Can we really understand the mysterious and random virality of social media? In an immense sea of content, how do we predict which trends will generate enough movement to form a wave?
Some trends can be picked ahead of their time, however the explosiveness of a random tweet, call-to-action or cat video is almost impossible to pin-point.
While trends will mostly fade back and be replaced with another, the occasional and rare trend can have legitimate and measurable impacts on society. A recent example of this is the anti-plastic straw movement that took off in 2018.
It started with a terribly sad and visceral video of a straw being removed from the nose of a sea turtle – it’s likely you’ve seen it yourself. The internet is filled with images and videos relating to the impacts of pollution and climate change on the wildlife, however this video happened to stick in the social media sphere long enough to cause a stir.
In the context of environmental upset and helplessness, the plastic straw became the epitome of our harmful single-use plastic culture. In the space of a couple of months, plastic straws were disappearing from venues and public discourse stigmatised their use. Massive chain restaurants such as McDonalds and Starbucks announced plans to ban the plastic straw, as well as some cities and countries introducing bans or taxes on similar single-use products.
While this is ultimately a positive movement with good intention, rejecting the use of plastic straws is an easy and short-term relief to an overwhelming frustration with single-use consumer culture. This year we’ve been seeing similar trends emerge with the rise of keep-cup popularity and debates over plastic bags in super markets.
These trends may be tokenistic, however, they are telling of widespread sentiment and signify the public’s desire to be heard and responded too.
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.
An organisation’s reputation is at its core, really how people feel about them. These feelings can be based on their interaction and knowledge of the brand, or their experience with the products and services the organisation provides. This reputation is important as it can often dictate the actions or choices audiences and buyers make, impacting an organisation financially and its ability to grow. If managed and measured, the value of an organisations reputation can safeguarded and used as a source of growth by strategically influencing key consumer’s consideration over the competition and the market more broadly.
People can interact directly with an organisation more than ever before, on social media, targeted advertisements, in-store experiences, customer support to name a few.
Given how wide reaching reputation is, how would your organisation make improvements given that it encompasses ‘everything’ an organisation does? What would be an efficient channeling of resources?
Social media is a great place to listen to the voice of consumers and key audiences who choose to voice their experiences online. It provides insight into what your organisation has done well or needs to do better. When used in conjunction with additional data, like survey analysis it can also reveal what channels and content are contributing to this perception, and how this can be shifted. Drawing from online resources and social media, Isentia has established 3 drivers to identify and quantify an organisation’s reputation.
1st Driver: Strategy
The first driver is about the future direction of an organisation.
Does your organisation have a strong leader? Does your organisation seek toinnovate? Does it shape the way society thinks? Is your organisation authentic in its messaging? Is your organisation likely to succeed?
When an organisation shows these qualities, it raises consumer trust and confidence, but it’s important that this is authentic. An example of this is Honestbee. Honestbee’s strategy covered several of these points - they were a fast expanding and innovative Singaporean startup in the online grocery delivery business. The founders focused on being perceived as successful, with plans for rapid expansion.
However, In October 2018, Habitat, the world’s first tech-integrated multi-sensory grocery and dining destination launched. Three months after the launch of Habitat, it was discovered Honestbee was deep in financial debt. This was a shock to the industry as Honestbee had a good strategy. Their downfall had been in their inauthentic messaging which resulted in the organisation losing trust of their consumers and investors.
2nd Driver: Culture
Culture is determined by the organisation having strong values and integrity.
Is the organisation socially responsible? Are practices fair and transparent? Do they promote a balanced workplace? Is it an environment where people aspire to work? Do they have ethical relationships with their business partners?
The growing number of organisations ‘going green’ is as good example of how the market can reflect and appeal to the values of today, in this case by demonstrating they're more environmentally conscious. In a 2019 Nielsen study, it was shown 1 in 3 consumers prefer eco- friendly products. Both Fairprice and Redmart, grocery chains in Singapore, also expressed growth in demand for their environmentally friendly products.
