This report aims provides insight into the Banking Industry in Vietnam. We look into people’s preferences into their customer experience; using either traditional or digital banks, we deep dive into the topics driving social conversations about the banking industry, and the top mentioned brands related to the banking industry in Vietnam.
We have explored the latest trends and unpacked the current situation faced by the digital banking industry in Vietnam.
Download the whitepaper and read more.
Loren is an experienced marketing professional who translates data and insights using Isentia solutions into trends and research, bringing clients closer to the benefits of audience intelligence. Loren thrives on introducing the groundbreaking ways in which data and insights can help a brand or organisation, enabling them to exceed their strategic objectives and goals.
There’s no doubt the GameStop saga caused quite a stir within the finance industry and beyond. From a communications perspective, I’d like to reflect on the reputation of the finance industry and what’s changed as a result of the incident. I’d also like to explore the sentiment towards different financial institutions.
It’s important to delineate between investment banks, hedge funds (including HFTs and other obscure finance organisations) and commercial banks. For all the flak that commercial banks get, on the whole, individual banks are pretty good at communicating with consumers, maintaining their reputation and avoiding healthy skepticism turning into outright criticism.
Both professionally and personally I am compelled to regularly read the comments under breaking news articles shared on social media, and no matter what the cause or issues, I cannot recall a single story’s response being so absolutely one-sided.
When Isentia did an analysis of social media conversation relating to the GameStop saga, it found 88% of comments expressed an opinion about the topic supported the insurgent Wall Street Bets group. Approximately 50% of comments expressed a clear statement that hedge funds were losing at their own game and deserved no sympathy. The positively gleeful schadenfreude at the losses sustained by the hedge funds unified groups that in any other contexts would be building strawmen to attack each other in a never-ending battle of replies. Commenters in support of Wall St Bets floated conspiracy theories of the Democratic Party’s and Joe Biden’s personal involvement, while others called for the beginning of a socialist revolution. Robinhood closing positions and restricting trading in GME united such disparate voices as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump Jr., a potential dinner party for the ages that was cut short by AOC reminding Cruz of his role in the January 6th Capitol storming.
This reaction shouldn’t be surprising to anyone. Recent real-life examples, like the GFC have built up doubt in financial institutions like hedge funds and investment banks, and cultural representations of these organisations tend to be negative.
Looking at Hollywood films about investment bankers and hedge funds, we see a list of negative depictions; The Big Short, Wall Street: Greed is Good, Wolf of Wall Street, Margin Call and American Psycho. Indeed, it’s hard to find a positive depiction of Wall Street and high finance with the possible exception of the Pursuit of Happyness.
Opinions of ‘Wall Street’ in the 2017 US YouGov survey, found that 77% of people believed that “most people on Wall Street would be willing to harm consumers if they believed they could make a lot of money and get away with it”, 72% believed Wall St financiers were more greedy and selfish than regular people. By contrast, in 2018, only 66% of 18-24 year olds and 76% of 25-34 year olds said they have always believed the earth was round. Put another way, you would possibly have more success on social media, arguing for a theory of a flat earth, than you would for the idea that there are ethics on Wall Street.
But none of this is new, those surveys are years old, people still talk about the open wounds of the GFC in 2008 and American Psycho was released in 2000. It may have ebbed and flowed at times, but movements like Occupy Wall Street didn’t feel like a response a single moment, but looked to address long-standing grievances. People have long been cynical about hedge funds and investment banks, and it doesn’t appear much has been done by the industry to improve the situation. Thought pieces on public relations and branding express exasperation with the financial services sector, generally acknowledging early in the text; ‘we know you don’t like it but here’s why you need it’, much like a dentist explaining flossing.
And who could blame hedge funds and investment banks for being ignorant in the modern world of communications? They are non-consumer facing businesses. They don’t have issues like other non-consumer-facing businesses (mining companies) that regularly seek community and environmental project approvals and face a highly organised and powerful climate change movement. They also don’t have an easy story to tell. The mining sector’s blue-collar jobs and regional economies have a more convincing message than providing liquidity to financial markets and diversifying risk.
