Blog post
May 30, 2023

What’s the wrap on soft plastic recycling?

The circular economy of Australia’s soft plastics recycling system

You’ve probably heard of REDcycle by now – the initiative started by a passionate mum, providing Australian’s with the opportunity to recycle their soft plastics. Its operation helped reduce the amount of landfill in Australia and its sudden halt in operation sent the community into a frenzy.

The pause in the popular REDcycle program presented an opportunity to rethink the model for soft plastics recycling in Australia and find end markets for recycled package content. It also prompted Australians to rethink the way they consume products, rather than just the way they recycle them.

Social media conversations show Australians continue to encourage retailers and large corporations to use their influential power to create impactful change. These conversations are heightened where regression (or progression) is made towards sustainability.

Soft plastic recycling to the kerb

As Australians become more conscience about their soft plastic usage, it raises the question of whether the collapse of the REDcycle program was a blessing in disguise or more of a curse on sustainability?

From the end of October 2022 to the end of March 2023, Australians have consistently felt negative sentiment towards REDcycle’s collapse with spikes when key announcements were made by the organisation. Overall, close to 45% of Aussies felt negatively compared to 18.5% positive.

Source: Pulsar TRAC. Sentiment across online and social media between 29 October 2022 – 23 March 2023

A Twitter user sharing their frustration about soft plastic recycling.

The collection of coverage

As people learned the news about REDcycle, there was heightened concern about how soft plastics were going to be recycled. With over 12,000 mainstream media items about REDcycle or soft plastic recycling, it supports the idea that Australia’s broken plastic recycling system is distressing for many and more needs to be done. 

The halt in operation brought on more concern for the environment and ignited feelings of anger and distrust after thousands of tonnes of plastic had been stockpiled instead of being recycled.

Soft plastic coverage over time
Source: Isentia, REDcycle coverage across broadcast, print. Source Pulsar Trends, Twitter coverage. Source: Google Trends, search coverage ( 1 October 2022 – 20 March 2023)

Media coverage across different channels (social media, search, broadcast and print) shows spikes of coverage on the same days (9 November, 7 February, 27 February) but at varying levels;

  • 9 November – REDcycle announced it would pause its operations indefinitely. This shock announcement caused an influx of conversations on social media platforms which then caused people to search ‘where to recycle soft plastics’.
  • 7 February –  additional stockpiles of plastic were discovered in warehouses. People felt disappointed and let down by REDcycle.
  • 23 February – supermarket giants announced they would take responsibility for the 12,400 tonnes of soft plastic stored by REDcycle in warehouses around the country, ahead of REDcycle declaring their insolvency. This announcement gained more chatter across social media in comparison to other channels. 

Conversations on Twitter represent social media as the preferred option for users in comparison to broadcast, print and search.

Closing the loop

As political leaders have the power to influence their supporters on sustainability development, sustainability advocates are pushing Australian leaders to accelerate plastic waste regulations. 

Conversations on Reddit rapidly grew on 9 November – the day the REDcycle program paused. Overall sentiment was anger and sadness with many expressing their feelings of disappointment after learning their donated soft plastics were not ending up where promised. Others felt frustrated or angry towards large organisations who were not holding up their end of the deal, especially after taking the time to correctly separate their recyclable waste. 

At 40%, political enthusiasts far outweigh any other active community on social media and forums. Their ‘passion’ for Australia can be overshadowed, as they share their beliefs towards the government – ranging from incompetence to over governing. Generation Z are true digital natives and make up 22% of active online communities. This cohort is motivated to make more sustainable choices, if it means it will benefit the environment for the long term.

Who are the active communities discussing soft plastics?
Active communities on social media and forums discussing REDcycle and soft plastic recycling. (October 2022 – March 2023)
Comment
byu/AutoModerator from discussion
inmelbourne

Supermarkets to the rescue

The REDcycle program illustrated the complexity of soft plastics recycling and the need to build robust systems to close the loop on this common household waste. For years there have been stockpiling issues, dumping, toxic fires and lax regulations, making it challenging to operate.

