A Toolkit to Change Hearts and Minds

April 1, 2019

This manual tells the story of how activists and researchers in Nigeria, Cameroon, Zambia and Mozambique explored new ways to influence public opinion on sexual and gender diversities, with support from the UN and a support team from the South African organisation Singizi.

“This is a manual by activists for activists. As activists one of our main jobs is that of trying to persuade other people to see the world differently, to stop doing one thing, and start doing another. As sexual orientation and gender identity activists living and working in places where we are criminalised, where forming organizations is sometimes prohibited, and stigmatisation and descrimination is real and dangerous – that makes our job really hard.

We hope that this tool kit will help you to find new ways to do the work of persuading people to think about and act towards people with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions in a more open and understanding way. It will provide some ideas about how to go about doing that in even the most difficult places to work.”

Access the toolkit HERE

How to use digital storytelling to win over hearts and minds

March 25, 2019

Craig Dwyer, founder of ForaChange and Social Media Director for Yes Equality shares his learnings on unleashing the power of digital.

Original article on Actbuildchange.org

There has never been a better time for activists and organisations to harness the potential of campaigning in a digital world.

Your campaign or organisation may already have a presence on social media, but are you using it to its full potential? Are you taking advantage of all the options digital offers to help meet your aims and objectives?

Digital and social media play a crucial role in shaping public thought about campaigns and organisations working on progressive social change. It enables audiences to be become aware of, stay up-to-date and take action on behalf of your cause.

The 2018 Global NGO Online Technology Report found that 93 percent of global NGOs (non-government organisations) have a Facebook page, 77 percent are on Twitter and 50 percent are on Instagram. Yet only 32 percent have a written strategy.

Winning Over Hearts and Minds

Achieving the desired outcome for your campaign or cause will usually require winning over hearts and minds.

Digital and social media can be used to identify, collect and curate stories as part of your digital storytelling strategy. This involves changing the narrative and reframing how people perceive your campaign issue. Storytelling must be central to your digital strategy, as it lets us amplify our voices, reach more people and make human connections. This shapes public thought on your campaign and influence relevant stakeholders.

Stories not only empower the storyteller but can also inspire others to share their story. The cumulative effect of these stories, from different messengers to different audiences, will help create understanding and emotional resonance. Fundamentally they inspire people to take action.

Campaigns that can create a space which encourages supporters to tell their own stories – to describe, in their own words, what motivates them to support your cause will have a much greater impact and create more meaningful connections.

Research on how social pressure influences participation found that people are motivated by how others perceive them. If by taking action they are likely to be perceived as pro-social, fair and caring, people are more inclined to participate.

In 2017 I had the opportunity to work on the campaign for marriage equality in Australia. As part of our GOTV campaign, content was created to encourage Yes voters to take a selfie as they returned their surveys and to share it on social media with the hashtag #PostYourYES. The aim was to create a situation where other voters, seeing all their friends posting selfies, would want to take part.

Within hours, #PostYourYES was trending on Twitter, and over the coming days, this had a snowball effect: Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter flooded with images of Australians posting their Yes votes in mailboxes across the country.

Man and woman posting into a red letter box. Image, Craig Dwyer — #PostYourYES Image, Craig Dwyer

Successfully introducing an element of social pressure to your campaign can prompt supporters to create content that can be shared with peers and promotes your central message.

Changing the Narrative

How you frame your issue will also be crucial in helping change the narrative.

You can have different messages for different target audiences, but they should all sit within an overarching frame and narrative.

An effective frame will:

Articulate the issue in a compelling and authentic way
Appeal to people’s values
Show how things can improve
Outline what a person can do to help achieve that

#SaferFromHarm a joint campaign between Ana Liffey Drug Project and Humans of Dublin – aimed to raise awareness of the importance of introducing Supervised Injecting Facilities (SIFs) in Ireland, to reduce the harm from injecting drug use.

Much of the narrative around introducing SIFs was focused heavily on policies, procedures, and examining SIFs’ effectiveness internationally. We set out to change the narrative by putting a human face on the issue, telling the stories of people who would benefit from introducing SIFs into Irish society.

Across social media, we shared the stories of seven people who have been affected by drug use. including Brigid, who lost her daughter to addiction 12 years ago, and Aidan, who was living with an active addiction.

One thing they all had in common is that they believed introducing SIFs would ensure that drug users were #SaferFromHarm. The digital storytelling approach proved instrumental in achieving the objective of changing the narrative and reaching as many people as possible with key messages highlighting the importance of introducing SIFs.

