I will give the opening address at the Edelman Trust Institute’s Trust Summit tomorrow. My remarks are a summary of our studies on trust over the past year, noting the progression from Polarization (a political division) to Grievance (an emotional divide including hostile activism) to Insularity. Insularity is the next crisis of trust. It describes a society in which people increasingly retreat into communities that reinforce their own values, information sources and views of the world, making trust across differences far more difficult. This is a global phenomenon, evident not only in lower-trust developed markets but also across many of the higher-trust developing markets.
I will describe five divides that have prompted Insularity.
The first is the Mass-Class divide, in which the top quartile of income earners have a much greater average trust level across institutions than those in the bottom quartile. The divide began in 2012 in countries such as the U.S., UK and France, then has grown over the last decade to over twenty points in nations such as Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. The bottom quartile has flat-lined while the top quartile has accelerated, coincident with greater income divides, stock market and real estate gains.
The second divide is the Geopolitical chasm, the rise of Nationalism. There is a huge difference in consumer trust between companies headquartered in their home market and foreign companies competing in that market. The domestic trust advantage is 31 points in Canada, 29 points in Germany and Japan, 25 points in the UK and nearly 20 points in the U.S. and China. Two thirds of respondents told us that it’s important, or even a critical deal breaker, that when buying or using brands, they are made by companies headquartered in their market.
The third divide is around Information. Insularity has prompted a deliberate narrowing of the world view. Only 39 percent of respondents told us that they get news from sources with a different political leaning at least weekly. There has been a massive decline in consumption of alternative views, down double digits in markets as diverse as the Netherlands, Spain, Indonesia and South Korea in the past year. The battle for truth is being won by those outlets that provoke and combine opinion with news.
The fourth divide is in the Workplace, which has been the refuge for respondents seeking rules-based discussion of difficult topics. Now we find that 42 percent of employed respondents say that they would rather switch departments than work for a supervisor with different political opinions and one third say they would put in less effort if they disagreed with the boss on political beliefs. This is tragic given that My Employer is the most trusted institution, well ahead of business overall.
The fifth divide is the Social Divide. The Mass-Class divide, Geopolitical chasm, Information divide and Workplace divide all point to the same conclusion: people are becoming less willing to engage with those who see the world differently. Seven in ten global respondents now identify themselves as insular, meaning they are unwilling or hesitant to trust people with different values, backgrounds, approaches to solving societal problems or sources of information. This mindset cuts across income, gender and age, and is evident in both developed and developing markets. Polarization divided us politically. Grievance divided us emotionally. Insularity now divides us socially, making it the defining trust challenge of our time.
There are significant consequences from the descent to insularity. We observe problems for the technology and health sectors. We also find that insularity has penetrated the consumer consciousness with important implications for marketers.
The first consequence is resistance to innovation. AI is viewed as Globalization 2.0, with major risks of downward economic mobility and job loss. Nearly half of respondents in the U.S., UK and Germany are against implementation of AI, with more than half of those in the bottom income quartile believing they’ll be left behind by AI. In fact, resistance to AI is comparable to the fear of genetically modified food.
The second consequence is the devaluation of expertise. This is most evident in the food and health sectors. Only around forty percent of respondents believe that such canards as raw milk being healthier than pasteurized (43 percent) or fluoride in water being a public health risk (36 percent) are false. It is stunning to see that those who believe in at least one of six presented health myths have higher rates of news consumption on a monthly basis than those who believe all six are false, and that there is no difference in rate of belief between those with college degrees and those without college degrees. We believe that this muddying of truth and fiction is a legacy of COVID.
The third consequence of insularity is for brands. Insular consumers are over twice as likely to say they are unwilling to buy from brands that are used by people who are different from them. Consumers exact a trust penalty from brands that sell to people with different core values compared to brands in general, with a trust gap of 23 points in markets as diverse as France, Germany and South Africa, which matters now more than ever as trust is in an equal position as a purchase criterion with price and quality. This penalty is a self-limiting proposition for brands seeking to move beyond their core consumer base. Brands also have a particular relevance problem with insular consumers when it comes to providing identity reflection and community connection (26- and 21-point gaps between insular consumers saying these are important for brands to be relevant vs brands are doing these well).
The purpose of our Trust Summit is to gather corporations, media, academics, NGOs and government leaders for an open discussion of the way forward. We see an increased likelihood of institutions needing to function in a time of prolonged uncertainty. The worst option for leaders is to mimic the turtle and withdraw into a shell until the storm passes. We will push our theory of Trust Brokering, which is bringing together parties with very different views for a constructive debate which aims to Disagree Better. This is my favorite day of the year, full of passionate expressions of views. To the participants, bring your best game. We must find a better way forward.
Richard Edelman is CEO.