Australia’s largest supermarkets continue to work towards reducing unnecessary plastics in their stores, and support the development of circular economies through the use of recycled material. 

Supermarket chains have moved quickly to find an alternative solution, teaming up with the National Plastics Recycling Scheme (NPRS) with financing from the Federal Government and top food and grocery producers to establish the Roadmap to Restart Taskforce.

23 February 2023, supermarket giants announced the return of soft plastics recycling by late 2023, despite the lack of recyclers. This announcement generated 6 x the amount of ‘supermarket’ Twitter mentions compared to 1 Nov 2022.

Twitter mentions and soft plastic recycling
Source: Pulsar TRENDS. Supermarkets and soft plastic recycling conversations on Twitter.

Although it’s a promising development, announcements like these are what drive the conversations and force change. This rings true as sustainability advocates push for more substantial action to address soft plastic waste in Australia.

Large organisations are being challenged to rethink how they package their products and how they can be more sustainable, what about the government?

A RED hot go

Minister for Environment and Water, Tanya Plibersek, has been vocal in her response to the soft plastics recycling crisis. Initially, the program’s failure was met with calls for urgent action with Ms Plibersek weighing in on the news, saying it was “really concerning” and put the pressure on major supermarkets to come up with an alternative recycling program.

Although it is acknowledged that the government plays a role, it has been made clear the responsibility also lies with manufacturers and packagers.

State and Federal Ministers are actively sharing their opinions and policies online in an effort to make change faster and positively influence their audience. Victorian Premier, Dan Andrews and the Victorian Government are leading the way, banning the selling and supply of single-use plastics in the state.


Commonwealth, State and Territory governments have jointly invested considerable funds into developing local capabilities to recover the challenging recycling stream and have committed to turning around Australia’s lack of progress on its recycling targets, setting new targets for 2025.

Who is leading the soft plastic conversation
Source: Pulsar TRAC. Influential federal and state leaders driving conversations about recycling and soft plastic usage.

Adding another interesting layer of insights on social media from our sister company Pulsar, is that reddit is playing a major role in disseminating sentiment surrounding the REDcycle program. The below chart shows the most recurring keywords grouped by channel. The larger the tile, the more times the topic has appeared in that channel. Conversations involving scientists were notable and finding a solution to plastic pollution was a key narrative.

Top keywords by channel. (October 2022 – March 2023)
https://twitter.com/IJepson/status/1590496324209999874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfwu0022u003eN

Trust was also a recurring keyword across all channels, indicating trust needs to be rebuilt. is something that needs to be rebuilt. Australians have begun to lose faith in the recycling industry as there is a lack of transparency into how much actually gets recycled.

The introduction of a new taskforce – the Road to Restart – will work towards rebuilding the public trust in soft plastic recycling. The taskforce also endeavours to ensure supermarkets and the packaging sector will get it right on their own accord.

The way forward

Conversations through online forums show Australians deeply care about sustainability, stating that ‘unless it can be recycled, it shouldn’t be produced.’

Social media platforms are especially fueled by sustainability advocates who need to share a broader awareness of recycling initiatives and earn potential audiences – conversations are widespread and emotions are elevated. Whereas broadcast and print channels are sharing the facts and the need to know information, directing audiences to use the information they have and to search where they can take their soft plastics. In addition to sustainability advocates, everyday Australians are learning how to pivot, seeking out support and ideas from fellow supporters on Twitter and other social media platforms.

If organisations can work together and policymakers can set clear legislative frameworks, it’s possible to implement necessary changes in both manufacturer and consumer behaviour to create a thriving circular plastics economy. 

The pause of REDcycle is certainly on its way to being a good thing for the environment.

If you would like to learn more about discovering how media intelligence can lead to insights across environmental issues or the active communities leading the conversations using audience intelligence, get in touch with us today.

