Suchergebnisse

AbstractToday, corporate crises inherently pose a threat to brand reputation. Multiple stakeholders, online influence and the interconnectedness of reputation with major social issues raise the stakes for crisis teams. The level of complexity has perhaps never been so great, and with it, the need for data‐driven decision‐making. In practice, research, analytics, and intelligence experts are full members of corporate risk and crisis teams from planning, to response, to evaluation. These professionals develop the insights to fuel smart, timely decision‐making by surfacing insights to ameliorate crises. Additionally, they are responsible for measuring and evaluating progress and performance improving the brand's readiness for future issues. Insights, intelligence and performance measures drive conclusions necessary to determine what, if any, brand damage has occurred, how to fix it, and how to prepare better for the next time.

Do social media users read, comment, and share false news more than real news? Does it matter if the story is written by a bot and whether it is endorsed by many others? We conducted a selective-exposure experiment ( N = 171) to answer these questions. Results showed that real articles were more likely to receive "likes" whereas false articles were more likely to receive comments. Users commented more on a bot-written article when it received fewer likes. We explored the psychological mechanisms underlying these findings in Study 2 ( N = 284). Data indicate that users' engagement with online news is largely driven by emotions elicited by news content and heuristics triggered by interface cues, such that curiosity increases consumption of real news, whereas uneasiness triggered by a high number of "likes" encourages comments on fake news.