[screen 1]
“Elites control everything.” “The system is rigged.” “You can’t trust anyone.”
Simple, powerful narratives drive belief and action. Debunking individual false claims doesn’t counter compelling narratives. Effective response requires competing narratives - alternative stories that satisfy psychological needs while pointing toward truth.
[screen 2]
What Are Counter-Narratives?
Counter-narratives offer alternative stories to harmful narratives:
Definition: Competing narratives that challenge and replace harmful narratives
Distinction from debunking:
- Debunking: “That’s false, here’s why”
- Counter-narrative: “Here’s a different, more accurate story”
Characteristics:
- Story-based, not just fact-based
- Emotionally resonant
- Offers meaning and understanding
- Addresses psychological needs
- Provides alternative explanations
Purpose: Not just negating false narrative, but offering satisfying alternative
Humans think in stories, not just facts.
[screen 3]
Why Narratives Matter
Stories shape understanding more than facts:
Narrative power:
- Make sense of complex reality
- Emotionally engaging
- Memorable
- Provide identity and meaning
- Explain causation
- Prescribe action
Example harmful narrative: “Foreign immigrants are stealing jobs and destroying our culture. Elites don’t care about ordinary people.”
Why powerful:
- Explains economic anxiety
- Provides enemy (scapegoat)
- Offers identity (defender of culture)
- Implies action (restrict immigration)
Competing narrative needed, not just refutation.
[screen 4]
Counter-Narrative vs. Alternative Narrative
Two related but distinct approaches:
Counter-narrative:
- Directly opposes harmful narrative
- Addresses same themes/anxieties
- Refutes while offering alternative
- Example: “Immigration enriches society economically and culturally”
Alternative narrative:
- Different framing entirely
- Shifts attention to different themes
- Doesn’t engage directly with harmful narrative
- Example: “Community cooperation creates opportunity for all”
When to use each:
- Counter-narratives: When harmful narrative widely known
- Alternative narratives: To prevent harmful narrative dominance
Both have value depending on context.
[screen 5]
Elements of Effective Counter-Narratives
What makes counter-narratives compelling:
Authenticity: Genuine, not manufactured
Simplicity: Clear, understandable core story
Emotional resonance: Engages feelings appropriately
Values alignment: Reflects audience values
Explanatory power: Makes sense of their experiences
Agency: Offers constructive action possibilities
Credibility: Grounded in reality, trustworthy sources
Cultural appropriateness: Fits audience context
Memorability: Sticky, repeatable
Effective counter-narratives compete on narrative terms, not just factual.
[screen 6]
Story-Based Approaches
Using narrative structure:
Key elements:
- Characters (heroes, victims, villains)
- Setting (context)
- Conflict (problem to solve)
- Plot (how events unfold)
- Resolution (outcome)
Example counter-narrative to conspiracy theory:
- Character: Scientists working tirelessly
- Setting: Pandemic crisis
- Conflict: Racing to develop vaccine
- Plot: Collaboration, testing, breakthroughs
- Resolution: Safe, effective vaccines saving lives
Why it works: Provides alternative heroes, conflict, resolution
Stories compete with stories more effectively than facts combat stories.
[screen 7]
Values-Based Framing
Connecting to audience values:
Identifying values:
- Security and safety
- Freedom and autonomy
- Fairness and justice
- Care and compassion
- Sanctity and purity
- Loyalty and belonging
Counter-narrative design:
- Identify values in harmful narrative
- Frame counter-narrative around same values
- Show how counter-narrative better serves values
Example:
- Harmful: “Restrictions threaten freedom”
- Counter: “Collective action protects freedom for all”
- Value: Freedom (both appeals)
- Different interpretation of how to achieve it
Meet audiences where they are, values-wise.
[screen 8]
Positive vs. Negative Messaging
Counter-narratives can affirm or negate:
Positive counter-narratives (often better):
- Affirm constructive alternatives
- Focus on what is true, good, possible
- Build toward vision
- Example: “Diversity strengthens communities”
Negative counter-narratives:
- Negate harmful narrative
- Focus on what’s wrong with false story
- Defensive posture
- Example: “Immigration doesn’t cause crime”
Research: Positive framing generally more effective
- Less reactive
- Offers something to believe in
- Avoids amplifying harmful narrative
Lead with what you’re for, not just what you’re against.