An organisation’s workplace culture, including ethical behaviour can also negatively impact an organisation. For example, Google was challenged for the way cases of sexual harassment were handled within the workplace. They were also challenged for questionable deals in AI technology that resulted in a protest of 20,000 employees across their offices. Google’s poor behaviour was exposed which led to criticism from Amnesty International and a backlash on social media.
3rd Driver: Delivery
Delivery is how good an organisation is at delivering on it’s day to day business.
Do people perceive the organisations products are good quality? Are the products well received? Is the organisation well knownin the industry? Do customers have a good experience? Are they successful?
A good example of how delivery can be analysed is in the sphere of reputation is the case of, Razer Inc. known as an organisation passionate about gaming. With a tagline ‘For Gamers. By Gamers’, they are well known in the gaming industry for supply gaming software, hardware and accessories.
According to their annual report, their revenue last year, hit an all-time high of 712 billion US dollars. While online reviews of their mostly praise the high quality of Razer products, a common complaint on sites such as trustpilot.com, Reddit and Forum Hardwarezone are about slow or unhelpful customer support. Some customers even expressed that due to the poor customer support for products, they were even considering switching brands. This signals an opportunity. While Razer Inc has performed well financially and seemingly has a message that appeals to their key consumer, by improving their touchpoint experience and capacity to deliver they could potentially eclipse the competition and swing those who were apathetic towards other brands.
This is just a small glimpse of how your organisation’s reputation can be analysed and measured by a combination of social media data and more traditional market research techniques. Executing a broad analysis of your organisation based on the 3 drivers of Strategy, Culture and Delivery, we can assist in gauging your organisation’s reputation and how it fares against competitors. With a clear metric for overall reputation and a breakdown of performance by driver, Isentia's Reputation Analysis helps your organisation identify areas for improvement and where there are opportunities to strengthen PR, marketing and engagement strategies.
An organisation’s reputation is at its core, really how people feel about them. These feelings can be based on their interaction and knowledge of the brand, or their experience with the products and services the organisation provides. This reputation is important as it can often dictate the actions or choices audiences and buyers make, impacting […]
Across the communications landscape, teams are being asked to do more with less, while staying aligned, responsive and compliant in the face of complex and often shifting stakeholder demands. In that environment, how we track, report and manage our relationships really matters.
In too many organisations, relationship management is still built around tools designed for customer sales. CRM systems, built for structured pipelines and linear user journeys, have long been the default for managing contact databases. They work well for sales and customer service functions. But for communications professionals managing journalists, political offices, internal leaders and external advocates, these tools often fall short.
Stakeholder relationships don’t follow a straight line. They change depending on context, shaped by policy shifts, public sentiment, media narratives or crisis response. A stakeholder may be supportive one week and critical the next. They often hold more than one role, and their influence doesn’t fit neatly into a funnel or metric.
Managing these relationships requires more than contact management. It requires context. The ability to see not just who you spoke to, but why, and what happened next. Communications teams need shared visibility across issues and departments. As reporting expectations grow, that information must be searchable, secure and aligned with wider organisational goals.
What’s often missing is infrastructure. Without the right systems, strategic relationship management becomes fragmented or reactive. Sometimes it becomes invisible altogether.
This is where Stakeholder Relationship Management (SRM) enters the conversation. Not as a new acronym, but as a different way of thinking about influence.
At Isentia, we’ve seen how a purpose-built SRM platform can help communications teams navigate complexity more confidently. Ours offers a secure, centralised space to log and track every interaction, whether it’s a media enquiry, a ministerial meeting, or a community update, and link it to your team’s broader communications activity.
The aim isn’t to automate relationships. It’s to make them easier to manage, measure and maintain. It’s about creating internal coordination before the external message goes out.
Because in today’s communications environment, stakeholder engagement is not just a support function. It is a strategic capability.
