JV: We heard shooting. Out of some naive curiosity I went to the Taj, nobody stopped me. There were some policemen there who did not seem aware of what was going on or what they could do about it. The first press reporters also arrived on the scene. When I was in front of the hotel two grenades went off to my left side and I could feel the pressure of the blasts. Little did I know that at the same time guests were gunned down in the lobby and restaurants as per reports I received later. I returned home and there followed a large explosion in the dome of the hotel after which the fires started. I later went back and at the time when evacuees came out of the hotel I tried to find Dutch guests who may have stayed in the Taj. There were no Dutch being evacuated at that time so I stayed on the square at the gateway of India practically the whole night. Security forces had by then already moved in; shooting and grenade blasts were going on until Saturday morning which we could hear at home. In the last stages of the siege, between 7 and 8 AM on Saturday it was as if all hell broke loose. After this followed unreal silence. 

KBA: NDTV have labelled the attacks "India's 9/11" - do you think the comparison fits?  

JV: The comparison in the number of casualties does not fit. But the attacks on Mumbai were as they were in New York: unexpected, unprecedented, brutal and merciless. The terrorists aim was to kill many, many more. These facts bear of course much resemblance with 9/11.  

KBA: Mumbai has a reputation as a city that never sleeps; it's been described as teeming with life and has a great party atmosphere.  Is there a sense in Mumbai that the city has been irrevocably changed?  

JV: I would not say that the city has irrevocably changed. Mumbai has a reputation of resiliance and is known to bounce back from any crisis, be it terrorist attacks (1993, 2006) or climate related (floods in 2005). Time must heal the wounds caused by 26/11 and it will be etched in people's minds for a long long time. It is our sincere hope that in time everything will come back to normal. 

KBA: I was sorry to hear that a Dutch man was killed in the attacks.  Could you describe generally what the consulate's role is when a citizen is killed abroad?  

JV: In many such cases we are required to identify the body after which it is released for repatriation. In this we are assisted by local undertakers who prepare the remains for transportation. In murdercases we then follow the investigation and trial of the accused. 

KBA: Have there been movements within the expatriate community to leave Mumbai or even India?  

JV: Not that I am aware of.  

KBA: Do you feel more "vulnerable" now than you did on the 25th of November? 

JV: Not really, there have been terrorist attacks before in India and in Mumbai, so we do not feel more vulnerable now. 

KBA: A week before the attacks, Al Jazeera ran a special about what it meant to live in Mumbai as a young person - they interviewed Muslims and Hindus alike, with Muslims going on the defensive because of the perceived hostility towards them.  Have you experienced or seen an increased sense of fear or distrust directed at the Muslim community in India since the attacks?  

JV: No, as far as I know the Muslim community in Mumbai has distanced itself immediately from these attacks; they have also refused to bury the remains of the 9 killed terrorists. I have seen many Muslim Indians at the Taj Mahal Hotel paying their respect to the victims.  

KBA: A week after the attacks started (and I apologize for the broad question) what's next for India? Are westerners less likely to travel there because of a fear of being targeted? Are governments less likely to invest in Indian businesses and trade because of the threat of terrorist attacks? 

JV: I think the number of visitors will be lower in the days and weeks to come but I also think they will return when time passes. This will also depend on which measures will be taken by the authorities to better safeguard the safety of the city's population and its visitors. The economy will also suffer, but it is expected that this also will have a temporary character.   

In the week since the terrorist attacks in Mumbai began, we've seen an unprecedented outpouring of grief from all corners of the world affected by the tragedy.  From the funeral of a rabbi and his wife killed in Mumbai's Chabad House to stories of heroism and strength in the face of unbelievable danger, the world has given its support and sympathy to India and condemned the attacks almost universally. A big dank u wel to Mr van Vriesland for his candor, and for sharing his experiences during a difficult time.

My Latté Just Got Cheaper

I treated myself to a nice big second latté tonight, and it cost me £0.04 less than it did this morning.  Why?  Caffé Nero figured out how to fix the tills, making me a somewhat sarcastic happy camper.  They aren't changing the boards though, as changing them would basically force them to charge an extra 2.5% just to announce the price of a large latté as £2.21 instead of £2.25. Wonderful.

I'm going to accumulate my 4p savings until the end of the reduction period in January 2010. Any suggestions on what should I spend it on?

