Social Media, Psychology, and Protest: Challenges Managing Institutional Reputation in Higher Education
Higher education is no stranger to political protest. In fact, campus activism can be traced back hundreds of years: from the Butter Rebellion at Harvard University to student occupation at Columbia University in the 1960s to anti-apartheid activism in the 1980s.
But for many of the college communicators we’ve spoken with, today’s protests feel different.
Negative perceptions of higher education continue to grow. In recent surveys, nearly half of New Englanders say that a four-year degree isn’t worth the cost. Media coverage of higher education increasingly focuses on turmoil. In fact, in research conducted by Comsint for an upcoming white paper, our team found that negative coverage of higher education increased 27 percent between 2022 and 2023. That was before the recent string of highly publicized issues. And, of course, there is social media.
The role of social media in today’s campus issues cannot be understated. According to McKinsey & Company, 58 percent of college-aged students are spending one hour or more per day on a variety of digital platforms.
This audience data is a critical insight for communicators as they seek to navigate the current environment. It illustrates how students are consuming and distributing information (but granted, most knew this already). More importantly, it sheds light on some of the communications dynamics that could be driving these audiences and thus igniting new or further action on campus. In any consumer-facing PR campaign, communicators look for factors that will engage audiences and drive action; campus communicators seeking to quell crises must reverse engineer that process.
Understanding the role of social media can also contextualize the true challenge many campuses are facing in addressing the speed and volatility of digital activism. Institutions have tendencies to communicate by committee and/or have marketing-communications functions aligned to support advancement and admissions, not reputation and crisis. And true to academic philosophy, many try to win the day through rational argument in their external communications. In today’s media environment, both factors can worsen a crisis.
Here, we dive into some of the factors that may be driving on-campus activity and what communicators can do to best craft their response strategies. Note that we’re not discounting any of the factors that compel political activism. Rather the goal of this piece is to best help communicators understand the motivations and influences at play as they work to navigate crisis.
THE NEUROSCIENCE BEHIND SOCIAL MEDIA
Humans are hardwired to gravitate to things we enjoy. Dopamine, a neurotransmitter that plays a significant role in pleasure and motivation, is released when we engage in pleasurable activities and its effects are powerful. When dopamine is released, it triggers a reward pathway in our brain causing us to desire the original stimulus more. For example, exercising releases dopamine which may cause us to work out more for another hit of that feel-good feeling. Unfortunately, the release of dopamine and the rewards pathway it triggers can occur from a myriad of stimuli, not just healthy behaviors.
Social media is a dopamine releaser. The fluttery feeling in your chest you get when someone likes your Instagram post? You have dopamine to thank for that. The surge of happiness you feel when someone retweets you? Dopamine again. The reward pathways that are created every time you receive positive reinforcement on social media can become incredibly strong and persuasive. If you are garnering likes, shares, and comments praising you for that content, it will become increasingly difficult to stop seeking that attention.
In corners of the Internet where influencers are sharing things like new recipes or funny parenting advice, this cycle can create communities that encourage and support healthy behaviors. The inverse is also true. On pages where content creators share political propaganda, sow disinformation, or value signal, the effects of dopamine are the same and can create an insidious and dangerous feedback cycle.
A NEED FOR CONNECTION AND ENGAGEMENT
Part of what makes social media so addictive is the endless opportunities for dopamine hits coming from people supportive of our posts. Connecting with people who share our values or interests creates a sense of community and security. The desire to stay connected and valued in the group can entice us to say or do anything to maintain our status. This kind of “herd mentality” celebrates those who conform to the group ideals and often demonizes those who fall outside of the carefully held parameters.
While more pronounced on social media, these kinds of echo chambers now created online have existed as long as people have had opinions (see Federalist 10). What is different now is the speed at which these ideas can circulate and the immense reach they can have.
VOLUME PUSHES UNIFORMITY
The parasitic notion of groupthink found a willing host in social media. When it comes to pushing a particular worldview, volume is key. Said another way, the more people in a group, the fewer unique ideas there will be. More importantly, the ideas of a large group can be easily manipulated by a large influx of voices saying the same thing, essentially drowning out the competing ideas (here’s one more link for Federalist 10). We see this happen most clearly in the use of “bots” online.