Image of peoples faces — #SaferFromHarm Image, Craig Dwyer

Craig Dwyer is the founder of ForaChange, a free online resource for NGOs, campaigners and activists on designing and implementing effective digital strategies for progressive social change. He was the Social Media Director for Yes Equality during the 2015 marriage equality referendum in Ireland and he travelled to Australia in 2017 to work on their marriage equality campaign.

A Guide to Changing Someone Else’s Beliefs

March 14, 2019

Listen to this story

Changing minds is hard to do: When our most dearly held opinions — things like political convictions, religious beliefs, morals, and core principles — are challenged, our brains put up one hell of a fight to protect them. Research has shown that when deeply held beliefs are called into question, the amygdala, a part of the brain that processes emotions, kicks into high gear as if we were encountering danger, leaving us in no mood to consider a difference of opinion.

And yet people convincing other people to believe things is what makes the world go around. Whether you’re selling a product, angling for a promotion, or running for office, the odds are good that your job requires you to influence and persuade people in some capacity. And outside of work, many of our social relationships are built on shared beliefs: We often get along best with people who agree with us.

The same science that helps us understand how beliefs are formed can actually help us get better at changing them. The first thing you need to understand about persuasion, explains Robert Cialdini, author of Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, is that what you’re saying matters far less than who you are.

“Most of us think that the message and the merits of the message are the things that will convince people,” Cialdini says. “That’s usually not the case. Very often, it’s the relationship we have to the messenger. It’s not always about the argument, but about the delivery.”

This may seem like a no-brainer, but it’s much easier to influence people who are already close to you. This is in part because their brains are already primed for the right chemical reaction. Neuroscientist Paul Zak has spent most of his career researching oxytocin, a neurotransmitter associated with love, happiness, bonding, and — as Zak’s research has demonstrated — trust.

“It makes you more sensitive to social information,” he says. “I can more effectively persuade you if I flood your brain with oxytocin.” If you’re trying to convince a friend, family member, or partner of something, your odds are better if you soften them up with reminders of your closeness: Warm temperatures, eye contact, and touch all prompt the release of oxytocin. “Give them love, give them affection,” Zak says. “Tell them, ‘I really want to help you understand this thing.’”

Of course, you can’t just go around hugging everyone you need to sway to your point of view. But even for acquaintances and other loose ties, you can still use psychology to your advantage. Cialdini says that understanding a few universal principles of human behavior can help make you a master influencer.

“People want to give back to those who’ve given to them,” Cialdini says. “That’s the principle of reciprocity.” A 2002 study via Cornell University found that when restaurant servers brought customers a mint or candy along with their bill, tips went up almost three percent. If they added an additional mint to the tray, tips went up even more.

“If the server puts one mint on the tray and then turns and says, ‘You know what, you’ve been such great guests, here’s another mint,’ tips go up 20 percent,” Cialdini says. “The key is personalizing what you give; that can change people dramatically.”

“You can make the case that if an idea is unique, people will want it.”

But coaxing open someone’s mind isn’t as easy as just buying their affection. Instead, make them feel listened to. Pay attention to your friends and coworkers, and give gifts that are simple but meaningful. Learning someone’s coffee order and surprising them with a cup, for example, could have a much bigger effect on their willingness to listen than giving them a Starbucks gift card.

Another strategy: Use the rules of supply and demand to your advantage. The rarer something is, the more people want it, and the more they’re willing to pay for it. This same principle, Cialdini says, can apply to belief and influence.

“To some extent, you can make the case that if an idea is unique, people will want it,” he says. This might even offer an explanation for why some people are more susceptible to fake news or conspiracy theories or why they’ll cling to information that’s been resoundingly disproven. “They’re now in possession of a piece of information or knowledge that not everyone holds, and it sets them apart,” he says. “It explains why we’ll believe ridiculous things.”

The perception of scarcity becomes a more powerful incentive for people to get on board with your ideas “if you can make the case that unless we move now, the benefits of this cause or approach will be lost to us,” Cialdini says. “‘We have a limited time in which to elect people who are favorable to our side; we’ve got to move’ — that spurs people into action.”

If you’ve read this far, you’ve likely already experienced another principle of persuasion psychology: authority. Cialdini and Zak are published authors with advanced degrees — experts in their fields — so you’re likely more willing to accept what they have to say about the science of influence at face value.

“When people are given an expert’s position on, for instance, difficult economic problems, the areas of the brain associated with critical evaluation flatline,” Cialdini says. “If an expert says it, we don’t have to think about it.”

