For most of us, the fact that they listen to us, listen to our opinions and agree with them is especially important. Many people believe that if you force your interlocutor to desire this or that, you can conquer the whole world. For those who are able to take the place of another, understand his thoughts and desires, listen to his opponent, he can confidently look into the future without fear. A person who is able to motivate others to act will be able to lead people.
Rice. 6 techniques for influencing and influencing your interlocutor
There are 6 techniques for influencing and influencing your interlocutor, which will be described in detail below. These simple techniques make up the most.
Methods of influencing your interlocutor
1. Always communicate with your interlocutor with great interest. The right start of any dialogue there will be an interest in the life of the opponent, and not stories about one’s problems and troubles. If you are interested in the life of another person, then dialogue with him will always be successful and will endear you to your interlocutor.
2. Chinese wisdom teaches to always give smiles to others. A smile on your face is a way to manage your own emotions and mood. It is also a way to make your opponent smile.
3. It is very important to pronounce the name of your interlocutor often enough, because psychologists say that a name is the most pleasant sound for any person.
4. It is important to be able to listen to others. You can awaken your opponent's sympathy for you if you carefully listen to his opinion. Few people can resist the subtle flattery of interest and attention. It is known that people prefer a worthy listener to the best speakers. Friendliness and a desire to listen are such a rare occurrence today. A person who talks only about his life, accordingly, thinks only about himself.
5. Choose topics for conversation that are interesting to your opponent. The sure and unmistakable path to the heart of your interlocutor is communication about what he honors and values above all else. Very often, business contacts can be established in this way.
6. You need to be able to convey to a person his importance and in no case turn this into open flattery, only sincerely and honestly. In this way you can find not only an ally, but also a friend. This style of communication gives both participants in communication moral satisfaction and a sense of respect for each other. It has been proven that a person, in one way or another, strives to be appreciated and recognized. Moreover, flattery and insincerity will not bring the expected result, but only a real assessment of all human merits.
Let's start by looking back at my post from November 2014, “How power works on the Internet”:
At one time, Ogilvy wrote that for a person to perceive an advertisement and motivate him to action, it is necessary that this advertisement catch his eye at least 28 times. And this is data from the last century. Currently, given the abundance of media, portals, websites and other things, I am sure this figure is many times higher. And if we're talking about about a boring government initiative - tenfold.
What does this mean? First of all, about the fact that even getting your agenda, article or event into the news broadcasts of the country's leading TV channels will give absolutely nothing. This resonance will be forgotten the very next day, another informational occasion will appear, for example, a sofa falling on someone from a window.
Once upon a time I wrote about the “Navalny phenomenon,” which consisted of a previously unimaginable effect from posts in his magazine. A citizen spends five minutes on a post - and then a dozen federal officials spend hours making excuses from their screens. This was caused by the novelty of such an information field as the Internet and the ignorance of officials about its specifics. Now they are no longer at all afraid of resonance on the network, knowing full well that by the evening what was booming in the morning will be off the agenda.
The presence of your news feed in the top does not give anything. The publicity of your news story by the central media does not give anything (soon they will stop paying attention to this altogether).
Only systematic, regular, time-distributed work on each information issue produces an effect. Here are dozens of posts on the topic of the work of the fifth column in Yekaterinburg, but since April 2013 there has been an information struggle with American portals, and here with the US consul. And these are just some of the examples.
What conclusion can be drawn: projects in the information field are no longer one-off projects. Now, in order to achieve an effect (and I consider an effect to be only the audience’s perception of information in the right way, understanding and acceptance of the voiced position), constant work with the material is required over the course of not even months, but years.
We face a brave new information world in which evaluation criteria and working methods have changed. Now, when an official is offered a list of publications on a topic and a printout of comments as a report, this is a triple deception. The contractor deceives the customer, wastefully wasting funds, the customer himself is deceived and reports conclusions and reports that do not correspond to reality higher up the vertical of power. As a result, the authorities see a picture that is very far from reality.
Now, in April 2016, I understand that we are observing two trends. Firstly, I was completely right about systematic and regular work on informational issues. Even from the examples highlighted in the text with links - the US consul in Yekaterinburg has changed, we have been working on a new one for a long time, Marcus Micheli, as for the fight against American portals - the head of Hers Shkulev himself spoke out and complains: . Not to mention the fact that the fact of the information war against Russia is recognized at the state level. This is where the good, or rather the logical, ends.
The main methods of work on the network (both government and opponents) are of the nature of “one-day” campaigns, short-term campaigns with frantic counting of likes, views and promotion of them for the record.
