Understanding audiences and dynamics in the context of information manipulation.
1 – Sociodemographic profile
Understanding the social structure of a population makes it possible to identify dominant or marginalized groups, inequalities in access, and priority targets based on their vulnerability, visibility, or capacity for influence.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Age, gender, education | ||||
| Income, occupations | ||||
| Urban/rural, social class | ||||
| Languages spoken | ||||
| Ethnic/community groups | ||||
| Access to infrastructure / mobility | ||||
| Access to information / digital tools | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
2 – Geopolitical, political, and security environment
In many situations, the political and security context strongly influences the perception of messages, public behavior, and opportunities for action. It is necessary to identify the balance of power and local room for maneuver.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Regime and institutions | ||||
| Censorship and surveillance | ||||
| Social tensions | ||||
| Influences of foreign actors | ||||
| Armed non-state actors (depending on the national/regional context) | ||||
| International agenda / sanctions | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
3 – Culture and values
Collective narratives and behaviors are structured by beliefs, taboos, symbols, or worldviews. Knowing how to interpret them allows us to calibrate messages, avoid cultural clashes, and prevent the mistake of exploiting internal tensions due to a failure to identify them.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Dominant values | ||||
| Shared beliefs and stories | ||||
| Religions present | ||||
| Symbols and taboos | ||||
| Founding myths or shared narratives | ||||
| Influential foreign actors (NGOs, states, diasporas, etc.) | ||||
| International media / global cultural models | ||||
| … |
4 – Language, channels, codes
Analyzing languages, dialects, popular expressions, as well as dominant formats and platforms makes it possible to adapt distribution methods and identify social groups that share cultural references, common codes, and media or social authority figures.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Languages and dialects | ||||
| Cultural codes / humor | ||||
| Dominant formats and media | ||||
| Local media and platforms | ||||
| Influencers / authority figures | ||||
| Informal communication channels | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
5 – Social behaviors
Observing social practices (mobilization, abstention, digital engagement, etc.) reveals dynamics such as trust, resignation, or latent anger. These elements shed light on the levers or resistance to be anticipated in a response strategy.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Trust in institutions or authorities | ||||
| Collective mobilization (demonstrations, strikes) | ||||
| Digital engagement / social media | ||||
| Uses of techno ology, and information | ||||
| Practices of solidarity/local mutual aid | ||||
| Social rituals / cultural practices | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
6 – Psychological segmentation
Deducting psychological profiles allows us to anticipate emotional or cognitive reactions to a message. This guides the tone, form, and persuasion strategy according to dominant motivations and styles.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Dominant attitudes (fear, anger, mistrust, apathy, etc.) | ||||
| Deep motivations (need for security, recognition, etc.) | ||||
| Information processing style (rational/emotional) | ||||
| Relationship with authority / legitimate figures | ||||
| Level of trust in traditional sources | ||||
| Need for identification/belonging | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
7- External influencing factors
Observing external influences (cultural, political, economic, or symbolic) provides a better understanding of how certain narratives are reinforced or challenged. This helps anticipate perceptions of interference, conflicting loyalties, or transnational dynamics that may affect the reception of messages.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Perception of external powers | ||||
| Foreign cultural influences | ||||
| Diasporas or transnational communities | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
8- Tensions, narratives, and vulnerabilities
Identifying social divisions, collective emotions, and conflicting narratives allows us to pinpoint sensitive tensions that need to be taken into account. This enables us to adapt our tone, prevent backlash, and develop a more nuanced, targeted, responsible, and respectful response.
| Element | Observable data | Sources | Bias or limitations? | Strategic assumption* |
| Anger, fear, nostalgia | ||||
| Rumors and misleading information | ||||
| Perceived injustices | ||||
| Divisive figures or symbols | ||||
| Generational or identity divides | ||||
| Context-specific factors | ||||
| … |
Strategic summary
This summary transforms analysis into action. It allows us to identify the priority audience, clarify the misleading or biased narrative to be addressed, anticipate the risks of rejection or misappropriation, identify potential blind spots, and formulate an initial strategic hypothesis.
- Priority audience to target:
(Who is the most vulnerable or influential group to reach first?) - Misleading or biased narrative to be redirected/neutralized:
(Which narrative currently in circulation is problematic? Which framing needs to be challenged or repositioned?) - Risk of backlash or resistance:
(What negative reactions should be anticipated if we respond head-on?) - Biases or blind spots in our analysis:
(What may we have underestimated? Which groups or narratives have been overlooked?) - Strategic action hypothesis:
(What response is possible? With what tone, channel, or voice?)
| When in doubt... Have I consulted enough internal and external sources? Can I draw on the experience of a colleague who knows this audience better? Is there already a report, study, or informal observation that I can reuse? Is this an angle that I can document a little later without blocking the entire strategy? |
| Frequency of use of the framework: The strategic analysis proposed by this framework is not intended to be fixed. It must adapt to changes in the context, information threats, and priorities. Three levels of activation are recommended: Full update (every 6 to 12 months) Allows for a refreshed understanding of audiences, social and cultural dynamics, and structural vulnerability factors. Best performed during quiet periods or times of significant change (new government, major crisis, institutional reform, etc.). Rapid targeted analysis (for each sensitive campaign or incident of manipulation) Focus on the most relevant aspects depending on the context (social behaviors, conflicting narratives, influential figures). Express reaction (in crisis situations or sudden disinformation campaigns) Use only the strategic summary, based on already available information. Can be supplemented at a later stage. The goal here is to make quick decisions without losing sight of the main risks (target audiences, dominant emotional reaction, toxic narratives, channels of influence, risk of backlash). Important: it is not necessary to fill in everything each time. This template is a collective guidance tool, not an administrative exercise... It can be completed iteratively, by calling on colleagues with complementary expertise. |
* Strategic hypothesis: allows you to express what you think can be done based on the elements analyzed. It must be clearly formulated, with an idea for action.