​​​​ ​​​​

Blog

Too many cooks in the kitchen?

Most are familiar with the saying “Too many cooks spoil the broth”, meaning that when too many people start deciding on something, it normally ends up messy.

The typical coalition pitfalls will be familiar to most readers: turf wars, conflicting interests, resource constraints and so forth. From a communications perspective, these are often expressed in challenges like:

  • How will the coalition present itself publicly?
  • How will they reach agreement on positioning and messaging?
  • How will the groups share their lists and how will newly-acquired supporters be distributed amongst the partners?

This excellent article from Greenpeace’s MOBLAB shares interesting insights about how to navigate those waters and suggest a creative solution: create a common portal and let each coalition partner develop their own content from there.

Read more HERE

Tips for effective image testing

In a previous post, we shared some insights from the Resource Media website on choosing the right image for your communication. But how will you know whether your carefully laid out thoughts actually work? Here are some more insights from the same source on how to test your visuals.

Why test?

Testing your visuals can help you:

• Learn what an image “says” to your audience and the associations it triggers

• Understand if an image is engaging and compelling

• Unearth unanticipated or unhelpful associations

• Spot ways to improve a particular visual communication

• Motivate more action-taking, and be cost-effective with outreach

• Reveal trends to help you refine your next visual projects

What to test?

Good image research starts with thoughtful planning to identify goals and desired outcomes for the communications outreach, key audiences and the channels needed to reach them, and the interests and values of target audiences. A good planning process gets as specific as possible, as these considerations will in turn inform image options and testing design.

Looking at your range of ideas for visuals and appeals, what predictions can you make about what will be best at drawing attention, triggering emotion and engagement, and motivating action? What are you pretty confident about based on past research and  experience? What are you unsure about or perhaps assuming without prior research to go on? These will become research questions to explore in your image-testing.

How to test?

An online experiment via Facebook comparing the effectiveness of two or three different visuals in motivating participation is useful in ensuring an outreach campaign is as efficient as possible. The shortcoming is that you don’t get to understand as much about why one image does better than another to inform broader learning. That’s where a focus group approach is helpful.

But in image testing, there are some additional elements to other focus group discussions that need to be considered:

Sequencing:

The very start of an image-testing focus group is a chance to see viewers’ reactions to photos before they are influenced to some degree by discussion and material shown over the course of the group. For these first visuals, consider showing photos alone without accompanying text so you can learn where the imagery itself naturally “takes” viewers – whether it triggers the interests and associations you presume or not. Later, you can get feedback on versions with text, or other more “message-laden” approaches such as side-by-sides or drafts.

A quick-glance test:

In the real world, photos get only a brief moment to catch viewers’ interest as people scroll online or flip through print material. This can be simulated in a focus group by showing a set of photos to participants briefly, one at a time, and then putting them away and asking which caught your eye, and why? Later, participants can take more time to dwell on the images and provide feedback on each.

Assessing reaction:

In addition to paying close attention to the associations that come up for participants as they view images, it’s also helpful to watch for signs of more engaged reaction. Are people mentioning personal memories or experiences? Are they imagining more beyond what’s shown in the image? Are they using words and phrases that convey feelings, either their own or those felt by the subjects depicted in the image? Do they talk about values or ideas that are particularly important to them?

Stickiness:

A memorable image has greater influence than one which is quickly forgotten. At the very end of a focus group, when all the images have been put away, consider asking participants to identify which of everything they viewed during the group stuck with them most, and why.

 

Question prompts to get feedback on images:

• What do you see in this image?

• What does it make you think about?

• What are the first words that come to mind?

• What questions would you ask about it?

• Is it important to you in any way? How?

• Which of these images is most compelling to you? Why?

• Which stands out the most to you? Why?

 

Storytelling: Seeing is Believing

This article is a summary of the publication Seeing is Believing : A Guide to Visual Storytelling Best Practices by Resource Media

 

300 million photos are uploaded on Facebook alone every day in 2017 (source), that’s how powerful our drive for pictures is. No story has the power to move people without visual support. This is why we all need to understand the principles of visual communication.

