Welcome back to the latest edition of Faqcheck Insights! This blog is designed to assist companies about trends and potential informational threats that could impact their brand's reputation. This biweekly blog maps issues surrounding the complex online content landscape, helping local and international corporations in Malaysia identify and counteract sources of misinformation and disinformation. 

In this installment, we’re unpacking issues stemming from the Crowdstrike update that triggered one of the largest global IT outages in history. Global newsrooms reported that Crowdstrike’s outage has caused airports to shut down and grounding of commercial airlines.  

Stock exchanges and credit card processors also encountered trouble processing transactions, and emergency services in hospitals were disrupted.  

Large corporations like Starbucks, Amazon and other retailers faced logistical issues as the effects continue to spiral onto other smaller players.

What happened in the days after the Crowdstrike outage is relevant to other industries in the context of misinformation and disinformation. Let’s take a look at how companies can deal with these incidents.

Hyper reporting

We know that widespread use of smartphones has significantly impacted the dissemination of information. Every individual has at least one smartphone with the ability to record, edit and share content easily on social media platforms.  

Sharing such content is often done out of curiosity or novelty, but there are risks when videos or photos are recorded without journalistic or objective investigation.  Materials could be shown out of context and pose even a greater risk to corporations, if its intention was to misinform. Tweets like this and this spread fast on the Internet and without proper media literacy,  consumers are quick to react and may institage all types of assumptions of a particular brand. 

This kind of hyper vigilance does not limit itself to Crowdstrike, but spreads across other sectors which are headlining the news such as the aviation industry. The public is sensitive for any news related to commercial airlines, and as a sector that relies heavily on passenger traffic and the exposure to hyper reporting is high.

These two examples - a toilet door falling off and poor baggage handling - demonstrate that incidents, no matter how minor, will expose companies to public scrutiny. With the help of multiple devices, passengers, and customers of other sectors, are quick to report. They may do it in public interest, out of anger or simply mischief. Companies need to be across such conversations. 

‍

The right response 

In the face of a major disaster, corporations do understand that the best approach to public reaction is not a rushed one. Public statements like this from Crowdstrike and a guide from Microsoft, reflects their strategy of putting customers’ needs first while managing the confusion of this widespread IT incident. But more often than not, sensationalism takes centre stage as users look for a party to blame in last week’s disaster.  

Example, Crowdstrike’s decision to offer consumers a US$10 apology voucher was criticised heavily, through this public backlash. The situation was further aggravated when some users who had received the voucher took to social media to say that it didn’t work.

Companies know that reeling back from the amplification of initial misinformation can be difficult as cynics may be reluctant to accept corrections, especially when an online narrative starts shifting maliciously.

In this case, being proactive with the right kind of response can benefit a brand’s reputation and tackle any risk of misinformation. 

For example, the Philippines Center of Investigative Journalism ran an investigation to find out how the e-haling company Grab’s surge pricing model worked. And through data collection and customer interviews, the company responded to some of the discrepancy in the findings.  Whether the responses were satisfactory or provided transparency, the company’s stance of responding to claims of their opaque algorithms can be seen as a way to manage public expectations.  

‍

Transparency

The Crowdstrike incident underscored the importance of transparency in an interconnected world where information moves rapidly across multiple online platforms. In a system like Crowdstrike and related technological platforms, maintaining trust is important as clients rely on such technology to protect their sensitive data and system. 

A corporation which establishes itself as a reliable and trustworthy provider will keep its existing customers happy and attract new ones. Good business practices of transparent communication about the nature, scope, and impact of cybersecurity incidents allows clients to make informed decisions about their own security measures and responses.

While experts and newsrooms were quick to point out that the Crowdstrike incident had nothing to do with cyberattackers or terrorism, IT outages are often complex and laden with technical jargon. It gives rise to misinterpretation or oversimplification, often leading to the spread of incorrect information. Combatting this misinformation with factual rebuttals is tough because of the technicality involved.

Using satire and humour to understand Crowdstrike’s outage is a way of keeping the issue light, but does not help a brand’s reputation and gives rise to inaccuracies. 

Furthermore, conspiracy theories such as this, do not help when the narrative spirals out of control with hundreds, if not thousands, of online users contributing to the noise. Fear mongering is rife as the IT crash stirs up other conspiracy theories from World War 3 to likening the outage to having Covid-like characteristics fuel the fire of misinformation.

Additionally, this quick edit on Wikipedia page, which has since been altered, confirms to naysayers about how chaotic technology can be, even posting that it was artificial intelligence that was responsible for this IT disaster.

During fast-developing news events, confusion often reigns on major tech platforms, with users scrambling to obtain accurate information in what appears to be a sea of false or misleading posts that rapidly gain traction.

The speed and instantaneous nature of social media gives little or no room for verification, and misinformation can spread like wildfire. Online users tend to have merely seconds to scroll and are often on the lookout for the next piece of news or entertainment, so digitally altered images like this one can have a severe impact on all the brands involved.

The insight here for corporations is to manage the public's expectation and take control of the narrative as quickly as it is possible to avoid misinformation or disinformation. The online community has shown its own ability to debunk fake news, as shown in this tweet, but how do corporations themselves cope with the speed of how online news spreads?

This example from Malaysia’s state water corporation Air Selangor illustrates one way of managing communication about water crises. Its July water disruption announcements were displayed on multiple social platforms, which provided regular updates throughout the water cut and addressed questions with timely information.  

This strategy has evolved over time, and much needed to combat the minute-by-minute expectation for accurate information.  More importantly, staying on top of conversations and public narratives allows corporations to be transparent, responsible and also combat misinformation. 

‍