Films – a pre-station cultural weapon, clearing the way …

From the perspective of media researcher in general and social networks in particular, what do you think about the noises related to singer My Linh these days?

I temporarily call the story that he mentioned as “My Linh incident” or a “suicide crisis” of this singer. Famous singers like My Linh, in the media, are considered influencers. In the “two step flow theory” communication model, Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955) called people like My Linh as opinion leaders.

In his theory, when studying public groups, the respected German professor Martin Loeffelholz called these people multipliers. These people can lead a private public force, which we call “fan” (fan / follower). Actors like My Linh are able to create a trend by using their public power. This public force can cause a trend that changes significantly to the community and society.

In their eyes, the public has high expectations and hopes for their idols. Other public groups in society, though not a fan of My Linh, will also require her to demonstrate a person’s social responsibility “of the public”. Saying so to see, with her influence and attraction, all her behaviors, lifestyles, words and words are always monitored by many “eyes and ears” …

As a result, when a statement or behavior is considered “not standard” by the crowd, or is not in accordance with the fans’ expectations and expectations, or is deemed not to be socially responsible towards the public, or “betraying the belief” of the public … then “idol” will get enough. My Linh is a typical example of this case.

The elders used to call this crisis a form of “slap of mouth”: from a statement considered insensitive to the troubles of society; the crisis escalated when the spouse of this female singer joined the story and stirred up the story of “upper class” (“upper class”); The crisis was like adding fuel to the fire when My Linh announced that it was considering inviting lawyers to sue those whose words are not with me online … And so the public’s eyes were focused on this singer’s couple more.

The act of self-provoking the “hives” was (accidentally) performed. Since then, stories of “environmental ambassador” My Linh, despite protecting the environment to build houses in protective forests, have been uncovered. Local government was dragged into the press and public opinion to demand “implementation of responsibility”. Under such tremendous pressure, the property that was supposed to be built illegally was in danger of being demolished. Not stopping there, some public opinion continued to demand a boycott of the brands My Linh is advertising, including Minh Long ceramic company, pressured to end the role of My Linh as image ambassador. for this famous brand of ceramics.

Anti-invasion culture

Researcher Le Ngoc Son analyzed: “In countries with long-standing cultural influences like Vietnam, movies are easier to“ tie up ”to the public in films with similar cultural contents. If Vietnam does not have a smart selection method, there will be many risks, contents related to politics and sovereignty will be cleverly integrated through those films ”.

In the world, have there been cases of this kind of “suicide crises”, sir?

Have a lot of! Before discussing “in the world”, we can find these familiar crises in Vietnam, from ancient times to ancient times. The Vietnamese people ‘s social knowledge base is mainly based on the experience of right and wrong trial, and then learns from experience for each case. So, by our life experience, our ancestors called this kind of crisis as “gagging” or “populous” than “dead frog in the mouth”, so that the next generation knows to be cautious, prevent: be careful first. words. And today, countless statements of the dignitaries are involved in this kind of gag …

In the world, in Germany, with statements promoting xenophobia, there were many politicians who lost their positions; In the US, many of President Trump’s spontaneous statements sparked fierce criticism; In the UK, there was a professor who lost his job and was laid off because of unintentional jokes, considered to be sexist against women, etc.

In the past, when there were scandals related to some brands of silk, industrial fish sauce, soft drinks … there were boycotts of products and artists acting as ambassadors for those brands. These boycotts quickly turned into an oil-slick effect in the media with widespread support.

This time with the incident of My Linh, there was also a call to boycott the advertising My Linh brands. However, there is a negative effect when many famous people, market experts, social activists, journalists, law teachers … do not support and think that a boycott of brands is wrong, because businesses do not. related to the noise of My Linh. The difference in public effect like that, where do you think?

It must be seen that the partnership “brand” and “brand ambassador” is a win-win relationship, both sides are beneficial. The brand wants to take advantage of the influence of the influencer to drive the shopping behavior of the public group (fans), like to convey the message: “Hey, your idol still likes the product. my brand, do not hesitate to buy anything “. That’s the essence. This is a symbiotic relationship, the “brand” will sell well, and the “ambassador” gets more money.

However, besides that benefit, this relationship also shares the risks equally. A brand has a problem (eg poor product quality, or toxicity) will affect the image of the “brand ambassador”, and vice versa. Therefore, one of the two sides “had a problem”, the other side had to raise their head to be scapegoat. Must understand the nature of this type of relationship, to see that there must be a reasonable “risk-crisis strategy”, to minimize the “oil spill” and the “other” damage. get into a crisis.

