WHEN SILENCE BECOMES DANGEROUS: THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MARKETERS AND COMMUNICATORS IN TIMES OF HARMFUL RUMOURS

 

"What is our role as communicators and marketers?"

It is a question that has been sitting heavily on my mind lately.

As rumours continue to spread through communities, social media platforms, and even mainstream media channels, we are witnessing something troubling. Misinformation is no longer just a communication problem. It is becoming a public safety problem.

The recent discussions around the infamous missing manhood phenomenon reminded me of a study by Albert Sharra titled "Vampires in the News: A Critical Analysis of News Framing in Malawi's Newspapers." The paper examined how media coverage of bloodsucker rumours in Malawi failed to educate and enlighten the public, instead amplifying fear through the way stories were framed.

Reading about it today feels less like history and more like a warning.

Because the challenge remains. And it raises an uncomfortable question:

When dangerous rumours are spreading, where are the communicators?

For decades, Malawi has periodically experienced waves of panic fueled by different claims. One recent example is that individuals have mysteriously lost their genitals or that certain people possess the ability to "steal" them through supernatural means. While these stories often spread rapidly through communities and social media platforms, medical professionals, psychologists, and law enforcement agencies have consistently found no evidence to support such claims.

To date, authorities and medical professionals have repeatedly reported finding no evidence to support claims of physical disappearance, with experts often explaining such incidents through social and psychological dynamics.

Yet the consequences are painfully real.

Innocent people have been assaulted, killed, and had their property destroyed after being accused of involvement in these alleged incidents. Communities have descended into fear and suspicion. The Malawi Police Service has arrested dozens of individuals connected to mob violence, murder, and the spread of false information, while government officials have launched awareness campaigns and deployed additional security personnel to affected areas.

This is where communication stops being merely a professional function and becomes a matter of public safety.

We Are More Than Brand Custodians, we shape Public Understanding

Traditionally, marketers are seen as people who sell products, build brands, increase awareness, and drive engagement.

Communication professionals are expected to manage reputations, write press releases, and craft compelling messages.

But surely our role is bigger than that.

At our core, we are custodians of meaning.

Every day, we influence how people understand issues, interpret events, and make decisions. We know how narratives are formed. We understand framing. We understand persuasion. We understand audience behaviour.

If those skills can convince someone to buy a product, can they not also help communities distinguish fact from fiction?

If they can build trust in a brand, can they not also build trust in credible information?

The Cost of Silence

One of the most dangerous things about misinformation is that it thrives in information vacuums.

When credible voices remain silent, rumours become explanations.

Fear becomes evidence.

Speculation becomes truth.

And before long, communities begin acting on information that was never verified.

History has shown us that rumours can trigger panic, destroy reputations, fuel discrimination, and in extreme cases, contribute to violence and loss of life.

The frightening reality is that misinformation does not need to be true to be harmful.

It only needs to be believed.

This is why silence from communication professionals can become dangerous.

Not because we have all the answers.

But because we possess the skills needed to help people ask better questions.

Should Corporate Social Responsibility Include Behaviour Change Communication?

This brings me to another thought.

Corporates spend millions every year on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives.

We support education.

We support health.

We support environmental conservation.

All important causes of course.

But should there also be room for investment in public information and behaviour change campaigns?

Could leading brands pool resources into a common fund, perhaps managed through professional bodies such as the Public Relations Society of Malawi and Institute of Marketing in Malawi (IMM), to support nationwide communication campaigns aimed at countering misinformation, promoting critical thinking, encouraging media literacy, building trust in verified information and educating communities on how to verify claims before sharing them.

Imagine if the same creativity used to launch products was used to protect communities from harmful misinformation.

Imagine if the same media buying power used during promotional campaigns was deployed to spread verified facts during periods of public uncertainty.

Would that not also be social responsibility?

Communication Is a Public Good

There is a tendency to think that communication only matters when there is something to sell.

I disagree.

Communication is a public good.

When used responsibly, it strengthens institutions, supports development, and helps communities make informed decisions.

When neglected, the consequences can be severe.

The truth is that misinformation is not going away.

Artificial intelligence, social media algorithms, anonymous messaging platforms, and increasing political polarization mean that rumours can now travel faster than ever before.

The question is not whether misinformation exists.

The question is whether communicators are willing to confront it.

A Challenge to Fellow Communicators and Marketers

Perhaps it is time for us to rethink our profession.

What if our success was measured not only by market share and campaign reach but also by our contribution to a better-informed society?

What if CSR budgets included communication interventions that addressed harmful rumours before they escalated?

What if marketers, journalists, educators, civil society organizations, and policymakers collaborated to create a national culture of information literacy?

Would we be preventing harm rather than merely reacting to it?

I do not have all the answers.

But I am convinced of one thing,

Our responsibility as communicators does not end when a campaign ends.

In a world where misinformation can cost lives, communication is no longer just a business function.

It is a civic responsibility.

And perhaps the greatest question for all of us is this:

If we understand how narratives shape behaviour, and we choose not to intervene when harmful narratives spread, are we merely observers or are we part of the problem?