Guess What? I Didn't Save £0.05 This Morning

I was psyched this morning, thinking that all the work the government did to save me some money during these tough economic times was finally going to pay off.  I was going to be £0.05 closer to my goal of saving £12 over thirteen months from my morning latté tradition.  Sadly, I've not got an extra five pence in my pocket today.

What happened?  You see, businesses couldn't cope with change as quick as the government wanted it. On top of that, many businesses aren't changing their prices.  That's right, folks.  You've in effect had a 2.5% price increase, courtesy of Her Majesty's Government.  Unicom did a survey of 308 small businesses in the UK, and just over a quarter of them said that they were going to pass on the VAT rate reduction. The cherry on top of that lovely price raise sundae?  Businesses which are signed up to a VAT scheme under HM Government's small business "outreach" are now keeping a lower proportion of VAT revenues.

I love the quote from Mr Peter Hounsom on the BBC website, summing up what this VAT reduction is quite nicely; "it's vote manure".

Social Media and Tragedy: Hysteria, Hype or Helpful?

I want to begin this post by offering my heartfelt sympathy and thoughts to those affected by the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India.  There are no words, there is no fix-it phrase or mantra.

I try to engage in social media.  I have accounts across the spectrum; Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and a heckuva lot more.  When an earthquake hit Sichuan Province in China, the Twitterverse erupted in a steady stream of information sharing and updates from those in the affected areas.  Last night, I rather accidentally read the first of many updates from Jason Calacanis about news of a terrorist attack in Mumbai.  Other news began to trickle in, and I flicked between the Beeb, CNN and Al Jazeera at home to get updates.  At one point, CNN told its viewers to check Twitter out for latest news and updates.

Okay, so has Twitter (and the wider social media universe) been helpful?  While some of the news coming out of Mumbai has been helpful - Aditya Sengupta being particularly helpful by updating maps and the list of injured and deceased as well as an aggregated feed of information from the aptly named account MumbaiAttacks - a lot of it seems to be hysterical chatter and bandwagon jumping.  How much of it is genuinely useful to you?  I can't say that much of it is to me.

For breaking news, Twitter is great.  It's the first place I heard about the Mumbai attacks, the Sichuan earthquake.  URL-shortening links from CNN or any other media outlet and tweeting it seems to be clogging the feeds of a lot of people today. The platform is designed for rapid-fire response, but I would venture a theory: the people who are then made aware of the situation are going to get their news elsewhere.  They're going to read the viewpoint that's important and relevant to them (i.e. Canadians wanting updates on the status of fellow Canadians might go to the Toronto Star, people wanting updates on the Chabad House attacked by the terrorists might go to VosIzNeias, and British people might go to the BBC).  The information on those sites, as much as we love to use hashtags, is far more organized and readable than a random mashup of TinyURLs and advice to stop Tweeting updates because the terrorists might be watching.

The Telegraph breathlessly announced that last night, the social media came of age.  Wait a second.  Did someone not say this about the earthquake in Sichuan, the cyclone in Myanmar or the arrest of an American in Cairo?  It's a great medium and feel free to call me old school here, but let's take a breath.  While print newspapers might be taking a last, raspy gasp of air, traditional media outlets are alive and kicking.  They integrate social media, alongside real, trained journalists (okay, maybe Faux News doesn't count here).  I'll eat my shoe (and it's a big one) if social media overtakes television or the internet as the place where people get their updates - it's simply far too disorganised to become a viable option for the masses.

Maybe it's time we stop thinking we're as important as we want to be or perceive we are in the social media sphere and give a thought to the people who are caught up in this tragedy of unimaginable proportions.  I'll venture a tweet here - please be with them, support them and help them as they deal with this attack.  It's happened, and I sure as goodness can't do anything about it from where I'm sitting.  Pray, meditate, contemplate, reflect.  Peace be with them.

VAT Reduction, E-Commerce and You

In an effort to stall or slow down the death spiral of consumer spending in the UK, Alistair Darling announced today in the government's Pre Budget report that Value Added Tax (VAT) would be reduced to 15% from 17.5%.  This means that from Monday, 1st December, that new 40" LCD television you want to buy is going to cost £538.29 instead of £549.99, saving you a credit crunch munching £11.70 you can apply to the case of cabernet sauvignon you intended to purchase for your office holiday party and the gas to ferry you to your kids' school pageants; the tax is actually increasing on tobacco, alcohol and petrol on the same day to make up for the loss.  If you're saying "huh?", you're not alone.  It seems like a very minor bandaid fix with major pain points for retailers and customers alike, not to mention the mad rush expected on petrol stations, liquor stores and tobacconists this weekend after payday.