Going back to your question, as I answered in the previous question, the public (here crowds) are smart, but the crowd is also easily led. The same is true in the science of crowd research. Accordingly, there are two basic arguments, one says that the crowd is often less intelligent, emotional, easy to be led; the other one, saying that the crowds gather social intelligence, so the opinions of the crowd are wise.

Although these debates are still not settled in the academic world, but from a research point of view and personal observation / experience, I think that the crowd in us, although in many cases, is very wise, but from the perspective of research and personal observation / experience, Most of them are emotional, easily led by emotions. The crowd in us is easy to be led in a certain direction when it comes to some issues, such as “national pride”, “protection of the cynic” … In this case, the strength of the crowd. The crowd is moved by “influential opinion flows”. These streams of opinions can be for a certain benefit, they can be impartial or impartial.

There was a suspicion that there was a “dirty play” enterprise that wanted to push the public’s emotions to extremes, and launched a boycott campaign that My Linh is advertising to destroy reputable brands that are competitors on the brand. school. Whether or not this conspiracy theory needs investigation, but from the perspective of consumer rights, how should the public behave so that their emotions are not taken advantage of and still exercise their rights?

As I have analyzed, the media gurus always grasp the weaknesses of the crowd to lead them in a direction that benefits a certain interest group. Therefore, it is entirely possible that rival brands of ceramics products that My Linh are brand ambassadors, are used by the competitors to use the “chisel” strategy to defeat, due to the “incident “Hey. The wider the oil spill, the better they benefit.

However, saying that is not that for every incident, just blame the crowd as “taken advantage of”, and the crowd is not only one, so when analyzing an incident, you must carefully consider the “crowd”. What crowd is it. And often this is not easy, depending on the specific situation there will be different ways of analysis. This work requires the participation of both knowledgeable and experienced professionals.

Again, in the case of the “My Linh incident” with quite an elite crowd, they immediately boycotted statements and behaviors that were considered inappropriate in the context of a social influencer; and the crowd is also smart enough to pressure the partner of the “crisis person” to speak up and adjust the frequency of this person’s image.

That is the power of the consumer – a formidable public group. Only when these public groups are overly behaving can then be questioned whether or not they will be taken advantage of. And they use their strength to properly and properly pressure, that is still the crowd of adults. That said, care should be taken when making judgments about crowds.

If you have quantified all the risks right after the cooperation agreement, but unfortunately you have a “big blow” in the middle of the road, how should the business and the brand ambassador have to deal with it to avoid the incident into a media crisis. ? As a consultant in both Germany and Vietnam, how do you usually advise your clients in these situations?

Depending on specific situations and events, there are different ways of reacting. When dealing with situations like this, people base on two factors, the first is the ethics of cooperation (code of conduct) and the legality of cooperation. In studies, it has shown a variety of options and possible response modes for an organization to respond in a crisis. Therefore, Professor Timothy Coombs – the great tree in the media industry about crisis has come up with a classic theory called “Communication theory in crisis based on situations”. In the cases of “My Linh incident”, in fact, people often choose the rather “cruel” and cold strategy, which is to find a suitable reason to immediately terminate the cooperation. This act of harsh cutting was like stopping an oil slick.

However, to do so, in order to avoid legal consequences, both parties should have a clause specifying each party’s responsibilities and obligations in keeping the image for the other party, and mentioned in the school. The contract has a crisis, either party has the right to immediately terminate the contract. Doing so will benefit both sides, when one of them has a problem. That said, it is not promoting “insignificance in business” or “living dead and flying, benefits are pocketable”, but in “no need to stop” situations, the preservation of business interests Celebrity is very important.

More importantly, every business and celebrity needs crisis management strategies. These strategies need the participation of real, knowledgeable experts.

So that means to prevent and limit the damage of crises, experts in crisis management like you will be essential for businesses, celebrities?

Right. If the profession of doctor is to cure diseases, to be a lawyer to protect justice, then the profession of crisis management will protect the reputation and brand. Vietnamese society used to be a closed society. But now, with deep integration, coupled with the blossoming social media trend, like a house with open doors, there will be more risk of “getting sick”. At that time, every famous individual or organization needs someone to take care of and manage their risks.

In a certain perspective, it makes perfect sense to imagine periodic packages of “name care”, “reputation risk examination”, “reputation restoration” … like rentals. phone service covers.

Nguyen Le reports – Photo: Nguyen Quang

(According to Urban People Online, Thursday, November 1, 2018)

According to Le Ngoc Son