Truth, trust, transparency: The case of WWF's 'Ivory Lane'

TRUTH, trust, and transparency. These are ideal values in governance and communications, but are increasingly harder to achieve in an age where rapid-response content is king. Although social media has the power to support the search for truth and transparency, it can also quickly destroy it and bring trust down with it. The recent case of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)'s "Ivory Lane" stunt reveals the challenges in maintaining the delicate balance amongst the "3Ts".

TELLING THE "TRUTH"

"Ivory Lane" was a fake online shop set up by WWF Singapore in a bid to tell the truth about illegal wildlife trafficking. Using the case of the global ivory trade, WWF set up Ivory Lane's website and social media accounts on Facebook and Instagram. With its sleek branding, the online shop's campaign described owning a piece of ivory as owning a piece of nature's luxury. The shop justified its sale of ivory as using "vintage" ivory - sourced from ivory that was hunted from elephants before the 1990 International ban.

In a matter of days of Ivory Lane's Facebook page going live on July 31, it attracted immense attention. The page provoked shock and rage from netizens, who left comments that ranged from horror to disgust at the shop for trading in Ivory, legal or otherwise.

When it was revealed a week later that Ivory Lane was a hoax engineered by WWF, subsequent social media and other media outlets - including the BBC - were awash with comments and discussions that were ironically, not on the ivory trade, but about the ethics behind WWF's campaign.

While many on social media applauded the use of shock tactics to generate awareness for WWF's campaign, there were also others who questioned the campaign, saying that it was adding to the swirl of fake news in cyberspace.

To be fair, the Ivory Lane saga cannot be considered as entirely fake news. Although it is true that the Ivory Lane shop is fake, it represents the reality of illegal wildlife trafficking. According to the WWF, Singapore is a significant player in the illegal wildlife trade, both as a transshipment hub and demand market. There are over 40 shops in Singapore selling ivory hunted before 1990. In other words, the truth is that despite the international ban on the import and export on elephant ivory in 1990, national enforcement of the ban here remains weak.

LESSONS IN MANAGING TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY

This episode has provided two key learning points for communication in the age of social media and the proliferation of fake news. Firstly, context matters and the playing field in which PR and communications practitioners operate in has become more complex and complicated. Many practitioners are focused on the speed at which information spreads via social media, and thus lose sight of the need to be aware of their audience's behaviour. Users of social media are now not simply passive consumers of information, but also active responders to (mis)information.

In most contexts, public reaction to pranks or hoaxes may be brushed off. Think of the various candid camera TV shows or YouTube videos. However, in this situation, we see that some annoyed netizens were relatively less tolerant towards the prank. Some keyboard warriors, having lost the battle against Ivory Lane, then repositioned their canons towards the WWF. As a result, attention has been taken away from the actual issues itself - the reality of illegal wildlife trafficking, and weak enforcement of the ivory trade ban.

Given the raw and transparent nature of social media, managing the "loss of face" and reputation of audience members is therefore vital in managing one's brand reputation.

Matrices that are used to measure success now have to take into account this new normal: the number of clicks and impressions are no longer good enough to indicate a campaign's outcome. It is really not about how many people have seen a post, but rather what people are saying about the post.

This brings us to the second learning point, which is the importance for organisations to carefully consider whether their communications strategies are in line with their overall objectives and ideal outcomes.

How does a company effectively translate the clicks, engagements and impressions generated online into substantive stakeholder engagement offline? More importantly, can organisations continue to effectively engage stakeholders whose trust they may have lost as a result of a high-risk shock campaign? While it is relatively easy to set up a social media page or mount a digital campaign, organisations must take great care in planning and executing these campaigns.

In the case of Ivory Lane, the WWF has made information available about the extent of ivory trade in Singapore, based on its covert investigations. The WWF team has also recently been spotted promoting environmental awareness in Asia Square Mall with a ranger, Rohit Singh.

That said, there are also limitations with too much transparency. WWF has noted that there are more than 40 shops selling ivory products, but stopped short of naming them. On the one hand, this may be to avoid an additional wave of criticism or legal action against the WWF. On the other hand, it also demonstrates the complexities in maintaining trust of different stakeholders while telling the truth. This is not the first WWF campaign that potentially affects the rice bowls of the average Singaporeans. (Nasi lemak with ikan kuning, anyone?)

While lobbying the government for stricter enforcements would potentially be the best solution, it would also be interesting to see, for example, to what extent WWF is able to gain the trust of the 40-odd shops and encourage them to stop trading in ivory altogether.

Hence, while it is important for campaigns to advocate the truth, the modes and contexts in which organisations operate matter greatly, as their credibility depends on how they manage trust and transparency. With social media becoming an increasingly double-edged sword for the 3Ts (Truth, Trust and Transparency), PR and communications experts need to be more mindful of the depth and nuances of running advocacy campaigns.