The regional comprehensive economic partnership through the eyes of AI
The media coverage of the regional comprehensive economic partnership (RCEP), a monumental deal among 15 Asia Pacific countries, has been interesting.
As media analysts, we looked into more than 800 articles and videos from the prominent news outlets across the 15 countries that signed the deal within the time period of 8 November to 20 November 2020.
Natural language processing uncovering the power dynamics in the region
We employed state of the art AI models specialising in natural language processing (NLP), and contextualised them with our strategic viewpoint.
Sharing more about the AI analysis, Joseff Ymanuel Tan, Jr, data scientist at Isentia, noted: “NLP models work well for key information retrieval, specifically identifying proper nouns (entities). The entities are classified into several categories by the AI/NLP model.”
The first category we were interested in was the most frequently mentioned location names (country names, city names, etc). The image below provides a glimpse of the NLP model identifying the entities from an excerpt of an article.
The word cloud here shows the countries identified by the AI/NLP model. The bigger the country name is, the more number of articles covered it. The US (appeared in 843 articles) & China (749 articles) were the top countries mentioned.
Sharing insights from the NLP analysis, Arisa Otsuka, Analyst at Isentia, said, “This deal was seen as a significant victory for China as it reduces the impact of the ensuing trade war between the US and China by reducing China’s reliance on US trade [1]. The articles also mentioned the waning influence of the US as many allies rethinking their economic ties with the US [2].”
One of those US allies being Japan (584) which was also the third most mentioned country. Some of the reasons why Japan was mentioned where their plan to sign military ties with Australia [3]; also Japan was covered as the one ensuring the protection of their local farmers by retaining tariffs on essential products like rice, wheat, dairy etc.[4]
Arun Elangovan, Regional Analytics Manager of Isentia Asia said, “At first glance of the country names, the AI is merely confirming the hypothesis that everyone would have regarding this deal, the 15 countries who signed the agreement are covered equally. But when we look at the results of the AI through a different lens, the message changes.”
While the previous word cloud shows how many articles the countries appeared in, the following word cloud demonstrates how many times the countries were mentioned across articles. This word cloud not only captures the essence of how prominently a country is covered but also uncovers subliminal messages or in other words, the unsaid.
The articles more prominently mentioned China (4324 times) than any other country. US (2171 times), Japan (1483) and Australia (1246) were some of the other countries also prominently mentioned. This could seed the idea that some countries are more influential than others, portraying the power dynamics in the region.
The media also extensively covered some countries that were not part of the deal. The first one being India (296 articles), as India was initially part of the RCEP and withdrew towards the end of last year. The coverage on India was mostly about how the countries (esp. Australia, Singapore & Vietnam) [5][6] are hopeful & keeping the door open for India to join the partnership in the future. Japan considers India’s presence necessary to counter China’s economic weight [7]. The other country was Taiwan (66 articles). Taiwan was reportedly underplaying the significance of RCEP by pointing out that 70% of it’s exports to RCEP is already tariff-free; instead, they were hopeful of joining the Trans-pacific Partnership (CPTPP).[8]
Video AI hints towards a hopeful & prosperous future
The subliminal messaging in video coverage are less subtle as compared to articles. This is due to a video having 2 components, the visuals and the audio/speech.
“Most of the news reporting on mainstream media state the facts through the audio/speech and show accompanying visuals. When we analysed the audio/speech, the narratives were very similar to the one we uncovered through the articles,” said Ma. Angelica Tatad, Data Scientist at Isentia.
But while analysing the visuals we found different narratives. Francis De Leon, Jr. Data Scientist at Isentia said the analysis of the video was “done through a state of the art neural network (AI) which can identify the objects shown in a video. Our analysts then group these object labels into relevant categories.”
Apart from the usual suspects with groups of objects detected like people (incl. audience, speaker, journalist etc.) & event-related labels (incl. conference, auditorium etc.).
The above image shows the AI (Google Video AI) identifying various objects shown in a video.
There were some interesting group of objects detected such as Buildings & Cityscape.