 

First Principle: we are a visual species.

Study after study bears this out. Effectively pairing words with pictures and video enhances attention, memory, recall, and believability. For example, in one study when information was presented orally, people remembered only about 10 percent of what they heard when tested 72 hours later. That figure jumped to 65 percent when pictures were added.

Second Principle:  Our decisions and actions are based more on emotional reactions than rational thought.

Good visuals make people feel first, and think second. Effective pictures and videos evoke powerful emotions. Emotions drive decisions. Let emotions be the initial filter for selecting one picture over another.

Third Principle:  Visuals are the most effective communications vehicles for evoking emotion and getting people to take action.

The rationale for paying close attention to visuals when you are trying to get people to make a decision or change behavior is clear. However, understanding that pictures are important isn’t enough. You need to be intentional about how you use them. This is where the art of communications strategy meets the science of human behavior.

7 rules for effective visual communication

 

1. Don’t assume others will react to a picture or video the same way you do. Test visuals with your target audience.

A few hundred dollars is sufficient to run several versions of your campaign concurrently on Facebook to see which headline and photo combinations generate the most clicks. As the digital landscape evolves, traditional opinion research firms and online companies are developing new, creative, inexpensive ways to test how various images perform before finalizing the design of  campaigns.

2. Pair your pictures with words for highest impact and to cement them deeper into your audience’s memory.

If your pictures are going out via social media, consider integrating captions into the pictures so that they can travel together throughout the social web. These social memes can go viral precisely because the message – humorous or serious – is not lost when the picture gets shared over and over again.

3. Make sure your images match your message.

If your visuals send one message and your words send another you create a disconnect in your audience’s mind. Don’t, for example, pair a devastating picture with a hopeful headline. The visuals will win the battle against words every time.

In this campaign, for example, in spite of the fact that the written messages detail how bad smoking is, the social cues in the image drive people in the exact opposite direction:

Screen Shot 2018-01-02 at 11.29.41

4. Use genuine, not generic pictures.

One good test to determine whether a photo has true emotional impact or is simply filler is to try and write a caption or cutline for it. If you can’t write a caption for the photo that relates to the point of the body copy surrounding it, the chances are good your photo does not belong there.

5. First impressions matter! Invest the most in the first picture your audience sees

Think of the first picture your audience might see in any communication you develop as the “hook.” But make sure you are hooking the emotion you want. Don’t confuse the most beautiful photo with the most effective photo. The two can be very different.

6. To use pictures effectively, be diligent about taking them…

The most effective photos will, of course, reflect the work you do on the front lines.  You can also get great photos from your supporters or you can mine the Internet for photos. If you are looking for free, legal-to-use photos on the Internet, the Creative Commons is the place to go.

7. People relate to people in pictures. Choose your subjects carefully.

Common ground between your cause and your audience can quickly be established through pictures of people. But choose those people pics with an eye to what works best. For example, we are biologically programmed not to look away from people looking straight at us.

We also connect better with people who are most like us. The 2012 “I’m a Mormon” campaign used this principle when showing people of many different ages, occupations and ethnic backgrounds above the simple caption “I’m a Mormon.” The campaign was meant to make the Mormon Church seem more accessible, more mainstream, by getting people to recognize themselves in at least one of these pictures.

Screen Shot 2018-01-02 at 11.43.02

Babies provoke an especially powerful emotional response. One experiment conducted in the streets of Edinburgh, Scotland in 2009 reveals our altruism when it comes to babies. The researchers planted 240 “lost wallets” all over the city and found that the ones that had photos of babies in them were returned a whopping 88 percent of the time. Compare this to the wallets containing photos of elderly couples, which were only returned 28 percent of the time, and those with no photos in them were returned only 14 percent of the time.

