17 May 2026 The human counter-algorithm: Why listening is the future of aid

Pinar Okur – Upinion

Imagine a mother in a displacement camp, hundreds of miles from home. She has a smartphone in her hand – her lifeline to the world. But as she scrolls, she isn’t finding clarity. Instead, she finds many conflicting rumours: news that the border is closing, whispers that aid supplies have run out, and strange warnings about the safety of local clinics. She is surrounded by humanitarian organizations, yet she feels more unheard than ever. Her data is being “collected” by surveys and apps, but she never sees the results. She is living in a world where technology is a constant presence, but a real conversation is nowhere to be found.

This is the reality of the “Information gap.” While we have more ways to communicate than ever before, the quality of that communication – and the trust behind it – is at an all-time low. At Upinion, we believe that the only way to resolve these information challenges is to change the communication model: we take information from the people, complement it with verified facts, and share the complete picture back with them.

Rapidly spreading online misinformation

Today, a few large technology companies have more influence over public information than most governments. Their platforms are not designed to serve the community; instead, they are programmed to keep users active for as long as possible. In this fast-paced online environment, false claims or alarming rumours spread more quickly than verified facts. As a result, misinformation frequently overwhelms accurate information, leading to widespread public distrust.

As a 2025 issue of Media Development questioned¹: Is Artificial Intelligence a friend or a foe? The truth is that AI-driven algorithms have turned the internet into a place where, as Cordel Green argues in his piece²: “…even the most sophisticated critical thinkers are outmatched by the speed, scale, and opacity of these systems.”

For people in crisis zones, this isn’t just a social media problem – it’s a matter of survival. When people cannot see how decisions are made or where their data goes, trust evaporates. They feel like the technology is just “taking” from them, leaving them to navigate a world where the lines between what is real and what is manipulated are increasingly blurred.

In recent years, funding cuts during major crises – such as those in Syria and Yemen – have typically been announced through high-level government or United Nations statements. On the ground, however, these formal announcements often lead to a rapid spread of inaccurate information. Affected individuals do not view these changes as simple budget reductions, but rather as a failure of support. Without direct communication from aid organizations, unverified online reports spread quickly and increase public anxiety. Upinion’s ongoing research confirms that trust is built when aid providers are consistently responsive, respectful, and transparent in their approach.

Putting the “human” back in the loop

Upinion was created to be a secure platform for reliable information amidst this online chaos. We don’t try to fight the machines with more machines; we fight them by bringing back the human voice. Our approach is built on three simple pillars:

1. The two-way street. Historically, humanitarian communication has often functioned as a one-way process, where organizations provide information and communities receive it. Upinion evolves this model by using the platforms people already use daily – like WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger – to establish a continuous, two-way dialogue. This approach ensures that communication is not just about gathering data, but about creating a mutual exchange. If 1,000 people tell us they are worried about water quality, we don’t just put that in a report for a boardroom in Europe. We tell the community: “This is what you told us, and here is what is being done about it.”

In the East DRC, for example, we partnered with Mercy Corps to test this “Return of Information.”³ When we asked communities about their urgent needs, this wasn’t the end of the data collection. We shared the collective results back with the community, turning a standard survey into a shared piece of knowledge. By ensuring that information flows in both directions, the humanitarian sector acts as an active, transparent partner rather than an unreachable entity.

2. Challenging the falsehoods. During a crisis, misinformation can create significant safety risks. When persistent false beliefs spread – such as unfounded fears regarding a specific aid program – we take active steps to intervene using human-verified information. We provide a platform where individuals can ask questions and receive clear, factual responses.

The COVID-19 pandemic is a clear example of how quickly misinformation can spread. In 2020, Upinion conducted discussions with people in Yemen to identify active rumours and distribute accurate information to the public. To ensure the highest level of accuracy, we shared the latest findings from internationally recognized organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF.

3. Radical transparency. Referring back to the call in Media Development (2025/3) to “act transparently”, we believe that technology can only be a “friend” if it is understandable. We strip away the mystery of the “black box.” Our platform is designed to be a bridge for accountability, ensuring that people aren’t just data points on a map, but agents of change in their own recovery. The biggest asset that we have is transparency; even if aid is halted, or unable to deliver, we report this to the communities. Not to shame an organization for not being able to deliver, but to show the complexities and decisions that are affecting the aid from reaching them.

Innovation is not only going for the most complex solution

In the tech industry, innovation usually means something more complex. But at Upinion, we believe the most exciting innovation is actually something very “low-tech” in spirit: returning the microphone to the people.

What makes our work exciting isn’t just the software; it’s the shift in power. By giving people a platform to speak for themselves, we are helping to rebuild the trust that the digital era has damaged. We are proving that you can use modern connectivity without exploiting the user. We are showing that the most advanced form of innovation is the practice of active listening.

We are helping people navigate a world where truth is fragile and falsehoods are fast. This isn’t just about aid; it’s about restoring communication rights in a world that has forgotten how to talk to – and not just at – the most vulnerable.

Conclusion: a new standard for trust

The rapid spread of online misinformation will not stop on its own, nor will the digital era’s tendency to treat people as passive data points. As technology continues to develop at an unpredictable pace, the humanitarian sector must decide how it will fulfil its responsibilities to the people it serves.

At Upinion, we have made our choice. We address the threat of inaccurate information by facilitating clear, two-way communication. We also reject the standard model of one-way data collection. By ensuring that community insights are always verified and shared back with those who provided them, we move beyond technical data gathering toward honest, accountable relationships. We choose to believe that the people we serve are the experts in their own lives, and our role is to ensure they have the accurate information they need to lead their own recovery.

The future of aid isn’t about more complex algorithms; it’s about more honest relationships. By taking information from the people and sharing it back with them, we aren’t just solving a technical problem. We are rebuilding the very foundation of human trust.

This article was drafted with the collaborative assistance of Gemini, a large language model. In alignment with the ethical standards set forth in Media Development (2025/3), it is disclosed that AI was used to help structure the narrative framework regarding digital communication challenges. However, the core philosophy of “Information for the people, by the people,” the specific case studies (DRC and Yemen), and the described humanitarian methodologies remain the verified work and intellectual property of the Upinion team.

Notes

1. Media Development 2025/3. “Artificial Intelligence: Friend or Foe?” World Association for Christian Communication (WACC).

2. Green, C. (2025). Power, responsibility, and trust: A framework for communication governance in the digital age. Media Development 2025/3. https://indd.adobe.com/view/98263589-b080-49c6-9859-a224973c1a9c

3. Upinion, & Mercy Corps. (2025, October 1). Strengthening trust through community participation in the DRC [long read]. Hague Humanity Hub. https://www.humanityhub.org/news/strengthening-trust-through-community-participation-in-the-drc-long-read/