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.

BBC iPlayer FINALLY Available for Mac

The Beeb has finally, after 18 months, let us Mac users download Spooks, Heroes and Top Gear on their iPlayer. It's still in Beta, but they expect to release a real version in February 2009. Interestingly, the BBC have said that they're not developing their own content delivery system, but working closely with ISPs to move the market there.

Fat chance, given that most of us are stuck in 1905 (that's not a mistype - I mean 1905) with copper cabling for broadband. I tried to download Spooks on our Wii a couple of weeks ago, and it took 12 hours for a program that lasts just one hour. The quality was poor, and it was jerky and jumpy. It also doesn't have the high quality you'd expect from a "high quality" download; it's pixellated, not suitable for big screen televisions or those larger than about 30 inches to be honest. Not a huge incentive for us to use the iPlayer, but I look forward to the day that we get upgraded and are actually able to play YouTube videos longer than 3 minutes without crashing our broadband connection.

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?

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.

The Royalist in Me: I Want to be a Googler Today

So Her Majesty The Queen is visiting Google London today, and a video of HM's visit will be put up on the British Monarchy's official YouTube page at around 15.00 this afternoon. The Queen is also being honoured with her very own Google Doodle:

Note the "E" with the crown on top. Pretty neat, pretty geeky, and another nice way for the Royal Family to bring themselves into the 21st century. Since she's the Queen of Canada as well, I secretly (or not so secretly) wish I was a Googler today, if only for the brief glimpse. Yes, I'm sad.

I've been a wee bit busy lately, and haven't updated in ages. This is starting to become repetitive. I'll fix it soon, as well as upload some photos from my trip to Canada last week.

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.

Ye Olde Bandwagon

Okay, I'm jumping on the bandwagon and blogging about the blogging about Microsoft walking from the table.  Surely you're not surprised that in this industry, the bloggers are the ones all over it?  Since we're such an opinionated and vocal bunch of people as well, why are people suggesting that the chorus are just jumping on the bandwagon and diluting the "authority" of those who were laptop-ready when Steve posted his letter to Jerry?

I'm really looking forward to how this pans out.  Microsoft does have some pretty exciting things on the horizon - things that will endeavour to change how they present search to people.  So, what's next?  While Jerry Yang seems to have tried to make it as undesireable as possible, what has it achieved?  Autonomy from one company, but a move towards reliance on another company.  Lawsuits from shareholders?  Sure.  Although the initial bid opened up a reasonably sized can of worms, this new landscape, where Yahoo is snuggling up to Google and Microsoft will have to re-think their search strategy, is a colossal can of worms and will doubtless lead to a very interesting and volatile summer.

I'm excited - are you?