If you’re trying to influence someone’s opinion on a topic that you’re well-educated in, that’s a good time to brag about your resume. “Mention your background or experience or degrees,” Cialdini says. “If you can get people to believe you’re an expert and get them to see you as trustworthy, no one can beat you.”

That trustworthy part is key: You can be the most educated, qualified person around, but it won’t matter if people don’t trust you. To that end, Cialdini recommends a shortcut that may seem counterintuitive: “We’re trained to begin with our most compelling arguments — strongest ones first,” he says. “To establish trust and credibility, you should begin by describing the weaknesses in your case.” People might be taken aback, he explains, but they’ll like that you’re being straight with them. “Then, you show how the strengths overwhelm the weaknesses, and you win the day.”

You can also use a person’s history to your advantage — after all, no one is more persuasive to us than, well, us. Tailor your pitch to match things they’ve done or said in the past. (That might mean doing a bit of digging on a LinkedIn or Twitter feed — just don’t bring it up to them in a way that seems creepy or off-putting.)

“Align your recommendation with a statement of theirs,” Cialdini says. “Like, ‘I really appreciated what you wrote about equality and fairness. That’s why I’m asking you to move in the direction of greater diversity.” No one wants to be seen as going back on their word, so this tactic works especially well on social media. “The more public it is,” Cialdini says, “the more powerful that commitment to consistency.”

But one of the best strategies for changing someone’s beliefs is also the simplest: We’re far more easily influenced by people we like or have things in common with. Again, this is where an internet search can be your friend: If you find commonalities or shared hobbies with someone, it can be helpful to mention them before you launch into a sales pitch. Even if it’s as basic as rooting for the same sports team or binging the same Netflix show, you’ve established a common bond.

You can also try genuine compliments. “Not only do people like those who are like them; they like people who like them and say so,” Cialdini says. “If it’s a phony compliment, people will see though it, so wait until you find something you really like about what a person said in a meeting, a position they took that you agree with, or a good job they did on a task and then tell them so.”

You don’t need to employ every one of these tactics every time you’re working to persuade someone. Sometimes, just one strategy fits the bill; other times, a situation might require a combination of persuasion methods. But the most important thing to remember when it comes to changing beliefs is that the facts are sort of secondary: The human element is what matters. “The mistake people make is using logic. For normal humans, data and evidence isn’t the way to change a mind,” Zak says. “We’re social creatures, and we’re fascinated by other humans. It’s not about the story. It’s about the storyteller.”

WRITTEN BY

Kate Morgan

Kate is a freelance journalist who’s been published by Popular Science, The Washington Post, USA Today, Slate, and many more. Read more at bykatemorgan.com.

Old and New Power – Distributed action in modern times

March 13, 2019

NEW POWER

How Power Works in Our Hyperconnected World—and How to Make It Work for You

by Jeremy Heimans & Henry Timms

Heimans, CEO of Purpose, which “builds and supports social movements,” and Timms, executive director of the 92nd Street Y, debut with an illuminating discussion of how technology and our rising expectations have enabled us to achieve our goals on a greater-than-ever scale. Old power, write the authors, depends on expertise and what you own or control, as in Fortune 500 companies. New power relies on connectivity and the desire to participate and collaborate, as in Uber, Airbnb, and Facebook (as well as protest movements like Occupy and Black Lives Matter and terrorist groups like the Islamic State).

Using online engagement, crowdsourcing, and peer-to-peer approaches, new power offers a fresh means of participation and a “heightened sense of agency” for all involved. The authors detail how power—old, new, or a combination of both—is now exercised by people, companies, and movements to quietly shape our lives in impactful ways.

Old power has the top-down voice of a corporate press release; new power soars through “meme drops,” which “spread sideways, coming most alive when remixed, shared, and customized by peer communities”—e.g., in the ice bucket challenge and Pepe the Frog.

Old power thinks of what makes an idea stick in people’s memories and imagination. New power wonders what makes an idea spread. To determine what makes an idea spread, the authors propose the acronym ACE:

Actionnable: the idea needs to have a clear call to action, something that can be done by anyone.

Connected: the action needs to connect you to others

Extensible: people need to be able to customize the action, to make it fit their own formet

It is often in this last dimension that most so-called “participatory” actions fail.

The impact of these thoughts on SOGI campaigning is immense:

In a world where people distrust institutionalised power more and more, established organisations and movements find it increasingly difficult to mobilise. Most major recent mobilisations, from #MeeToo to the Climate marches have been generated outside of movements.