But there is a nuance - the information field - it is similar to the potato field; if you plant potatoes for ten years in a row in the same place, the land becomes scarce, the yields fall. So it is here - to attract attention, even for a short period, more and more resources are required. This means the headlines are getting louder, from a recent example: . Over the course of one day, the audience was told about a fight between Caucasians and transvestite prostitutes, a woman running with the severed head of a child, and even before that, the explosion of a bear, the sawed-off head of a walrus, and other joys.
They called us earthworms, they have 10,000 likes, we urgently need to give a refutation with at least 15,000 likes. This is the whole point of most of the information confrontation today. Externally, at least. On the one hand, it’s convenient that every day there’s a new battle. And it’s simple - they hit, they responded, the topic was closed. It’s easy again, the headline is worse, there are more news outlets, but “it won’t take off,” we’ll try again tomorrow.
But nothing helps. People's attention is becoming duller every day, and even in the news about dozens of victims of terrorist attacks, there is less and less reaction from people, more and more cheating.
The effectiveness of long-term system work is becoming more and more obvious. If you’ve been online for five to ten years and do the same thing, those who accuse you of populism will look at you like an idiot. If you have been developing a specific topic for years, they will look at the person who accused you of paying for money the same way. For contrast, you can look at the pre-election hysteria - politicians and their entourage are jostling and fighting, trying to protect the interests of citizens, the media is full of clenched fists, slogans and the burning eyes of fighters. So much for paid-for money and populism.
The disadvantages of system work are the long wait for the result and the expenditure of resources - the same time. But the effectiveness of this approach, of course, is an order of magnitude higher than “one-day” campaigns.
One of the tragedies played out before our eyes just the other day:
The West will throw dirt at Putin! (c) Peskov
- [slap of dirt]
- We told you (c)
And it seems that the incriminating evidence is so alive, there is corruption, mutual responsibility and even sex, there are countless points of injection... but it doesn’t take off. And why? One-day event. The whole cunning strategy is ruined by a simple anecdote:
The chief political officer of the Red Army, Shcherbakov, reported to the leader about numerous signals against General Rokossovsky. Like, there is constantly around him how much beautiful women- signalmen, doctors, cooks with whom he lives. And at the same time, he constantly changes the composition of his field harem. “What are we going to do, Comrade Stalin?” - asks Shcherbakov.
Stalin walked around, thought and answered: “What are we going to do? We’re going to be jealous!”
The authorities responsible for the media can relax - the main information method of the USA and Europe is not working.
Representatives of the authorities responsible for the media should strain themselves - they will inevitably be replaced by systemic anti-Russian work, and there is even time to train new leaders of public opinion, until 2018.
UPD. By the time this article was finished, the next story had spread across the media, again accusing the President of the Russian Federation of having an affair, now with the chosen one of none other than media mogul Rupert Murdoch. This once again confirms our conclusions and guarantees the failure of the next information attack, but with one caveat. Now we can interpret any criticism of Russia and Vladimir Putin from the Murdoch-owned media as the revenge of a cuckolded loser :)
I quote:
- Information typology.
Since rumors are always, to one degree or another, unreliable information, one of the most obvious ways to construct a typology of rumors comes down to classifying them according to the degree of reliability of the information they contain. From this point of view, rumors are divided into four types: absolutely unreliable, simply unreliable, reliable and close to reality. Although this typology is subjective, it is often used to solve practical problems. When launching this or that positive or negative rumor, it is necessary to measure the degree of its unreliability. It used to be that the more implausible a rumor was, the more effective it would be. For example, the canons of Goebbelian propaganda required that the lie be “huge” and even “monstrous” - then people would be more easily inclined to believe it. Over time, it turned out that the development of consciousness protects people from excessive reliability.
Nowadays, on the contrary, it is believed that disinformation launched through informal communication channels should be strictly dosed. Appearing as relatively plausible, it gradually gains trust and only after that begins to “grow in” with details. Slowly moving towards the line of being completely unreliable. For a modern person, too blatant a lie raises doubts that do not allow him to blindly perceive and actively disseminate information
It is extremely difficult to predict the success or failure of a campaign to launch rumors into the information space. Although there are several conditions for the effectiveness of functioning mechanisms. First of all, in the field of professional activities, a “media plan” is urgently needed. One cannot do without modeling what can be called rumor units, i.e. auditory-forming modules, stereotypes, functioning in various socio-political and economic, demographic and psychological contexts. Finally, it is important to empirically describe the patterns of the dynamics of mass consciousness in similar circumstances. There is also a directly proportional and inversely proportional relationship between consumers of rumors and their level of education, social status, material well-being, age
For example, there was a rumor at McDonalds for many years that then grew into a myth that helped ensure the cleanliness of its restaurants. It was a story about how the company's founder, Ray Cross, visited one of the franchised restaurants. He found a single fly there. However, even a single fly did not live up to the McDonalds creed of quality, service, cleanliness and value. Two weeks later, the restaurant lost the right to use the McDonalds brand. After that, everyone employed at McDonalds discovered almost fantastic ways to drive out every single fly from their stores.