What does it mean for retailers who operate e-commerce sites?  Firstly, VAT is already hard-coded into most e-commerce systems.  This means a major overhaul for only a 13 month period when this VAT reduction is valid (the kind folks in government are giving us a year plus a whole month to enjoy a £1.06 savings on that £49.99 pair of jeans).  VAT isn't applied to a lot of "raw" foods (i.e. meals that aren't pre-packaged/cooked/takeaway) or children's items (clothing, shoes, etc).  So the real "savings" are going to be for the bigger ticket items like TVs, furniture and holidays abroad.  My last little sarcastic dig: people aren't buying these things anyway, and a savings of £15 on a £600 holiday isn't going to be a make or break in the decision process.

The VAT rate change presents a huge problem for e-retailers come Monday morning.  With the team at Inside AdWords advising us how to prepare for Cyber Monday (which follows Black Friday, the day that you see news reports of people in Santa sweaters camping out at Wal-Mart after a hearty Thanksgiving meal in lawn chairs at 4 am waiting to bag Christmas bargains), we can expect an uplift in volume as people shop online for holiday presents.  Businesses are left to scramble and update their systems to the new VAT rate, and the same goes for online retail stores as much as it does for bricks-and-mortar high street shops.  Online businesses are now realizing that, in order to avoid stalling for the sake of a pound until next Monday, they're going to have to apply a 2.5% discount at the checkout right away. Currys and Body Shop were some of the first UK e-commerce sites to use this promotion tonight, and some enterprising PPC kids will doubtless use this in their ad copy come tomorrow morning.

What frustrates me is that the government has now created an artificial stagnation in sales (not just online) for the rest of November.  The Pre Budget report has snuck in a rise to petrol which hasn't gone down relative to the increase after the price of a barrel of oil tanked (pun intended).  Curiously, Darling has also included a sly whisky tax of 29p, which could hit Scotland's economy.  

Yes, the economy is in tatters.  Yes, decisive action needs to be taken in order for consumer confidence to increase.  The VAT rate decrease seems a ridiculously weak response to this, and something that is going to cause a bigger nightmare to retailers (who will doubtless raise prices by 2.5% in order to avoid temporarily changing their systems for a year).  I overheard people on my morning commute talking about how this rate change is going to represent a nightmare for them. At my favorite coffee shop this morning, the manager was already talking about spending the weekend at work changing the systems and price boards over to reflect the change.  Yes, I'm going to save a whopping five pence on my morning extra-shot latté, representing an overall savings of £12 (5p a day) for the entire 13 months this VAT reduction is valid for. For large and small businesses alike, this is going to be a headache of massive proportions.  For the average consumer, it's going to mean diddly squat.  It would be helpful if the government took a step back and thoughtfully addressed the problem, instead of creating a secondary mess out of the economic storm in the United Kingdom.  Oh well.  One can only hope...

Paddy Power - Need to Check Your Copy

I really try not to get worked up about things like this. Personal feelings are often best left out of business, but this is one of the first times when my personal feelings have clashed with a vertical within my industry, and I really feel like I need to blog about this.

Avram Grant is the manager of Chelsea FC, who played Manchester United last night during the Champions League final. Paddy Power are a betting company in Ireland, and like most other businesses who can't get past Google's rules on gambling, do a lot of e-mail marketing. The screengrab above is taken from their e-shot yesterday, and shows a photo of Grant under the title "Final Solution". At best, it's extremely tasteless and ignorant. Why post a photo of Grant, who has been the target of anti-Semitic attacks in the past, under a title which harkens back to Hitler's catchphrase about the systematic and complete destruction of the Jewish people?

Whatever your opinion about Grant and his coaching abilities (or personal feelings about Chelsea, I couldn't care less - I've never followed the football), it's definitely not okay to post photos about Avram Grant under Nazi-coined phrases.

Shame on you, Paddy Power. I'd encourage you to e-mail them and express your disgust about their choice of e-shots, too.