The above graph shows the various labels and the number of times they appeared in the videos.
The other group was Transport & Vehicles (as shown in above graph)
These groups of labels seem to indicate that the media is visually portraying this partnership as future-looking and opportunity for progress.
The other group of labels that were informative was the Food group (as shown in above graph)
The media also showed various parts of the food supply chain, touching on one of the top priorities for countries especially in the Southeast Asia region, food security. This deal brings could potentially ease the tariffs on food import and export amongst the countries that are part of the deal.
Analysing the coverage around RCEP through the eyes of the AI revealed that the media while largely emphasising the impact on the on-going power dynamics be it the dynamics between the US & its allies and China, also portrayed this deal as bringing a bright and prosperous future to the countries in the region. It also revealed that there are some subtle/subliminal messages that lie underneath the obvious.
Written by: Arun Elangovan, Regional Manager, Advance Analytics – Insights, Asia
This is the “wpengine” admin user that our staff uses to gain access to your admin area to provide support and troubleshooting. It can only be accessed by a button in our secure log that auto generates a password and dumps that password after the staff member has logged in. We have taken extreme measures to ensure that our own user is not going to be misused to harm any of our clients sites.
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.
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.
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 […]
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.
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 […]
What began as a localised environmental crisis in South Australia rapidly evolved into a national conversation, shifting from ecological impact to the high-stakes realms of economic survival and political accountability. Our analysis reveals a narrative driven by the devastating images of marine life loss, and by the powerful currents of government action, scientific debate, and the tangible economic pain felt by communities. The coverage shows a pivot from the immediate environmental catastrophe to a sustained focus on two core drivers: the formal political response and the severe economic consequences for the state’s key industries.
How coverage of a natural disaster unfolds in modern Australia
Government and political process are the primary anchors of this coverage, shaping the narratives that dominated media discussion. Two event-driven pillars generated the highest peaks in media attention: the Federal Government's response in July, marked by ministerial visits and the announcement of a multi-million dollar support package, and the highly publicised Senate inquiry hearings in September. These formal processes consistently generated news, positioning political figures like Federal Minister Murray Watt and SA Minister Clare Scriven as the central subjects of the story. Coverage from outlets across the country, not just within South Australia, demonstrates how the crisis was framed as a matter of national significance, with themes of federal support and the Senate inquiry resonating far beyond the affected coastlines.
Local concerns versus big picture narratives: Community or political accountability?
Where the initial reporting centred on the immediate environmental disaster, the visible spread of the bloom and the devastating loss of marine life the conversation quickly broadened. The narrative shifted to system-level impacts, with an intense focus on the economic devastation faced by the state’s vital seafood, oyster, and tourism industries. This is where a gap emerges between the local and national conversation. South Australian media, led by outlets like ABC Radio Adelaide and FIVEAA, remained intensely focused on local hardship, giving voice to struggling business owners and communities. In contrast, national outlets framed the crisis through a lens of policy and political accountability, dedicating more relative coverage to the Senate inquiry and the bloom's connection to broader issues like climate change.
Experts inform the narrative, politicians react
While politicians were the most frequently mentioned subjects of the coverage, scientific experts and industry representatives were the most directly quoted sources. Professor Mike Steer from SARDI, for example, was consistently quoted to provide scientific context, while industry leaders like Tom Cosentino of Southern Rock Lobster Limited and Ben Barnes of the SA Professional Fishers Association gave voice to the economic fallout. This dynamic often placed government figures like the Premier, and the Federal Environment minister in a reactive position, responding to a crisis being defined and explained by the experts and stakeholders on the ground.
The algal bloom may have peaked in the water, but in the media its story is moving, towards accountability, recovery, science, and the politics of prevention.
Algal bloom: The local crisis propelled into national spotlight
What began as a localised environmental crisis in South Australia rapidly evolved into a national conversation, shifting from ecological impact to the high-stakes realms of economic survival and political accountability. Our analysis reveals a narrative driven by the devastating images of marine life loss, and by the powerful currents of government action, scientific debate, and […]
