PART 1. What do our courses say?

We have seen in lesson 4 of our course on Campaign Communication that focusing on opponents is often a waste of time because they are very unlikely to change their minds. However, many opponents develop more subtle arguments, which somehow have the appearance of logic and “make sense” to uncertain audiences.

The important thing here is to try as much as possible to limit the harm they may cause, in other words, it’s important to undermine their capacity to persuade the neutral audiences along their lines.

Confronting your opposition’s messages is a risky strategy and must be thought through very carefully. Main strategies include to directly attack their weak points, to ridicule them or to undermine their authority. You can build your strategy with a mix of factual arguments and values-based messaging. Reinforcing values-based narratives in support of your cause will make people supportive of your cause and therefore resistant to the opposition’s messages, including disinformation.

Some communication strategies appear to be effective to counter the opposition’s message, such as the “truth sandwich” or the “poison parasite” effect.

If you want to challenge a well-meaning individual for spreading disinformation – take care not to make matters worse – be respectful, make your points clear, contact them in private, don’t make them feel stupid, if you sense their resistance – back off.

When challenging organised disinformation campaigns you can be more effective if you build a story to place the disinformation on context, build your case over time with more facts being presented giving you more credibility, develop a network of allies outside your main group who can support your campaign and help you engage different people.