[screen 9]
Addressing Psychological Needs
Understanding what harmful narratives provide:
Needs harmful narratives satisfy:
- Explanation for complex/threatening events
- Sense of control or agency
- In-group identity and belonging
- Moral clarity (good vs evil)
- Meaning and purpose
Counter-narrative strategy:
- Identify psychological needs being met
- Offer alternative way to satisfy needs
- Don’t just negate without replacement
Example (conspiracy theories):
- Need satisfied: Understanding chaotic world
- Counter-narrative: Complexity without malice - systems, not conspiracies
- Offers: Accurate understanding providing genuine control
[screen 10]
Cultural Appropriateness
Context determines narrative effectiveness:
Cultural considerations:
- Regional history and context
- Religious/spiritual frameworks
- Political culture
- Communication styles
- Authority structures
- Collectivist vs individualist orientations
Localization:
- Counter-narratives must fit local context
- What works in one culture may fail in another
- Local messengers crucial
- Cultural references and metaphors
Example: Counter-narratives for Western Europe differ from Eastern Europe, differ from Southeast Asia
One-size-fits-all narratives fail across cultures.
[screen 11]
Messenger Selection
Who tells the story matters as much as the story:
Effective messengers:
- Trusted by target audience
- Share identity/experiences with audience
- Have relevant expertise/authority
- Authentic, not reading script
Messenger types:
- Former believers in harmful narrative
- Community leaders
- Trusted authorities (varies by audience)
- Peers and influencers
- Unlikely voices (unexpected validators)
Example: Former extremists telling counter-narratives about radicalization
Right messenger can make average narrative powerful; wrong messenger undermines great narrative.
[screen 12]
Narrative Testing and Refinement
Counter-narratives require development:
Testing approach:
- Focus groups with target audiences
- A/B testing different versions
- Monitoring engagement and response
- Qualitative feedback
- Iteration based on results
What to test:
- Message resonance
- Credibility
- Emotional response
- Comprehension
- Sharing likelihood
- Behavioral intent
Refinement: Counter-narratives rarely perfect on first attempt
Treat narrative development as iterative process.
[screen 13]
Case Study: Countering Extremist Narratives
Applications to violent extremism:
Harmful narrative: “Your people are under attack; violence is justified defense”
Counter-narrative approaches:
Direct counter: “Violence harms your community and is morally wrong”
Alternative narrative: “Community building and political engagement create change”
Former extremist testimony: “I believed that, but realized…”
Values reframe: “True courage is standing up to violence, not perpetrating it”
Research findings: Alternative and messenger-based approaches often more effective than direct counter
[screen 14]
Risks of Counter-Narratives
Counter-narratives aren’t risk-free:
Amplification risk: Raising awareness of harmful narrative
Strawman risk: Misrepresenting harmful narrative, losing credibility
Backfire risk: Strengthening belief in harmful narrative
Oversimplification risk: Counter-narrative that’s too simple lacks credibility
Incoherence risk: Multiple counter-narratives contradicting each other
Cooptation risk: Adversaries adopting counter-narrative language
Mitigation: Careful development, testing, coordination
Counter-narratives powerful but require careful execution.
[screen 15]
Integration with Other Approaches
Counter-narratives work alongside other methods:
Debunking: Correct specific false claims within counter-narrative
Prebunking: Inoculate against harmful narratives before exposure
Platform moderation: Reduce harmful narrative reach while amplifying counter-narratives
Policy action: Demonstrate counter-narrative through actions
Education: Media literacy enables critical evaluation of all narratives
Comprehensive approach uses multiple tools in coordination.
[screen 16]
Sustaining Counter-Narratives
One-time messaging insufficient:
Sustained campaigning:
- Repeated exposure over time
- Creative variation prevents habituation
- Multiple channels and formats
- Building on previous messaging
- Responding to events
Long-term narrative building:
- Institutional voices consistently reinforcing
- Civil society amplification
- Educational integration
- Cultural production (art, media, stories)
Resource commitment: Effective counter-narratives require sustained investment
Narratives don’t shift with single intervention.
[screen 17]
Measuring Counter-Narrative Effectiveness
Assessing narrative impact:
Metrics:
- Narrative awareness and recall
- Narrative acceptance/belief
- Harmful narrative rejection
- Attitude change
- Behavioral intent
- Actual behavior change
- Resilience to harmful narratives
Methods:
- Surveys and polling
- Social media listening
- Focus groups
- Experimental studies
- Longitudinal tracking
Challenges:
- Attribution difficulties
- Long time horizons
- Contextual variations
Reality: Imperfect but improving measurement capabilities
[screen 18]
Ethical Narrative Development
Responsible counter-narrative creation:
Truth commitment: Counter-narratives must be truthful
- Not propaganda or manipulation
- Accurate representation of reality
Respect for autonomy: Persuasion vs manipulation
- Empowering informed choice
- Not deceiving or coercing
Avoiding harm: Consider unintended consequences
- Stigmatization risks
- Polarization potential
- Misuse possibilities
Transparency: Clear about sources and intent
- Who created narrative?
- What are their objectives?
Accountability: Oversight and correction mechanisms
Ethical counter-narratives strengthen democratic discourse; unethical approaches undermine it.
Counter-narratives offer hope competing with harmful narratives. Not perfect, but essential tool in comprehensive counter-messaging strategy.