Share

Similar articles

object(WP_Post)#8648 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(42649) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-10-13 20:23:41" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-10-13 20:23:41" ["post_content"]=> string(4358) "

Many organisations know stakeholder engagement matters, but turning that knowledge into an approach that consistently works is another story. At the recent webinar How to Master Your Stakeholder Strategy, leaders from Meridian Energy, the Victorian Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, and Isentia shared lessons from the field on what meaningful engagement really looks like.

Know who your stakeholders are

Stakeholders aren’t just on the periphery. As Mandy Griffiths from the Victorian Department of Families, Fairness and Housing explained, they are “the people who really have a great influence on whether the things that you’re working on or decisions you’re making are successful or not.” Internal stakeholders can be just as critical as external ones, especially in large organisations. Choosing terminology that reflects value and honesty helps too: her team prefers “critical friends” because it signals both importance and the possibility of differing views.

Build trust with evidence

Phil Clarke from Meridian Energy described how evidence can guide engagement strategies. By surveying 500 stakeholders mid-way through a two-year project, his team gained clear insights into what drives trust. This evidence-led approach, he says, “gives teams effectively a cheat sheet for what they need to do to build trust among their stakeholders.” Starting with data rather than assumptions helps teams focus their efforts where it matters most.

Learn through listening

Complex situations, like the pandemic, show why humility and iterative learning are essential. Mandy recalled that asking communities directly about their needs often revealed challenges her team hadn’t anticipated. “So many times we went in thinking we knew what the biggest pain points were, and it turned out to be something else entirely,” she said. Taking the time to listen ensures effort is spent on the right priorities.

Measure, adapt, and personalise

Measurement underpins high-performing strategies. Ngaire Crawford from Isentia stressed that “late teams don’t guess, they measure,” from establishing baselines to tracking engagement and adapting based on what the data shows. Effective strategies also go beyond simple demographics, grouping stakeholders by motivations, concerns, influence networks, and communication preferences. Closing the feedback loop is crucial: “Stakeholders who feel heard are the ones that are most likely to become advocates,” Ngaire explained.

Key takeaways

  • Treat stakeholders as central, not peripheral.
  • Use evidence to understand trust and guide decisions.
  • Listen first, act later, assumptions can mislead.
  • Measure and adapt continuously.
  • Personalise engagement based on motivations, not just demographics.

The common thread from the webinar: engagement works best when it’s informed, iterative, and genuinely centred on the people involved.

Watch the full webinar here, or contact our team to see how Isentia’s SRM solutions can help you achieve your stakeholder goals.

" ["post_title"]=> string(59) "Building stakeholder strategies that work in the real world" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(31) "stakeholder-engagement-strategy" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-10-13 20:23:45" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-10-13 20:23:45" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=42649" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
Building stakeholder strategies that work in the real world

Many organisations know stakeholder engagement matters, but turning that knowledge into an approach that consistently works is another story. At the recent webinar How to Master Your Stakeholder Strategy, leaders from Meridian Energy, the Victorian Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, and Isentia shared lessons from the field on what meaningful engagement really looks like. […]

object(WP_Post)#11024 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(42501) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-10-07 03:02:47" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-10-07 03:02:47" ["post_content"]=> string(9746) "

During reputational crises, many brands find themselves pressed into strategies that are entirely reactive. However, a better understanding of a brand's audience and stakeholders – how they communicate and what they value – would empower brands and the teams running their messaging to respond more authentically, helping comms land in the right way at the right time.
With AI content taking over audience news and social feeds, brand leadership must invest in creating a framework that actually measures authenticity.

Prashant Saxena, VP of Revenue and Insights, for Isentia (SEA region) in his research paper on "Authenticity in the age of AI" has identified cues or signals that audiences subconsciously look for when identifying if a social post is written by a human or virtual influencer. Understanding these cues gives brands and PR leaders a much needed manual or playbook that guides them with the content audiences expect to consume. These equip us with a practical roadmap with clear implications for AI governance and digital literacy amidst the workplace and audiences.

