Persuasion Tactics in Corporate and Activist Communication: A Case Study on Misinformation

In today’s fast-paced digital world, persuasion is a vital tool that shapes our beliefs, behaviors, and decisions. From personal interactions to corporate messaging, attempts to influence are everywhere, playing a significant role in how organizations communicate with their audiences. However, the fine line between persuasion and misinformation can blur, especially when brands or activists address controversial issues. This tension is central to my recent study on the tactics corporations and activists use when communicating about cases accused of spreading misinformation.

The Case: KLM’s Fly Responsibly Campaign and Activist Reactions

My research focused on a specific case: KLM’s "Fly Responsibly" campaign, which faced accusations of greenwashing by the environmental activist group, Fossielvrij NL. The activists claimed KLM misrepresented its sustainability efforts, misleading the public about 
the environmental impact of flying. This situation created a battleground of corporate and activist narratives, both aiming to sway public opinion but using very different strategies.

Persuasion: A Double-Edged Sword

Persuasion is central to corporate communication, often used to create positive perceptions, promote products, or foster trust. Yet, when persuasion crosses ethical boundaries, it can lead to misinformation—communication that distorts the truth or manipulates emotions for personal gain. In the corporate world, this can manifest in practices like greenwashing, where companies falsely promote their environmental efforts. On the other hand, activist groups often challenge these claims, framing their own persuasive narratives to counter misinformation and drive social change.

How Corporations and Activists Persuade Differently

In analyzing the KLM case, I explored how the company and activists used distinct persuasion tactics to address the same issue. KLM’s messaging sought to frame the company as a responsible partner in the fight against climate change. They relied heavily on creating a likeable, trustworthy image and highlighting their environmental credentials to gain the audience’s support.

Meanwhile, Fossielvrij NL positioned KLM as an authority that had misused its influence, calling out the airline for exploiting consumer trust with misleading claims. They framed their narrative around the company’s perceived dishonesty, pushing the idea that consumers had been deceived by an overreliance on KLM’s authority. 

Why This Matters: The Rise of Misinformation

Misinformation has become a critical issue in today’s communication landscape, exacerbated by the reach and speed of social media. It can distort public discourse on important topics like climate change, health, and politics. Corporate misinformation, especially, can have far-reaching consequences, as misleading claims erode public trust and harm democracy.

By examining how both corporations and activists communicate in these high-stakes situations, my research aims to provide insights into how persuasive tactics can be used responsibly—or not. Ultimately, it’s about ensuring that communication is not only effective but also ethical.

Conclusion: Navigating the Complexities of Persuasion

As we face the challenges of misinformation, it’s essential to understand the power of persuasion in corporate and activist communication. Both sides wield considerable influence, but with that power comes the responsibility to be truthful and transparent. Whether you're a communicator in a corporate setting or an activist championing a cause, the lessons from 
the KLM case highlight the importance of balancing persuasive tactics with ethical considerations to build trust and drive meaningful change.

Alina Arti
Doctoral Researcher
Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics, Corporate Communication