So if the reputation hasn’t changed why would we suddenly talk about it from a communications perspective? Because the consequences have changed. The power of social media conversation and accessible trading platforms has meant that suddenly the poor reputation of these firms not only makes them a target for activist financial consequences, but also an entirely unsympathetic one (again, 88% of commenters on social media supported the actions of Wall Street Bets, and celebrated hedge fund losses). The question of regulating future market distortions such as GameStop is made politically complicated by this sentiment.
The other thing that’s changed; the messaging is clearer. People often distrusted Wall Street, but the usual attacks of income inequality and regulation tend to be murky and complicated. The frequent usage of the word democratisation is probably the most interesting development in the entire GameStop saga from a communication perspective.
Anyone who has studied or read about behavioural economics and knows about experiments in the Dictator Game will readily understand there is an innate drive towards fairness in our dealings with others, and perceptions of unfairness encourage us to punish the perpetrators, even if it’s to our own detriment. Thus, generating a clear narrative of unfairness is a powerful tool to generate support for a cause. The traditional attacks of income inequality are often the flagship of anti-Wall Street or anti-finance messaging and are often blurred enough to create a reasonable level of debate. Even if everyone agrees that regulation isn’t working, surveys in the US show deep divides between whether people believe the problem is about not enough regulation, not adequate enforcement of existing regulation, or if it’s the wrong type of regulation. This disagreement makes it difficult to build a clear policy of reform.
Democratisation, however, feels like it is a more powerful and clearer message. Propelled into the limelight most clearly by the actions of Robinhood, it asks a question of fairness that is far harder to obscure or dispute. We can argue whether or not the game is rigged, but no one can deny it’s unfair if you’re not allowed to play.
As a communications professional I am interested in the development of the narrative of democratisation and accessibility, and how those who support regulation in the post-GameStop era find ways to attack this sentiment. I am also interested to see how investment banks and hedge funds respond. They’re clearly starting with a difficult story to tell. While none of this has been a problem before, they now need to find a way to communicate with the wider public, particularly young people. They also need to shift a narrative that has existed for decades if not longer. In this partisan era one might avoid consequences from the antipathy of either progressives or conservatives, but the concentrated and focused antipathy of both, united by a simple and powerful message, is something to be concerned about.
There’s no doubt the GameStop saga caused quite a stir within the finance industry and beyond. From a communications perspective, I’d like to reflect on the reputation of the finance industry and what’s changed as a result of the incident. I’d also like to explore the sentiment towards different financial institutions.
The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, and human stories shape the narratives across news and social media and ultimately reflect how the country is experiencing and remembering Brisbane 2032.
The difference is while the news media is overwhelmingly concerned with the logistics of the Games, the public is more interested in its social and economic consequences.
On social media, the conversation is a mix of excitement and concern, with a strong focus on what the Games will feel like. Discussions about social impact and economic outcomes are prominent, as people debate everything from housing affordability to the potential for new community arts programs.
In the news, the narrative is far more narrow. An incredible amount of the coverage is dedicated to infrastructure, with a particular focus on the cost and controversy surrounding the main stadium. The second-largest topic is the political jousting that accompanies these infrastructure debates.
While politicians dominate the news, what's making a real impact on social media are the communities and institutions at the heart of the conversation.
In the news, the most-quoted voices around Brisbane 2032 are overwhelmingly political figures, led by the Queensland Premier and Deputy Premier. Much of the coverage has centred on Premier Crisafulli’s media appearances, including a notable stop at Rockhampton’s Fitzroy River to promote plans for a feasibility study into using the site for rowing events despite concerns about crocodiles and currents.
The Deputy Premier, meanwhile, has been most prominent for his push to build a new stadium at Victoria Park. That proposal has fuelled debate over whether Brisbane 2032 is shifting away from being a sporting project to a political land grab. The discussion is further sharpened by Queensland’s reported shortage of tradies, with calls for urgent measures to recruit more skilled workers to meet the surge in construction and infrastructure demand tied to the Games.
Even Donald Trump makes an appearance in the coverage, with Brisbane’s bid to host the Quad Leaders’ Summit drawing headlines and gaining the support of Prime Minister Albanese.