BOTS MANIPULATE EMOTION BY SIMULATING PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
Bots infiltrated social media as software applications that run automated tasks, generally with the intent to imitate humans. For example, bots can be programmed to seek and respond in a prescribed way to all posts on a platform that use a defined set of words or phrases. This rise of online bots, and the public discourse about them, has brought with it a wave of intense distrust. The ability of bots to take on a variety of personas with distinct global opinions makes them appear very human and it is often very difficult to distinguish between one made by a bot and one made by a human. Our own biases also play into this dynamic, as we are far more likely to perceive comments that reflect a contrary viewpoint to be false.
SOCIAL MEDIA IS A DRIVER OF PROTEST PARTICIPATION
An analysis of social media activity found that this groupthink follows similar trends. A triggering event occurs, which is subsequently reframed to spark moral outrage for a particular audience. It is then organically or intentionally targeted to micro-influencers who, in turn, share it with their audiences, leading to virality. Something going viral within a particular campus is a much lower bar than the entire internet.
With that viral content comes calls to action. Based on the above, it should come as no surprise that research has found a positive correlation between social media use and protest participation. In fact, one study found that frequent Facebook users are 18 percent more likely to engage in political protest than non-users. Given that the barriers to entry to campus protest are low - after all, many students need only travel a few hundred yards - it is easy to see how only activism on a particular topic can quickly morph into real-world demonstrations.
WHAT ALL THIS MEANS FOR COMMUNICATORS
There is no one-size-fits-all solution to addressing political turmoil on campus. Factors such as institutional culture, location, contested issues, and the level of outside influence all play critical roles in crafting a plan and responding to strife. However, there are seven key strategic elements that every campus can employ.
Centralize Communications: Many campuses, especially larger ones, have dispersed communications functions. It’s essential that messaging is deliberate and coordinated across the organization. In addition to uniformity, centralizing communications provides the agility needed to address emerging threats to reputation. Ideally, a plan for centralizing communications in times of crisis should be in place before issues hit.
Staff Appropriately: Communicators at many institutions have deep expertise in supporting advancement and enrollment. Navigating cultural and political issues requires a different skill set to support these team members. This could mean embedding an existing government relations team within communications or hiring an outside agency. It’s also critical to ensure that your social media accounts are being run by or in consultation with someone who deeply understands how to navigate these issues. Where we see institutions get into trouble is when they attempt to apply a status quo strategy in the face of an involving issue.
Monitor Diligently: Monitor online conversations across platforms consistently to understand the types of causes stirring passion in your students, the volume of such conversations, and what emerging calls to action might be. During a crisis, such information can be critical in coordinating both an operational response and a communications strategy. Moreover, it is a vital tool in assessing outside influence on your campus.
Develop Clear Messages: Clear messaging is key. In any crisis, institutions need to reaffirm their mission and values. When facing campus protests, it is also important to communicate limits and boundaries. For example, it must be clear what types of activities a campus will permit, and the limits imposed by student codes of conduct. Given the nature of social media, it’s important to note that traditional holding statements are likely to be inadequate in stemming the tide of online criticism.
Communicate Regularly: When issues embroil a campus there is often a tendency to focus solely on one audience or inbound media requests. That leaves the needs of groups like alumni, donors, admitted students, and partners ignored. Those key constituencies need to understand that leadership has control of the issue, that the institution is firm in its mission, and that a path to resolution can be found. Lacking this understanding, additional issues may emerge, including drops in enrollment and additional calls for leadership change.
Respond With Appropriate Scale: By monitoring online conversations and tailoring messaging to the issue at hand, institutions can craft a strategic response to political unrest. But it’s a fine line: an inadequate response can make an institution appear disengaged or uninterested, and over-responding can elevate campus-level issues to a national scale. With monitoring and the right team in place, campuses can craft a right-sized communications strategy to defend their reputation.
Seek to End the Conversation: There is a tendency in academia to attempt to win the day through rational argument. While that may work in the classroom, it can be disastrous in external communications. Prolonged debate extends the news cycle and often raises additional, difficult questions for stakeholders. The best approach in any crisis communications scenario is to seek to end the public conversation as quickly as possible.
This is an incredibly challenging time for communicators in higher education. But a clear strategy can help you navigate these waters with your reputation intact. To learn more about how to implement such a strategy for your institution, contact Comsint today for a free consultation.