- "Emotional" typology.
From the point of view of emotional characteristics, there are three main types of rumors. Each of them corresponds to a specific emotional state that it evokes and on which it “holds.”
"Hearing is desire"- is a rumor containing a strong emotional wish, reflecting the current needs and expectations of the audience in which it is disseminated. For example, a rumor within the company about a salary increase.
"The Scarecrow Rumor" is a rumor that carries and evokes pronounced negative sentiments and an emotional state of fear and horror, reflecting some relevant, but extremely undesirable expectations of the audience in which they arise and spread.
For example, Procter & Gamble, one of the largest industrial firms in the United States with annual sales exceeding 11 billion, faced an unexpected problem related to the symbol that the company had used as its trademark since 1851. This stamp featured a man sitting on a moon and 13 stars representing the original 13 colonies. Suddenly, rumors arose in the western regions of the United States that this company symbol, which had served it for 131 years, meant love for the devil. The firm suddenly began receiving hundreds of calls and letters from people who said they had either seen one of the company's executives on a national television program claiming that it was a symbol of the company's connection to a Satanic cult, or had been told so at church. Responding to these requests, the company launched a powerful campaign, which included sending letters to all newspapers, television, and radio. In addition, she contacted church leaders of various denominations and asked for their help in combating the rumors. Letters on behalf of the company explained the origin of the symbol with a person on the month.
"Aggressive Hearing"- this is a rumor that not only causes negative moods and states, reflecting unwanted expectations of the population, but is quite specifically aimed at stimulating an aggressive emotional state and a corresponding behavioral “response” in the form of harsh aggressive action. Aggressive rumors are a continuation of the “scarecrow rumors”. Their plots are based on a powerful emotional and energetic aggressive charge.
For example, in early 1981, a subsidiary of the Colgate-Palmolive company in Malaysia began to be disturbed by reports that appeared in some newspapers that the company was allegedly using lard in the production of toothpaste. These rumors, which immediately had a negative impact on sales of the company's products in some areas, were particularly strong in some rural communities and in some schools, where teachers advised Muslim students to refrain from consuming toothpaste.
In fact, a furious campaign has begun to get Muslims to stop using this toothpaste. The company's attention was drawn to circulars sent by government officials declaring the use of Colgate toothpaste to be contrary to Islam.
- The action plan included:
- conversations with Muslim leaders;
- sending letters to directors of Muslim schools.
- limited series of publications with the support of Islamic press organs.
"Ridiculous Rumors"- stand apart in all typologies. They can be desirable, frightening, and even aggressive, but the main thing about them is the obvious absurdity of what is being described. Rumors of this kind often appear spontaneously, as a result of confusion inherent in everyday consciousness.
Based on various sociological surveys, one can try to create a hierarchical model of rumors based on the principle of their content: economics, politics, the criminal world, the sphere of social services, figures involved - newsmakers from the world of art, unsolved mysterious phenomena.
From the point of view of the texture of the genre technique in the technology of creating artificial rumors, one can distinguish: myth-making, montage, threat, bluff, interception of someone else's information. The degree of intensity (repetition) of rumors can influence an individual and groups of society, causing various phenomena. According to the degree of consequences, rumors can be divided into two groups: constructive and destructive.
Constructive actions include mass consumer actions in the commercial market (promotion of goods and services), the creation of stabilizing socio-political stereotypes. Destructive ones include discomfort, phobias, mass disobedience and disbelief.
Main technical media: print and electronic media, Internet, telephone. Analysis of the circulation assets themselves allows us to identify a number of subjects and motives of communication. Let's try to build
"technological chain", general diagram life cycle rumors
Many words cease to be used in speech due to obsolescence, but the language is constantly and quite intensively replenished with new terms and expressions.
Behind recent years 10-15 historical transformations took place in Russia: economic, cultural, political systems, scientific and legal fields, in the mentality of the people, which was reflected in the vocabulary of our language. New (words and expressions) that were not in literary, everyday, or social languages are called neologisms. One of these terms - “stuffing” - will be discussed in the article. What is this concept? What does it mean? In what areas is it used?
