Modern methods and myths
At the latest since Donald Trump won the US election, Big Data and “microtargeting” are considered to be communication silver bullets. Six questions to Ivo Banek, partner at Communication Works.
28. March 2017
How important was Big Data for Trump’s victory?
Trump’s campaigners have sent tailor-made messages to different voters, based on the modern means of digital communication. If you believe the self-appointed spin doctors and data gurus of Cambridge Analytica, Big Data used for “psychographic profiling” played a crucial role.
What exactly is this about?
Roughly speaking, about the digital traces which we all leave online and which can be used to identify our interests and preferences. Like, if you have googled cars, the next time you open a web page, it’s going to rain car ads…
That’s not new, is it?
Right. What is new is that from all our activities online a psychological trait is compiled: whether we are conscientious, extrovert, open to new experiences – our needs and fears and how we are likely to behave. These profiles allow companies to produce targeted content for each personality, in our example: the matching car model for each type, plus the relevant arguments for buying it.
Sounds like absolute control.
And like the perfect conspiracy theory, with omnipotent puppet-masters in the campaign offices. In reality, it’s not quite that simple. While micro-targeting can work for short-term activation, like in an election campaign. But people do not want to be manipulated in the long-term. They see through such methods and learn to defend themselves.
Does Big Data help targeting? / Foto: Ivo Banek
Big Data and the brave new communication world – just a bubble?
Simply the latest attempt to predict and influence peoples’ behaviour. However, microtargeting has three fundamental flaws. First: If at all, it works only as long as it is not uncovered. But when you promise different things to different people you create contradictions, at the expense of your credibility. Second, your competitors can use the same insights and send the same messages: by doing what everybody does, you do not stand out. And third, it’s just one-way communication, without real feedback from which an organization could learn.
What is the alternative?
Of course, data can be useful to understand the needs and expectations of voters or customers. However, instead of trying to manipulate people, this knowledge should be used for dialogue. People want to have a say, both in politics and when it comes to the products they buy. When communication facilitates such a process, it creates value for all – open, transparent and sustainable.
