Mitos utilizados en la campaña del no en el plebiscito por la paz en redes sociales: Facebook y Twitter

Abstract

The 4th of November of 2012 the peace dialogues formally started between Juan Manuel Santos Government and the guerrilla group FARC EP, finishing the agreement on the 26th of November 2016, setting a precedent of peace, communication and pardon. The only issue left was the endorsement of the agreement with a plebiscite for peace dated October the second 2016 in which the Colombian people would support or reject the agreement between the Government and Farc EP.

Everything was prepared for the victory of the “YES”, the surveys done showed a positive result and supported in the different articles of newspapers of Colombia accepting, in this way the proposed points in the peace agreement, but the surprise came with the “NO” to the plebiscite was the winner. ¿How was possible that the “NO” could won if all surveys and projections done targeted the “YES” as the winner?; What mechanism or strategies were used in the “NO” campaign in order to have such a powerful effect over the people? ¿ Perhaps manipulation when voting or was there really a strong idea which was spread through different and diverse media what lead the country to take the decision, that for many, was one of the most repressed and shameful, taking into account that the country has been submerged for more than 50 years in a deep war. For professionals in communication area it is a constant challenge to understand people behaviors and life styles, in order to create publicity and marketing strategies with the content

that generates persuasion in the indicated audience and the effective strategic results. To achieve this, the experts in communication base their studies, for example on; histories, public figures, animated characters, narrations, myths, among others. This project focuses in the analysis of the mythic structure of the winning campaign during the plebiscite, the “NO”, in which the use of social networks, half told truths and its political leaders were of great importance for the results in favor of the “NO”.