5. Analysis of Expert Interviews

This chapter presents a comprehensive analysis of expert interviews to explore the underlying assumptions and opinions that guide the current practice of storytelling in Countering and Alternative Narrative (CAN) campaigns. The analysis reveals a striking lack of engagement with narrative persuasion research in the CAN literature, despite the acknowledged effectiveness of storytelling in recruitment efforts by extremist groups. The chapter delves into the reasons behind this gap, highlighting five key indications: a lack of storytelling skills, skepticism about the effectiveness of CANs, fears of manipulation, skepticism about fictional narratives, and a realism bias. The interviews also provide insights into the experts' views on the goals of CAN campaigns, effective messages, suitable messengers, and the media environment. The chapter emphasizes the need for a more nuanced understanding of narrative persuasion and storytelling techniques to enhance the effectiveness of CAN campaigns. It also underscores the importance of addressing the underlying assumptions and opinions that currently shape the practice of storytelling in the CAN field. The analysis is structured around three main questions, each shedding light on different aspects of the gap between narrative persuasion research and its application in CAN campaigns. The chapter concludes by highlighting the potential for integrating insights from narrative persuasion research to improve the design and implementation of CAN campaigns, ultimately contributing to more effective counter-extremism efforts.