Last but not least, favour single people pics : When it comes to photos, our eyes want to focus in on one thing. Our brain hates the effort involved in processing a group shot. Effective fundraisers know that showing a single individual who represents.  Group photos are effective when it comes to protests, rallies or public meetings on an issue. These are good times to show pictures of masses of people as your main point to the viewer is to show how many people cared enough to turn out, not for the viewer to care about an individual person.

Essential guides to Framing Equality

The European umbrella organisation of LGBTQI organisations ILGA Europe and the Public Interest Research Center have just published two essential guides to help activists frame their messages.

The first of these, Framing Equality, is a short guide to strategic communications, based on extensive research and building on the experience of activists and communicators from around the globe.

According to the editors “It aims to provide a framework rather than a blueprint; helping you to ask the right questions rather than giving you the right answers”.

The toolkit is based around 3 chapters:

  1. Define the task
    This means getting clear on your vision and your goals, and then focusing in on where your audience currently is on the issue in order to know the barriers you need to overcome
  2. Develop the Frames
    This section provides lots of examples and exercices on how to do this. It also helps understanding how “frames” work for communication
  3. Test and refine
    There are more and less involved ways to do this, depending on how much resource you have, and what kind of scale of implementation it will involve.

The second publication is a resource to help you test your messages. It is designed for campaigners who have little or no experience with message testing. You will be able to use this guide if you’re working with a research company and want to be able to explain what you need and make sense of what they provide. You’ll also be able to use it to get more involved in testing messages yourself.

What does “Campaigning” really mean?

How Plato can help us redefine campaigning

We all know that campaigning has been going through a bit of a rough patch, with the lobbying act and all. However, I was still taken aback when someone referred to campaigning as the “C” word. A little strong, maybe. However, as I go round the country talking to people as part of the foundation’s Social Change Project, it becomes increasingly clear just how much of a problem language can be.

A woman in Manchester, who has an incredible track record of combating gun crime in her community, says she didn’t know what to call herself for a long time. She resisted the tag “community activist” because it made her sound angry and confrontational, and she isn’t. In fact, she is a highly sophisticated change-maker.

Another woman, this time in the Midlands, leads a charity for vulnerable adults. She doesn’t recognise the term “campaigning” because she understands it to connote challenging power from the outside. She works closely with her local authority – a relationship not without its trials – but she is on both the inside and the outside. She is, if anything, a negotiator.

The people who seem most comfortable with the term “campaigner” are those who work in professional roles for charities. They like the term and want to own it. Their gripe is that their organisations don’t understand campaigning and don’t give them the permission and space they need.

The Social Change Project has an ambition to detoxify the language around campaigning: to “reframe” the word, if you will, and consider new terminology and positioning that can make all parties feel more comfortable with campaigning and able to support it. Few would argue that people shouldn’t have voice and agency, and be able to shape their world. But what can we call this important endeavour?

Our early conclusion is that terms such as “activist” and “campaigner’” seem too oppositional and confrontational: spirited but unsophisticated. Meanwhile, being a “social entrepreneur” or “innovator” feels too passive politically, too commercial. Do we go for the neutral territory of “change-agent” or “change-maker”? Does anyone really use such language or know what it means? And sometimes campaigning isn’t about change. Sometimes campaigners are trying to maintain the status quo. Think Remain.

I was pondering this with a friend, who came up a nice idea. Campaigners should think of themselves as modern philosophers, he proposed, in line with the model of philosopher kings in Plato’s Republic. Plato believed political office should be held by philosophers, who are defined as having knowledge, not power, and whose role it is to ask questions in pursuit of what is good. I like it: rather than thinking of campaigning as speaking truth to power or pursuing change, we should think of it as being about asking questions.

Recognising that change is about us all the time, our job is to ask “is this change good, right and fair?” Of course, this will entail holding those with power to account, but it moves the core purpose of campaigning upstream. We are not pursuing change or opposing things for the sake of it. We’re not just angry people. We are asking questions in the interests of making society better. And what on earth can be wrong with that?