Across the communications landscape, teams are being asked to do more with less, while staying aligned, responsive and compliant in the face of complex and often shifting stakeholder demands. In that environment, how we track, report and manage our relationships really matters. In too many organisations, relationship management is still built around tools designed for […]
This was not an election won or lost on policy alone. While political parties released detailed plans around cost-of-living relief, energy, healthcare and education, the battle for attention played out across a different terrain. One shaped by identity, digital influencers and polarised media narratives.
1. Policy set the agenda, but didn’t hold it
At the start of the campaign, traditional media focused on familiar priorities. The Labor government’s May budget led with cost-of-living relief, fuel excise changes and increased rental support. The Liberals responded with proposals for nuclear energy and a plan to cut 40,000 public service jobs. While these issues framed the early weeks, they were quickly overtaken in online discussions by stories with more cultural weight.
On social media, a video comparing Peter Dutton to Donald Trump circulated widely, while Anthony Albanese’s “delulu with no solulu” moment during a Happy Hour podcast interview was picked up by national outlets and widely shared on social platforms. Personality often generated more interest than policy.
2. Messaging strategy went beyond the platforms
Both major parties tried to engage younger voters where they spend their time. Albanese’s appearance on podcasts and his interviews with influencers like Abbie Chatfield reflected a values-driven approach. Dutton’s appearance on Sam Fricker’s podcast targeted young men through a more casual, conversational format.
Mainstream media covered these appearances but often through the lens of political tactics rather than substance. When Abbie Chatfield’s pro-Greens posts attracted AEC scrutiny in early April, the story became more about influencer regulation than her political message.
3. Polarisation dominated public debate
The second leaders’ debate on 10 April marked a turning point, with stark contrasts on energy, education and immigration. Dutton's focus on crime and border control drew backlash, while Albanese was seen as calm but cautious. Instead of clarifying party differences, the debate intensified existing divides.
Online commentary quickly split along ideological lines. Audiences did not just debate the leaders’ points but used the debate to reinforce partisan views, highlighting how polarised public discourse has become.
4. Influencers reshaped election storytelling
Influencers became central to election storytelling. Abbie Chatfield faced strong support and criticism after posting about the Greens and questioning the Liberal Party’s media strategy. The Juice Media released satirical videos targeting defence and energy policies, resonating with disillusioned younger audiences.
Even incidents unrelated to official campaigns became flashpoints. In February, a video from an Israeli influencer alleging antisemitic comments by NSW nurses went viral, triggering political statements and shifting media attention to broader issues of hate speech and accountability online.
5. Culture wars outpaced policy in the final stretch
As the election neared, cultural tensions gained traction. On 12 April, media attention turned to Peter Dutton after reports emerged that his Labor opponent Ali France was leading in Dickson. Around the same time local authorities dismantled a tent encampment in the area while Dutton was campaigning in Perth. This raised questions about leadership and visibility on local issues.
Across social and news media, themes like Gaza, curriculum debates and identity politics took centre stage. Slogans such as “Get Australia back on track” were interpreted as echoes of US political rhetoric. Jacinta Price and Clive Palmer were both linked to similar messaging, fuelling memes and commentary about the Americanisation of Australian politics.
Rather than rallying around shared policy concerns, audiences engaged with content that reflected deeper anxieties about national identity and international influence.
What stood out the most wasn’t necessarily the policy itself, but the moments, memes, and messages that tapped into cultural tensions. The freedom for media and social media users to connect with and amplify these narratives created an arena where some politicians struggled to engage effectively. While some stuck to party lines without fully understanding the patterns driving media and social discourse, others embraced the shift, adapting to the rhetoric that was emerging online. The lesson is clear: in today’s media environment, ignoring what people are saying or the patterns of conversation isn’t an option.
Media and social highlights from the election campaign 2025
This was not an election won or lost on policy alone. While political parties released detailed plans around cost-of-living relief, energy, healthcare and education, the battle for attention played out across a different terrain. One shaped by identity, digital influencers and polarised media narratives. 1. Policy set the agenda, but didn’t hold it At the […]
