How do we use messaging platforms such as WhatsApp appropriately in a crisis?

Crises and disasters are often marked by a heightened need to seek information, as seen in the current Covid-19 outbreak.

To meet such needs, many use social media and messaging platforms such as Telegram, Facebook Messenger, Twitter and WhatsApp not only to share critical information but also to organise resources.

WhatsApp is particularly popular among Singaporeans, according to the State of Mobile Report 2019 by United States-based analytics firm App Annie.

But we know too well that while digital platforms can facilitate timely information exchange as well as civic pursuits and engagement, they can also be used to manipulate opinions and behaviour, spread panic and to amplify divides.

Instant messaging platforms, in particular, have been accused of being breeding grounds for echo chambers, and most of all, associated with the spread of misinformation.

Is this the case or are instant messaging platforms such as WhatsApp badly misunderstood?

IT IS (SOMETIMES) ABOUT RECIPROCITY

A day after Singapore confirmed its first case of Covid-19 on Jan 23, messages circulated on WhatsApp cautioning recipients to avoid specific hospitals and malls associated with confirmed or suspect cases.

In response, the Ministry of Health (MOH) clarified that it was unnecessary as there are strict protocols to handle and manage suspect cases.

Such public communications were quickly disseminated using different channels, including MOH’s own Facebook page and the Gov.sg WhatsApp group.

But rumours, memes and messages of places to avoid continued to circulate. Pictures and memes shared on Feb 7 when the alert level was raised to Dorscon Orange have been associated with the panic buying and hoarding that followed.

Why did these messages persist? Was the public messaging unclear? Is it a matter of media literacy? Are people just simply fond of bad news over positive news?

As a communication tool, WhatsApp is different from other platforms such as Facebook Messenger or Twitter.

Beyond the informational value embedded in multiple messages, memes and conversations, many interactions on WhatsApp serve a social function.

Users exchange messages and stay engaged in a chat group to signal that they are listening by responding to messages in the group. Such reciprocal exchanges encourage the production and reproduction of conversations, and often create feelings of solidarity and empathy within the group.

There are features in the platform that contribute to this sense of reciprocity.

The double blue ticks on WhatsApp to indicate that a message has been read introduce certain expectations in terms of communication — in a way having a message read but not responded to signal that it is being ignored.

More often than not, such features enhance two-way exchanges and contribute to the persistence of a topic.

The ability to forward or broadcast a single message to multiple chat groups and individuals encourages the trending of popular memes, pictures and rumours.

The end-to-end encryption feature provides users with the confidence that messages will not be read by anyone, not even WhatsApp itself, other than the intended recipients.

This can make users more willing to respond to show solidarity and express empathy regardless of the value of the information.  

A group chat on WhatsApp can manifest itself as a network where members observe certain norms and social dynamics. The extent of moderation and gatekeeping, the power structures between individuals in the group and of course, the characteristics of the messages, matter.

For instance, it is much harder to correct a message sent by the admin or moderator of a group. It is also difficult to correct someone who is perceived as senior in terms of age or authority in real life.

In other words, messages are constantly read not just for their informational value, but are read bracketed with perceptions about who is sending them.

Messages that build on existing and implicit biases are much more convincing and persuasive than messages that “don’t sound right”.

For example, jokes, memes and warnings about the eating habits of the Chinese have been circulated widely since the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak.

Such messages have evolved and expanded to include avoiding Asian people and Asian food in general and are seen circulating in countries such as Australia, United Kingdom and the United States.

But while there may be messages instigating panic, hostility and fear, the very same features of WhatsApp can also provide opportunities for civic engagement.

For instance, in one of the first ground-up initiatives on Covid-19 here, Singapore cooperative A Good Space created a Google spreadsheet on Feb 8 to connect different groups and individuals in sharing information and resources related to community response to the outbreak.

Members of the community used digital messaging platforms such as WhatsApp to share the spreadsheet, showing how technology can facilitate civic resilience in a crisis.

We can also recognise the battle against messages of hate, falsehoods and panic as a civic cause.

We can verify the information received with authoritative sources, and present facts where relevant in the same chat group where we can contest dubious information or hateful speech in a variety of forms. 

There is evidence of this happening already.

As the Covid-19 crisis unfolded over the past weeks, there have been instances of individuals using WhatsApp, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook to verify and question intentions behind messages.

For instance, in response to a list of places to avoid, individual users have engaged in conversations to debunk or verify the information as well as deliberate how to react to such information.

Even as the Government has used Pofma (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act) to blunt the effects of misinformation, let us not forget that civic action — on the ground as it happens — is often the most effective.

In a society where so much of our personal and social lives are connected by digital platforms, we must go beyond thinking about technology as the provision of electronic services or the betterment of individuals in terms of jobs.

The Covid-19 crisis presents new challenges which we can confront as part of a community. 

This necessitates rethinking how we mobilise and how we engage each other. It can mean disrupting certain power structures or norms in the chat group, or sending someone a private message seeking to verify the facts.

The nice thing is that it is only one WhatsApp message away.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Dr Natalie Pang is a Principal Investigator at the NUS Centre for Trusted Internet and Community and Senior Lecturer, Department of Communications and New Media, at the National University of Singapore.