I used to work for Cambridge Analytica – believe it or not, data can be used for good in politics

I worked as managing director of the non-US political division of Cambridge Analytica for two years until 2018. The company’s well-documented closure signalled a huge shift in the way we think about, and use, data. But a handful of my colleagues and I believed then, as we do now, that data-driven insight is no longer optional. That means it should be as much a tool for progressive politics as for division.

A year later, and the UK is once again heading to the polls. We should be getting quite good at it, given that we have just had local elections, it’s less than two years since our last general election and less than three since the Brexit referendum.

Campaign teams too should by now be well-oiled machines, well versed in delivering messages on the same topics that have dominated the national conversation for three years and yet, somehow, many are still missing the mark.

Some of this can be laid at the feet of political expedience, but in many cases, it seems to be an unwillingness to adapt to the realities of modern voter engagement. So, what lessons can campaigners learn that will allow them to unite and motivate people in the days following today’s vote?

From a marketing and political science perspective, there is a consensus that people hold multilayered identities.

Our offline and online identities can differ, and depending on the digital channel, the same person might present themselves differently; they can effectively switch between or activate different identities.

A similar thing happens to our ethnic, religious, regional and national – and European – identities, which consciously or unconsciously coexist and evolve in our minds. These are important as they frame the way we behave, the way we feel about different socio-political issues and the way we vote.

The ability to produce effective content for an election campaign will depend on uncovering what really matters to voters. Each region and town will have its own specific views on the benefits and frustrations of EU membership and producing a message which means something to this mosaic of individuality will depend on how effectively all that information is distilled.

Behavioural psychology is developing new research techniques to interrogate our multilayered identities, how we switch between them and what images and associations trigger feelings of “belonging” beyond our national, religious or ethnic selves.

Social media listening tools can sift through themes and ideas from millions of public online conversations, using semantic analysis and natural language processing to extract meaning and nuance from the global debate.

We can now collect and analyse information on a scale previously unimaginable, and digital media allows us to target with far greater accuracy, analysing each interaction to test and adjust the messages which resonate most strongly with different audiences.

This may sound scary to some – but it’s no different from the manner in which political communications has been undertaken since the advent of mass media.

In the 20th century, it was done by buying mailing lists for leafleting or postcard campaigns which shared different messages based on what campaigners thought would resonate in certain areas.

The only difference now is that the leaflets are digital and appearing in our newsfeeds rather than through our letterboxes. An old approach, but a new technology which offers campaigners the chance to have more impact than ever before and the opportunity to do tremendous good.

The recent rise of populism has often been blamed on the effects of social media “echo chambers” creating communities of individuals who feed off each other’s anger. Those trapped in echo chambers often fiercely deny the fact, but these groups simmer beneath the awareness of wider society and grow with alarming contagion.

Recent statistical evidence suggests that when online groups reach a high threshold of conversation, and have inversely low numbers, their level of anger begins to increase alongside the rate at which they recycle the same ideas and reject new opinions. They are real threats to unity and stability and cannot be ignored.

Algorithms and social media targeting are often blamed for the feedback loops that cultivate these groups, but Pandora’s box is open and the actors seeking to spread lies and promote hate won’t disappear of their own accord.

However, we can use data to understand these mechanisms, and to prevent people from becoming misled and misdirected. That’s why I helped set up Auspex International alongside other colleagues, to help political parties, governments and organisations to use these techniques to understand and communicate with people more effectively.

The world of 2019 isn’t neatly segmented by borders. We can share ideas instantaneously with people on the other side of the world, and we need to stop approaching these issues with blunt solutions.

The internet allows us to find a sense of belonging, whatever our beliefs, and if the EU elections are going to reignite the shared vision of a united Europe that sense of belonging and a strong European identity needs to resonate far and wide.

Data is the foundation stone upon which this broad church can be built. It can be used to measure the collective interest that underpins the European dream and fuel a sense of belonging across borders. So, just as digital platforms have effectively fostered the development of anti-EU groups, they can and should be used to amplify our pride in our common European heritage.

Data is a tool and it is time it was used in a meaningful way for good. Campaigners can and must tap into this – identify that which unites us, create stories that bring that thread of commonality to life, and embrace digital technology to share those stories more widely. Pride in our common European heritage is the emotional glue that will win hearts and minds, and that is something people can vote for.

Mark Turnbull is managing director of Auspex​ International