Why is authenticity in crisis?

There is a trust gap, as audiences show declining faith in brands and their leadership. Some of these factors are highly polarised, such as differing responses to CEOs and their part in society. But the most universal, and nascent, challenge to brand trust appears to be the rollout of AI. Businesses are now under the microscope, with changes to business models, substandard service and inauthentic communications all likely to be blamed on leadership teams haphazardly implementing AI solutions.

Astronomer's former CEO Andy Byron and the controversy at the Coldplay concert has added to this decline in trust and all the more underscores an authenticity crisis. Post the controversy, there was a fake apology statement that was circulated on X and other social media platforms. The company had to release a statement saying that the apology was in fact fake and was concocted by someone who wanted to satisfy audience sentiments. This is very telling in that, audiences will always be more attracted to content that conforms with their views and would accept anything at face value without having the need to fact check.

This underpins the need for brands to be as authentic as possible when it comes to responding to crisis.

Cues in action

Audiences are more alert than ever to signals of what feels genuine online. These subtle markers, from factual accuracy and cultural relevance to tone, consistency, and timing, influence whether people trust a brand’s message, engage with it, or scroll past.

Our analysis of leadership posts on social platforms reveals a pattern. The more authenticity cues a post displayed, the higher the engagement it received. It’s not about relying on one signal but about layering multiple ones together. Posts that showed identity, accuracy, emotional expression, and consistency outperformed those that didn’t. For brands, this insight offers a practical takeaway. Every post can be tested against these cues. The closer the content aligns with them, the more likely it is to spark meaningful engagement. When conversations are filtered through these markers, the most valuable audience feedback comes into focus, the kind that helps brands adjust strategies and connect more deeply with people.

Looking at how tech leaders post on LinkedIn shows just how powerful authenticity cues can be. Piotr Skalski’s celebration of hitting 30,000 GitHub stars combined identity, visuals, community validation, and more - and it drew the highest engagement. Tay Bannerman’s post leaned on accuracy, cultural insight, and emotion, earning slightly less traction, while Oliver Molander’s take on ChatGPT carried fewer cues overall and saw the lowest engagement of the three. This comparison highlights how posts with a richer mix of cues tend to resonate more, while those with fewer signals struggle to spark the same response.

Authenticity isn’t one-dimensional. It’s built from many layers, and brands that balance the scale and efficiency of AI with recognisable human signals will stand out. Those who manage both can achieve more by building trust, relevance, and long-term human connection. Ching Yee Wong, VP of Communications, APEC at Marriott International said, "AI can enhance planning and recommendations, but the human element remains central to the experience. Technology supports efficiency, while cultural sensitivity and personal care must remain human-driven."

How the launch of Chat GPT-5 did not conform with audience expectations

The GPT-5 launch was not the best. The expectations were so high, that audiences knew it was bound to disappoint. Why was it not up to mark? The online vocal users of a brand are the spokespeople that the brand did not choose. These audiences are loyal users of the product and in exchange, they expect that the brand provide them with what they need. The monetary aspect becomes irrelevant if the brand delivers.

When OpenAI launched GPT-5, many long-time users felt let down. The decision to merge earlier models into one version was seen by some as a cost-cutting move, and the disappointment was loudest among the platform’s most loyal audience. Running these reactions through our authenticity cues showed a clear gap in cultural relevance. The release didn’t reflect the expectations or norms of its most vocal users. That’s an important lesson for brands and leaders - audiences want to feel heard. The best way to achieve that is by analysing online conversations through these cues, which can reveal what people truly expect and guide how to respond.


Interested in learning how Isentia can help? Fill in your details below to get access to our latest Authenticity Report and read more about our cues designed to measure brand authenticity.