The concept of stuffing
Nowadays, the Internet has become an integral part of life; many have completely abandoned television and other media, receiving information and news from the Internet. And here it’s appropriate to figure out: what is stuffing? This is a slang word that comes from the word “throw.” The term means “to throw any information onto the World Wide Web that should cause strong and widespread discussion, and best of all, public condemnation.” That is, stuffing is information, most often false, that causes heated debate and discussion on the Internet.
If your throw-in is successful, then young people usually say: “they stole the throw-in.” Often, false information is placed on an Internet resource in order to increase traffic, which leads to an increase in views of advertising videos and, accordingly, an increase in profits.
Slang
Stuffing is youth slang, and the word is used in three meanings: compromising evidence, lies, insult. For example, “It doesn’t really look like a stuffing, but it’s probably true.” The word began to be used not only in colloquial speech, but also in poetry and even songs. For example, in the words of Lizzka’s song “Diss on Ateva”: “You’re just a poser. “I’ve been waiting for stuffing” - the term is used, most likely, in the meaning of “lie,” since “poser” means “schmuck,” and by “stuffing” we mean waiting for some sensational false information.
The term is used not only in colloquial speech, but also in Internet slang. In fact, the World Wide Web is overflowing with various types of information, the reliability of which remains highly questionable. And here, stuffing is made up stories or stories, false information with unreliable facts or without them at all. But then a number of questions arise. How to determine whether this is a fake or true? Is it really impossible to trust anything on the Internet?
Signs of stuffing
To distinguish reliable information from fictitious information, there are several signs. So, if this is a fictional story, then:
- It is presented without facts or evidence.
- She is very believable and realistic, and sometimes even super-realistic.
- There is no doubt about it. Moreover, the Internet source from which the information was taken is often indicated.
You should always think for yourself and understand that more than 85% of the information in the media and the Internet is fake. But at the same time, one should not treat it negatively - it is just a term that means “made-up information.” You just need to change your attitude towards what you read and hear, and have your own opinion.
Meaning of the concept
In general, in Lately the term is very often used to mean “unreliable information”, but there are other meanings:
- Throwing away, adding something somewhere. For example, “We can do without dumping grain into the country’s domestic market.”
- Publication of certain information. For example, “stuffing data about a mayoral candidate.”
- The neologism is used in the political environment when it comes to adding uncounted votes in order to change the results (of an election), that is, counterfeiting or rigging votes. For example, “I’m tired of stuffing ballots and bribing voters.”
Synonyms of the term are the following words: deception, forgery, falsification.
Information dumping
There are intentional and unintentional stuffings. An example of unintentional ones is reposting unverified information on social networks. Or, for example, when unverified data is published (without intent).
Deliberate:
- Carousels. The essence of this type is that there are at least 2-3 well-promoted and well-known sites. The information is posted on the first, the second rewrites it in his own words and links to the first site, the third to the second, and the first makes a link to the third. The information is looped. The scheme is simple and designed for ordinary readers who do not analyze or check anything.
- A reputable site writes news and links to major news agencies, and makes a link not to the source of this news, but to the site itself. To check the authenticity of the news, you need to go to this site and manually search for it, and if it is not there, then it was a fake.
- Link to authoritative people. The same scheme as with news agencies. Indicate the name as the news source famous person. Such information is very difficult to verify; you need to independently look for an interview with this person.
- There is also such a scheme: reliable news is created, and then through several other sites it gradually changes and ultimately takes on a completely different meaning.
- Some specific data is deliberately distorted. For example, information is written that is completely reliable, but the quantitative characteristics are deliberately changed.
These are the main ways to create false information in the information space. Before discussing anything, it is necessary to check the reliability of this or that information, analyze it and find the original source.
Another area in which this expression is used is the political environment, in particular when it comes to elections, and more specifically about ballot papers.
Ballot stuffing is an election violation that involves placing more than one ballot in a ballot box by one person. This illegal act is carried out with the aim of influencing the voting results.
According to recent studies, information influence is recognized as one of the most effective tools, not inferior to traditional methods of warfare in terms of mass impact.
With the help of a correctly structured sequence of messages, you can not only form public opinion, but also control the actions of this crowd. The heated crowd believes little verified and unreliable information. Moreover, in the era of high data circulation speeds information Technology mastered information dumping.
Throwing in is a fairly new concept. Just three or four years ago, such a method of influence was not separately identified. It has become updated with the rapid development of the information and switching environments of the Internet.
Features of information dumps
By its nature, information dumping is very similar to rumors. For example, in both cases there is a target audience that receives a prepared message from outside through various channels.
But at the same time, stuffing has its differences from rumors.