On social media, the conversation is being shaped largely by organisations and grassroots communities. Victoria Park, now at the centre of the stadium debate, has become a focal point for how people see the legacy of Brisbane 2032, and Queensland more broadly. Campaigns to preserve the green space are gaining traction, amplified both by smaller local outlets such as The Westender and by national publications including ABC and The Guardian.
The term "legacy" represents the most significant challenge in the Brisbane 2032 narrative, as the data reveals a mismatch between the public's focus on experience and the media's framing of cost and conflict.
On social media, the legacy conversation is aspirational and driven by the sporting theme, where discussions about preserving green spaces like Victoria Park highlight a desire for tangible, long-term community benefits. Other cities are also seizing the aspirational momentum of events like Brisbane 2032, with figures such as Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate using social media to highlight for hyper-local audiences the potential returns on investing in this opportunity. News coverage frames legacy as a political and economic undertaking, dominated by the cost of stadiums, the allocation of funding, and the political conflict between the government and its opposition.
Framing the use of the Fitzroy River as an opportunity for sustainability or presenting construction timelines as local job creation makes the connection between political debates and the community and sporting outcomes people truly care about more resonant, while also painting a positive vision for the legacy of Brisbane 2032.
Generic ‘good news’ posts or Olympic press tend to generate weaker engagement The content that captures public attention is highly specific, and often human-centric or controversial.
On social media, the most engaging content included the debate around HYROX judging standards, the passionate campaign to include Lawn Bowls in the games, and celebrating the specific achievements of individual swimmers.
In the news, it’s not the general updates that resonate, but detailed reports, whether on cost blowouts at specific venues, the impact of turning a local river into an Olympic event site, or the campaign to include Australian Rules Football in the program.
Media moments and narratives gain traction when meaning is applied. Shift content strategies from generalities to detailed storytelling, focus on journeys, the tangible impact of a new community facility, or a transparent explanation of a complex issue for example. The battle for the hearts and minds of the public ahead of Brisbane 2032 will be won in these details.
The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, and human stories shape the narratives across news and social media and ultimately […]
What’s the Albanese government’s real game plan for its second term, and how will it play out in the media? Isentia recently brought together three of Australia's top political journalists to pull back the curtain: Peter Gearin, Editor in Chief atThe Mandarin, Jason Koutsoukis from The Saturday Paper, and acclaimed broadcaster Virginia Haussegger AM, for a panel with our partners CPRA at the Government Communications Forum, held at the National Press Club
For communications pros, the conversation was packed with clues about what to expect next from Canberra.
The panel honed in on the government’s positioning since its “monumental election victory” an “oddly quiet return to political normality.” It’s a question every political operator is asking: is this a calculated, smart and stable approach, or is the government squandering a chance to be “bold and progressive”?
Peter Gearin suggested the caution is deliberate and here to stay. His take? The government learned a huge lesson from the Voice referendum, when Labor bit off too much, meaning the Government now wants to occupy the political centre and won’t risk getting caught out like that again. Expect the cautious approach and the first-term playbook to continue.
What sits behind this posture is a desire to move beyond being a party in power to being seen as the party of government. While critics argue this looks like stagnation, supporters see a measured style that prioritises trust over spectacle.
So, what are the key issues the government needs to nail this term? The panel highlighted several areas to watch closely:
Much of the government’s steadiness comes from its internal team. Albanese is viewed as a strategic operator with deep Labor roots, and his confidence is backed by a cohesive cabinet. Ministers like Jim Chalmers and Katy Gallagher have emerged as key players, bolstering the sense of stability. This team-based strength underpins the government’s cautious but deliberate style.
While domestic policy dominates headlines, the government is also asserting national interest abroad. Stability in foreign policy has been part of its strategy to project maturity and avoid overreach. This layer of pragmatism adds to the perception of a government intent on consolidating itself as a long-term, steady hand.
For communicators, the real gold was the discussion on how to get a message across in today’s complex and vast media landscape.
The panel explored the government’s newer tactics, like the PM’s appearances on popular podcasts with influencers such as Abby Chatfield and Hannah Ferguson. This reflects a broader shift from broadcasting to narrowcasting, with messages tailored to segmented audiences rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. Success now depends on understanding fragmented channels and feeding high-quality, diverse content into the ecosystem.