" ["post_title"]=> string(58) "How to rebuild brand trust through authentic communication" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(134) "Learn the major cues or signals that help PR leaders and brands measure authenticity, to deal with reputation risks and rebuild trust." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(58) "how-to-rebuild-brand-trust-through-authentic-communication" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-10-07 03:02:53" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-10-07 03:02:53" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=42501" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
How to rebuild brand trust through authentic communication

Learn the major cues or signals that help PR leaders and brands measure authenticity, to deal with reputation risks and rebuild trust.

object(WP_Post)#8746 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(42460) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 03:02:05" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 03:02:05" ["post_content"]=> string(3433) "

With a population of over 46,000 and a reputation for heritage streetscapes, and parks, the City of Burnside is one of Adelaide’s most well-known residential councils. But managing communications in a busy media landscape is no easy task. The council needed to ensure positive stories reached the public, while also tracking emerging issues and maintaining accurate records to support decision-making and accountability.

The challenge? Like many local governments, the City of Burnside needed a sharper, tailored approach to media monitoring.

The council wanted to:

  • See which local stories were gaining traction
  • Track sentiment and emerging issues early
  • Give executives and council members timely, accurate information
  • Simplify reporting and access hard-to-reach broadcast and parliamentary content

In this case study, we explore how the City of Burnside uses Isentia to:

  • Monitor story impact and public sentiment
  • Spot trends in other councils and anticipate issues
  • Share key updates automatically with leadership and teams
  • Receive proactive alerts and summaries on major events

With Isentia embedded across the organisation, the council can respond confidently, manage reputational risks, and make informed decisions across communications and planning.

Read the full case study or request a demo

" ["post_title"]=> string(90) "How Isentia helps the City of Burnside manage its reputation and anticipate complex issues" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(27) "city-of-burnside-case-study" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 03:02:10" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 03:02:10" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=42460" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
How Isentia helps the City of Burnside manage its reputation and anticipate complex issues

With a population of over 46,000 and a reputation for heritage streetscapes, and parks, the City of Burnside is one of Adelaide’s most well-known residential councils. But managing communications in a busy media landscape is no easy task. The council needed to ensure positive stories reached the public, while also tracking emerging issues and maintaining […]

object(WP_Post)#10972 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(42392) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 02:09:06" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-09-30 02:09:06" ["post_content"]=> string(11789) "

Mass AI-generated content has overwhelmed our social feeds, and that has set a sense of panic among PR leaders. Brand communications were tricky earlier, but this has been exasperated even further by AI content. Audiences have been left confused, whether it be not being able to differentiate between real and fake personalities online or fake statements being circulated to mislead audiences. This has kept leadership wondering how they can cut through and impact their target audiences who are, at the moment, overstimulated with AI-driven content.

We analysed 30M data points between 1st January 2025 - 12th August 2025 globally on social and mainstream media like X, Forums, Online news, LinkedIn, TikTok, Instagram and Facebook. We looked at real world cases of how audiences have been misled to believe something is real, and how this started a domino effect on the content being consumed by the world today.

The rise of synthetic content outranks fact-checkers by a mile

Synthetic media has taken over the internet and audience feeds have been flooded with unrelated and unreliable AI content. What's important to note is that, with mass AI content, unreliability can lead to getting into a dangerous spiral of consuming nonsensical content that does not benefit anybody. As a result, audiences have started to defend the content they see by wanting to only subscribe to what conforms with their expectations. With a decline in the number of fact-checkers, misinformation and disinformation have become rampant.

A real word case was when in the US a squirrel named Peanut “P-Nut” was given euthanasia for being illegally kept by a US citizen, a fake statement by President Donald Trump, in disagreement with the euthanasia by the authorities, was widely circulated on X. Audiences sympathised with this statement and stood by Trump, going as far as gathering support to make him the next President. This was a snowball effect, and the reason this happened was because the audiences had a public figure support what they were already thinking and Trump’s statement conformed with their expectations. Although the statement did not have any AI-involvement, it has become a case in point to understand how audiences perceive AI content. If they like what they see, whether it is human or AI, not a second is spared to confirm its authenticity.

