Planning social listening activities

Identify Objectives and Map the Information Ecosystem

Before any social listening efforts begin, it is essential to identify what are the main objective of this activity for your particular context, and what characterises the information ecosystem you will be trying to monitor.

There are many ways in which one could go about collecting and researching this information, some of which may include undergoing interviews with strategic community groups within the information ecosystem, and with key community experts, such as other UNHCR colleagues working in community-based protection and communications, trusted members of the host community, influencers, implementing partners, civil society activists, private sector partners, and refugee groups. (See Information Needs and Information Ecosystem Assessments).

Questions that can be useful to ask while scoping the information ecosystem:

What are the primary sources of information within this ecosystem?
Which channels (social platforms, radio shows, tv shows, etc.) are most influential?
How are these channels accessed? By whom?
What are the prevalent and / or most influential languages?
What type of information on refugees are prevalent?
What are the dominant narratives or themes being discussed when refugees are mentioned?
How do these narratives impact perceptions of refugees and behaviours around refugees?
Who are the primary audiences consuming this information?
How does the information influence their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviour?
Are there particularly vulnerable groups of forcibly displaced people affected by these narratives? Alternatively, are there people more vulnerable to be deceive by misleading information or hate speech targeting refugees?
What is the reach and engagement of specific sources and narratives of interest for this monitoring task?
What are the relationships and interactions between different actors in the ecosystem?
Are there alliances or conflicts that impact information dissemination?

Non-exhaustive list of social and traditional media platforms which might be monitored depending on context:

Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
WhatsApp
Instagram
Telegram
TikTok
YouTube
WeChat
Radio
Print media
Television media

Identify Capacity, Tools, and Methodologies and Needs

Once objectives are defined and the information ecosystem mapped out, social and media monitoring methods can be used to monitor misinformation, disinformation, malinformation and hate speech, both online and offline.

Internal vs. External Social Listening

Monitoring online harms can be done internally using or building on available tools and capacity, and/or it can be done by an external vendor or partner. Deciding which way to go depends largely on each team’s capacity, expertise and available resources, as each solution has pros and cons.

Internal Social Listening

Pros

Cons

Contextual understanding: Internal teams have a deeper understanding of the organisation’s mission and humanitarian contexts.
Control and flexibility: Teams have full control over the monitoring process, allowing for immediate adjustments and prioritisation.
Capacity building: Enhances internal expertise and long-term capability.
Multiple methodologies: Ability to leverage benefits of both manual and automated monitoring processes.

Resource and labour intensive: Requires significant investment in tools, training, personal, and time.
Scalability issues: May struggle to scale quickly in response to large or sudden crises.
Language limitation: Depending on the context, internal language understanding might be limited or insufficient.

External Social Listening

Pros

Cons

Access to expertise: Leverages specialised knowledge and advanced tools.
Scalability: External partners can quickly scale response.
Cost efficiency: Potential to be more cost-effective than building and maintaining internal capabilities.
Cultural knowledge: Potential for higher degree of cultural and linguistic understanding if procuring a local or regional expertise.

Loss of control: Limited oversight and influence over the monitoring processes and priorities.
Rigid parameters: Difficulty adapting the monitoring being done in response to more specific events or new emergencies.
Potential for bias: Depending on the context, internal language understanding might be limited or insufficient.
Increase risks: Partners may face risks in collaborating with UNHCR, especially in dangerous environments for journalists and activists. UNHCR may face risks of aggravating a relationship with a host or operational country.
Dependence on external providers: Long-term reliance on external partners may reduce internal capacity or make replication of the process difficult.

Online vs Offline Social Listening

Effective monitoring requires a multidisciplinary approach, combining various methods and tools to fully understand the context in which information flows. Ideally, both online and offline ecosystems must be monitored, as harmful narratives can spread across digital platforms and real-life conversations, influencing diverse audiences.

Whilst online monitoring captures the fast-paced, widespread nature of digital content, offline monitoring helps identify issues that might not be as visible online but are still impactful at a local or grassroots level. Together, they provide a comprehensive understanding of the information environment and ensure no critical narratives or threats are overlooked.

Online

When monitoring misinformation, disinformation, malinformation and hate speech online, practitioners can opt to use automated tools, manual tools, or a mix of both. Most monitoring involves a hybrid of automated and manual methodologies, leveraging tools to collect large amount of data and relying on human input for research and analysis.

RESOURCE

DPO, Monitoring Tool Mapping

Developed by colleagues at the United Nations Department of Peace Operations (DPO), this resource provides an overview of different types of tools available for online monitoring, their pros and cons, where and how to access them, and how to use these tools can be used by operations.

Automated Social Listening

Automated social listening Involves using software tools to track, collect, and analyse large volumes of digital content across various platforms in real-time. These tools automatically identify relevant mentions, trends, and patterns related to specific topics like misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech, enabling faster and more efficient monitoring than manual methods.

Manual Social Listening

Manual social listening involves human analysts who manually search, review, and interpret content across various media platforms.

Offline

Offline social listening covers an even large scope of rumours and narratives circulating in non-digital environments, such as community meetings, print media, radio broadcasts, or face-to-face conversations. It involves gathering information from local communities, observing grassroots movements, and monitoring traditional media outlets to identify the spread of harmful narratives that might not be as visible online but can still significantly impact public opinion and behaviour.