But even as the playbook evolves, there’s an argument for getting the basics right. Gearin believes the media’s core job is to talk truth to power and explain how government decisions actually affect citizens, rather than just focusing on the politics or the optics. As news consumption habits change, especially among younger Australians, this balance between accountability and relevance is more important than ever.
We are watching a government playing a cautious long game, intent on cementing itself as the party of government while avoiding the risks of overreach. At the same time, the opposition’s weakness and media’s evolution raise questions about accountability and contestability. For communicators, understanding both the government’s measured strategy and the fast-changing media playbook is essential to navigating the term ahead.
What’s the Albanese government’s real game plan for its second term, and how will it play out in the media? Isentia recently brought together three of Australia’s top political journalists to pull back the curtain: Peter Gearin, Editor in Chief atThe Mandarin, Jason Koutsoukis from The Saturday Paper, and acclaimed broadcaster Virginia Haussegger AM, for […]
At Isentia’s Beyond the Barossa panel, industry leaders from tourism, higher education, government, defence, and media came together to discuss how South Australia is being positioned, both to its own people and to the world. The discussion highlighted shared challenges, opportunities, and the essential role of communications in shaping South Australia’s identity.
Chris Burford (South Australian Tourism Commission) outlined the dual challenge of building national and international awareness while fostering local pride. While South Australia currently ranks sixth of eight states on “appeal and consideration” as a tourist destination, it leads the nation in state pride. Events like Liv Golf and Gather Round have helped South Australians feel more confident about their state, and post-COVID reflections have driven a greater appreciation for the quality of life.
The SATC’s Celebrate the Simple Pleasures campaign reflects a move toward “place branding,” focusing less on iconic landmarks and more on the lived experience of being in South Australia. The research underpinning the campaign revealed a consistent theme: South Australians want the state to “grow but not change” embracing progress while retaining its distinct character.
Djurdjica Arslanagic (Adelaide University) noted that Adelaide’s perception internationally has shifted from being seen as a regional city to a globally attractive destination for students. South Australia’s reputation as welcoming, safe, and supportive resonates strongly with international families making education choices. With the upcoming merger of Adelaide’s universities, communication is focused on tailoring messages to varied stakeholders, from students to alumni to government, ensuring consistency while meeting different needs.
Sasha Meldrum (Nova Systems) discussed the enormous communications challenge posed by AUKUS and the scale of defence industry growth. With tens of thousands of workers required, from shipbuilders to nuclear scientists, attracting talent locally and globally will demand new policy approaches and fresh messaging. Meldrum emphasised that communicators must also help shift perceptions of defence, reframing it as not only about warfare but also about peacekeeping, security, and technological advancement.
Verity Edwards (Hughes PR) reflected on the contraction of South Australian newsrooms and the rise of alternative platforms. Traditional prestige outlets like The Advertiser still hold influence, but strategies now require targeting the right audience with the right medium. For some clients, industry publications or regional media can have far greater impact than mainstream outlets. Edwards highlighted the need for nuanced communication strategies that prioritise outcomes over exposure, and lateral thinking to match stories with audiences.
A key challenge raised during the Q&A was South Australia’s ongoing algal bloom crisis. Burford noted its severe impact on coastal communities and tourism, with uncertainty around long-term recovery. He stressed the importance of communication grounded in science and transparency to maintain public trust, comparing the challenge to COVID in its unpredictability. The discussion highlighted how crucial clear, proactive communication is, both in explaining what’s happening and in shaping the narrative around next steps.
Contact us to discover how communicators are navigating complex industries, engaging diverse audiences, and shaping stories that resonate. You can also watch the full panel discussion here.
" ["post_title"]=> string(68) "Beyond the Barossa: Communicating South Australia’s evolving story" ["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) "strategic-storytelling-pr-comms" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-08-21 04:00:33" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-08-21 04:00:33" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=41445" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }At Isentia’s Beyond the Barossa panel, industry leaders from tourism, higher education, government, defence, and media came together to discuss how South Australia is being positioned, both to its own people and to the world. The discussion highlighted shared challenges, opportunities, and the essential role of communications in shaping South Australia’s identity. South Australia’s brand: […]
Get in touch or request a demo.