Virtual influencers are creeping in on social media feeds

Mia Zelu, a virtual influencer, grew popular during this year's Wimbledon. On her Instagram, she had uploaded a photo carousel that looked like she was physically there at the All England Club enjoying a drink. At first, she seemed real, but the media and audiences quickly questioned it. She posted the images in July of this year during the tournament with a caption, but was quick to disable her comment section adding to the mystery and debate. There was a lot of online backlash with audiences clearly frustrated with how easily deceiving this could be. Despite the backlash, her follower count grew and her account now has about 168k followers.

The conversations around AI influencers is only just beginning and raises serious questions on authenticity, digital consumption and how AI personas can truly affect audience perceptions - without truly existing.

AI means brands are operating in a space of reduced trust

According to the AI Marketing Benchmark Report 2024, the trust deficit directly impacts brand communications strategies, as 36.7% of marketers worry about the authenticity of AI-driven content, while 71% of consumers admit they struggle to trust what they see or hear because of AI.

Audiences are not rejecting AI outright, but the opacity around it could be dangerous, making their confidence in AI as a tool shaky. This is where PR leaders need to make authentic communication a necessity and not just a "nice-to-have". In times where audiences are doubting whether a message was written by a human or a machine, the value of genuine and sincere human-driven storytelling rises.

Real-world instances where AI as a tool misses

Scepticism towards AI doesn’t just come from high-profile controversies. It shows up in small, everyday moments that frustrate audiences and remind them how fragile trust can be.

  • Grok’s image blunder: A widely shared photo of a young girl begging for food in Gaza was wrongly tagged by Grok as being from Iraq in 2004. The mistake spread quickly across platforms, fuelling anger about misinformation and raising questions about the reliability of AI tools.
  • McDonald’s drive-thru glitch: A customer in the US posted a TikTok showing how AI at a drive-thru added nine extra sweet teas to her order. The error caused by crosstalk from another lane, might seem trivial, but it highlights how automation can fail at simple tasks and how easily those failures go viral when shared online.
  • Air Canada chatbot case: A customer seeking information about bereavement fares was misled by the airline’s chatbot. When the company was asked to explain this, they claimed the chatbot was “responsible for its own actions.” A Canadian tribunal then, rejected this defence and ordered Air Canada to compensate the passenger. The incident drew widespread coverage, reinforcing public concerns that businesses are over-relying on AI without accountability.

Audiences expect to consume "more real and less fake"

The November 2024 Coca-Cola holiday campaign controversy exemplifies how quickly AI-generated content can trigger consumer backlash. When Coca-Cola used AI to create three holiday commercials, the response was overwhelmingly negative, with both consumers and creative professionals condemning the company's decision not to employ human artists. Despite Coca-Cola's defense that they remain dedicated in creating work that involves both human creativity and technology, the incident highlighted how AI usage in creative content can be perceived as a betrayal of brand authenticity, particularly devastating for a company whose holiday campaigns have historically celebrated human connection and nostalgia.

This kind of response to a multinational company really sets the record straight around what audiences expect to consume. PR leaders and marketers need to tread carefully when creating content, making sure there's no over-dependence on AI and that is obvious for anyone to point out there is no human creativity. Authenticity is in crisis only when we let go of our control around AI. This mandates a need for more fact-checkers and more audits around brands and leadership.


Interested in learning how Isentia can help? Fill in your details below to access the full Authenticity Report 2025 that uncovers cues for measuring brand and stakeholder authenticity.

" ["post_title"]=> string(47) "AI has saturated audience news and social feeds" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(47) "how-ai-saturated-audience-news-and-social-feeds" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-10-02 04:47:05" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-10-02 04:47:05" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=42392" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
AI has saturated audience news and social feeds

Mass AI-generated content has overwhelmed our social feeds, and that has set a sense of panic among PR leaders. Brand communications were tricky earlier, but this has been exasperated even further by AI content. Audiences have been left confused, whether it be not being able to differentiate between real and fake personalities online or fake […]

Ready to get started?

Get in touch or request a demo.