Moreover, basic messenger theory tells us that people don’t trust sources which they feel have a vested interest in an issue. This bias to put more trust in close social circles has increased lately, with social apps like Yelp even specialising in channelling opinions. So mobilisation from “within” is increasingly un-strategic.

So it seems that organisations would have everything to gain from moving away from models of old power, and many organisations have

Yet, most of LGBTI+ organisations rely on a MODEL of new power but still remain within the VALUES of old power. In other words, organisations want everybody to participate but cling on to their monopoly on the content. The increasing complexity of the issues of sexuality and gender doesn’t make distributing the discourse easier: in a post-gender, non-binary, intersectional world, the gap between “politellectuals” (those with the intellectual capacity to draw the political concepts) and the “crowd” deepens, making meaningful participation more difficult across the divide.

Fake news, real damage – How fake news been has used against LGBT people

February 22, 2019

Think about the first time you heard the term ‘fake news’ – most likely it was uttered by Donald Trump, during his run for President in 2016. But although the term was new to most people even two years ago, the concept is painfully familiar to the LGBT community; after all, many grew up hearing nasty, whispered rumours from schoolmates, or reading lies about LGBT issues in the media every time LGBT rights were ‘debated’.

But fake news – or disinformation – is now on the rise, super-charged by social media and weaponised by authoritarian leaders and the far right worldwide. And unfortunately, it’s starting to become clear that the LGBT community – along with other minority groups – are one of the main targets. Now more than ever, we need to know why and for what purpose.

The disappointing result of Taiwan’s recent equal marriage referendum shows how – first and foremost – fake news is used to undermine the fight for LGBT rights. This has always been the case of course. Whenever progress tries to take a step forward, there are those whose aim is to spread lies about the LGBT community. They would be laughable if they weren’t so damaging.

Take the recent Romanian referendum to try and band same-sex marriage: campaign posters and ads urged people to vote “Yes” otherwise gay couples would steal their children.

Even when progress is made, and seemingly secured, fake news continues – perpetrated by those who want to roll back equality, which is rarely a one way street.

But while attacks on LGBT people are often the means and end to fake news stories, in more and more cases they are a proxy in a broader struggle to drive polarisation and stoke fears about progressive politics. LGBT people are cast as scapegoats, to try and build support for the far right or authoritarian leaders.

Just look at the recent Brazilian election, which saw a far-right former military officer win the Presidency. Fake news, spread through WhatsApp in particular, played a major role in the outcome. And one of the main stories spread by Bolsonaro’s side, was that his opponent had ordered the distribution of “gay kits” to schoolchildren to turn them homosexual. This was a reference to an actual proposal by Haddad’s Workers’ Party to launch a “Brazil without homophobia” programme in schools, part of which involved distributing anti-discrimination materials to teachers.

If we are now living in the age of populism, unfortunately Brazil marks a worrying harbinger of what’s to come. We can expect more of this in national elections – and progressives need to prepare accordingly.

And we can expect more at an international level. Because increasingly, fake news about LGBT people is used by authoritarian regimes on the chessboard of international diplomacy. A pink curtain is descending across the world, dividing support for LGBT rights (and liberal democracy) on the one hand, and reactionary authoritarians like Putin and Erdogan on the other. They demonise homosexuality and portray it as symbolic of a corrupt, immoral West. Internationally therefore, fake news about LGBT people is used to fan anti-gay hatred and deploy it to undermine ideas of universal human rights, and build alliances that can push back against Western influence.

Fake news is not new. Nor are lies and misinformation against LGBT people. But that does not mean we are facing ‘business as usual’. Too often the LGBT community is the canary in the coalmine – often, it is LGBT people who suffer first when politics takes a new and dangerous turn. Now is no exception. Fake news is being weaponised, and LGBT people are directly in the firing line.

Fight back ! Why LGBTI organisations have to join the fight against fake news

February 22, 2019

Last year, posters appeared across Oregon ‘promoting’ Central Oregon Pride. Featuring a well-known drag performer, 10-year-old Desmond Napoles, the posters claimed that the pride event was sponsored by the North American Man/Love Boy Association. It was of course disinformation. A targeted campaign to try and link pride and sexual predators who prey on children.

2018 saw a rise in fake news never seen before. It was massively used by all forms of conservative or populist branches: from Conservative Christians trying to spread the rumor that a new movie would depict Jesus and his disciples as gay lovers, to Brazil’s Bolsonaro intoxicating the electoral debate with claims of a “gay kit” promoted by his opponent that would aim to turn children gay.