Firstly, their target audience is many times larger: “ large groups people - the audience of states." Rumors imply the dissemination of information to a narrow audience at the “individual - group of people” level.
Secondly, information injections, as a rule, use information channels such as state and non-state media, public opinion leaders with their audiences, Internet communications, etc. Rumors are more likely to be channels of informal communication.
Third, the density of information messages of information dumping is tens of times higher than that of rumor. At the same time, in a short period of time, each of the involved channels can broadcast several messages with a single message. These can be news stories, interviews, messages, opinion shows, official statements, expert opinions, etc. (they will be discussed below).
Fourth, the time characteristics of spreading information and delivering information messages to the audience are significantly narrowed - starting from an hour. At the same time, the average figure according to rumors is taken from one day to the next. It is quite obvious that such standards helped to come up with a slang synonym for the concept of “information dissemination” - “dispersal” (disperse information through channels).
Fifthly, if a prerequisite for the effective “launch” of a rumor is low awareness of the audience, then the criterion for the “start” of information dumping is simply the presence of working channels for the rapid dissemination of messages. And the more there are, the higher the effectiveness of information dumping will be.
Distinctive features of stuffing can be:
A) ensuring the secrecy of the task being solved, like any event of information influence. In this regard, it is customary to disguise information dumps as familiar media stories.
We have selected illustrative examples from the practice of Russian information hoaxes. They can be roughly divided into categories:
Results of a meeting of authoritative organizations (“meeting of the Russian Security Council”, “meeting of the Interreligious Council of Russia to assess events in Ukraine” or “decision of Almaz-Antey specialists to establish the causes of the death of Boeing-777”);
Open Statement Russian politicians(Ministry of Energy of the Russian Federation A. Novak on gas pricing for Ukraine, Russian President V. Putin on reconciliation with Ukraine, Deputy Secretary of the General Council of the United Russia party, member of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs S. Zheleznyak on the collapse of the Ukrainian economy and social collapse);
Statements by foreign political leaders (President of Belarus A. Lukashenko about the flow of weapons from Ukraine, ex-Prime Minister of Italy and leader of the Forward Italy! party S. Berlusconi);
Other media methods.
b) involvement of information sources of the victim country in the process of disseminating information. It must be said that this effect is carefully studied during the initial planning of information dumping, since it creates a “second wave.”
The domino principle is triggered. In practice, information from Russian sources was almost always picked up by Ukrainian (or other foreign) media. They, without hesitation, broadcast messages with links to the primary source, thereby helping to disperse the stuffing in their information flow. A striking example of the “second wave” was the dissemination (02/26/2014) by the Ukrainian media of a fake story that the head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, was supposedly leaving for Crimea “on the friendship train to support Russians in Crimea”. Primary source - microblog @KadirovRussia on twitter. Literally an hour and a half later, the “arrival” of the head of Chechnya was reported by UNN, Finance.ua, Obozrevatel and Glavred. The news was also widely circulated social networks and forums. The resonance lasted for several hours in the Ukrainian information flow.
But sometimes information dumping does not achieve its effect. The reason for this is often the extremely high resonance of events from the primary source, which obviously implies low level local media's trust in this information.
Let's consider an unsuccessful attempt at information injection by the Russian special services. In August 2014, dozens of materials about “torture of prisoners by Ukrainian security forces”(here are some of the materials):
The key message of the information dump was formed by Russian President V. Putin: Putin held Ukraine responsible for the crash of the Malaysian airliner. The entire range of custom messages clearly demonstrates the scale of coverage, the high density of information materials and their uniform semantic focus. Their obvious goal is to as soon as possible spread the opinion of Moscow and prevent other versions from developing.
A month later, the scale of the operation “imposing false reasons for the death of the Boeing 777” spread to the foreign expert community, foreign political scientists and foreign media.
Six months after the tragedy, information leaks were focused on foreign experts who accused the investigative commissions of bias in the death of the airliner.
Today, the operation to impose false reasons for the death of the Boeing 777 has moved into the mainstream of current planned information events through the media. Such a transition from the reactive phase of information influence to the proactive phase became possible thanks to the formed arsenal of information tools, which today works practically without external effort, as if by inertia.
Thus, over the past few years, one of the frequently used methods of information influence has become information dumping.
A necessary condition for the formation of information dumping is the decision of the public opinion leader to convey his message to the target audience. Unlike hearing, stuffing spreads reactively, with connection to the process large quantity authoritative sources.
Information dumping is characterized by the “second wave” of dissemination of information that is created by others, incl. foreign media.
Vyacheslav Gusarov, expert in the field of information security, CVPI, IS group
* The opinion of the author of the publication may not coincide with the position of the agency