Fake news is not a new issue for LGBT+ people or the charities and campaigns who represent them. What’s new is the scale of the problem. Social media has supercharged disinformation; groups and governments opposed to LGBT rights can now create and share fake news with just a few clicks of a mouse. That poses a real threat. But what can charities, campaigns and activists do?

First and foremost, there’s a need for direct action. As the case of Oregon Pride shows, fake news is a very real risk for organisations. Imagine if vigilantes had seen those posters and taken matters into their own hands. Moreover, these sort of attacks undermine and weaken charities, delegitimise their activities and hurt the cause they fight for.

As such, tackling fake news now needs to be seen as a core communication issue. The right strategies, skills and tools are needed.

The obvious response to fake news is to fight it head on. But be warned – it’s important to recognise the goal of those who spread lies and disinformation. In the case of Oregon Pride and other disinformation campaigns like it, the goal was to portray the idea that LGBTQ+ people are having an internal debate over including sexual predators into the queer rainbow. Denying it would mean walking right into the trap, because there is no debate.

Research has shown if a lie needs to be repeated, it’s best to limit it’s description. Because rehashing lies to debunk them can make them more ‘sticky’. Instead, giving audiences new and credible information is more effective at undermining misinformation.

Also, its important to consider the medium of any response. Video can be highly effective in correcting misinformation, a recent study found. Fact-checking videos seem to increase attention and reduce confusion compared to text or written rebuttals.

However, LGBT+ charities, campaigns and activists can only do so much alone. Resources in the sector are often tight. And importantly, a disinformation campaign against just one LGBT+ organisation can cause collateral damage to the wider community. Indeed this is often the aim – to slowly build a broader negative narrative about the queer community through a drip-drip of individual stories and memes. An attack on one therefore needs to be seen as an attack on all.

In light of that, it’s worth considering what can be learnt from Lithuania’s ‘elves’ project – a coalition of activists, academics, professionals and civil society groups who are fighting on the digital frontline against Russian troll attacks. Could there be national – or even international – LGBT versions, who could fight the spread of fake news targeted at, or impacting on, LGBT people?

These measures would go a long way to preparing the sector for what lies ahead – a resurgent far right and an increasing number of authoritarian and regressive governments. The problem though is that these sorts of tactics only address the problem when it arises. What about action to tackle it before it becomes a problem?

Most fake news is spread via social networks. It’s therefore crucial to look at how to work with them on this issue. Because even when they have taken action to tackle disinformation, there has been little thought to how it could impact on the LGBT+ community.

Only last year for example, Facebook announced plans to disseminate a survey to its users which would determine the trustworthiness of news publications. At first glance this looks like a good thing. But LGBT charities began asking questions. What about conscious and subconscious bias? If members of the public were homophobic for example, what’s to stop them downgrading LGBT publications because they don’t like gays? The sector needs to be in the room having a open and honest conversation with social networks when they consider these sorts of actions.

As we’ve seen however, social networks are moving slowly on issues of disinformation and doing the bare minimum to tackle it. So LGBT+ organisations should think about developing their own tools that work with social networks. In Taiwan for example, CoFacts, a voluntary, collaborative chatbot for factchecking questionable messages being disseminated on Line was used effectively during the gay marriage referendum.

Nevertheless, the problem posed by social networks suggests that regulation is also required.This is not without it’s problems though.

Consider Malaysia, which led the world in passing the first ever Anti Fake News Act. Sounds good doesn’t it? Except the law was largely criticised by civil society for being too encompassing. It imposed hefty fines and jail time on “any person who, by any means, creates, offers, publishes, prints, distributes, circulates or disseminates any fake news or publication containing fake news”.

Regulation like this all suffers from the same problem – how to walk the thin line between tackling fake news and veering into political censorship. Activists across the world will attest to the fact that the term ‘fake news’ is itself becoming weaponised, not just applying to genuine misinformation, but also opinion that people strongly disagree with and even satire. LGBT organisations are acutely aware of the dangers this can pose.

As such, it seems important for LGBT+ organisations to be in the room from the very start when legislation like this is being debated and drafted. The European Union, for example, is considering further regulation on social networks. And so too are countries across the world. At both a national and international level it seems useful for LGBT organisations to partner with free speech and civil rights organisations, to hash out what would be effective and jointly advocate for effective policies.

Ultimately however, perhaps the sector should not overlook a more tried and tested method to help people identify for themselves what is fake news and what isn’t: education. After all, if you accurately educate people about LGBT+ issues, they are already inoculated against the lies and hate people want to spread.

Blog