Some Questions About That McKinsey Report

While I was larking about this weekend, the New York Times published a story about how Saudi Arabia uses an army of Twitter trolls to control its public image. At the tail end of the story—because it apparently wasn’t considered very important—the Times revealed that in 2015, after Saudi Arabia introduced some domestic austerity measures, the consulting firm McKinsey & Company analyzed how effective the Saudi leadership’s overall PR strategy was:

In a nine-page report, a copy of which was obtained by The Times, McKinsey found that the measures received twice as much coverage on Twitter as in the country’s traditional news media or blogs, and that negative sentiment far outweighed positive reactions on social media. Three people were driving the conversation on Twitter, the firm found: the writer Khalid al-Alkami; Mr. Abdulaziz, the young dissident living in Canada; and an anonymous user who went by Ahmad.

After the report was issued, Mr. Alkami was arrested, the human rights group ALQST said. Mr. Abdulaziz said that Saudi government officials imprisoned two of his brothers and hacked his cellphone, an account supported by a researcher at Citizen Lab. Ahmad, the anonymous account, was shut down.

Here in America, the overall view on Twitter was that McKinsey had essentially signed death warrants on three people. McKinsey, however, issued a statement saying the report was nothing more than “a brief overview of publicly available information,” and “It was not prepared for any government entity. Its intended primary audience was internal.” I have two questions:

For the New York Times: What does “issued” mean? How was the report issued? And to whom? And why can’t you simply post the report on your website so that all the rest of us can assess it?

For McKinsey: What does “intended primary audience” mean? And if the “primary” audience was internal, who was the rest of the intended audience? Also: If it was primarily for internal use, what prompted it to be written in the first place?


The more we thought about how MoJo's journalism can have the most impact heading into the 2020 election, the more we realized that so many of today's stories come down to corruption: democracy and the rule of law being undermined by the wealthy and powerful for their own gain.

So we're launching a new Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption. We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We'll publish what we find as a major series in the summer of 2020, including a special issue of our magazine, a dedicated online portal, and video and podcast series so it doesn't get lost in the daily deluge of breaking news.

It's unlike anything we've done before and we've got seed funding to get started, but we're asking readers to help crowdfund this new beat with an additional $500,000 so we can go even bigger. You can read why we're taking this approach and what we want to accomplish in "Corruption Isn't Just Another Scandal. It's the Rot Beneath All of Them," and if you like how it sounds, please help fund it with a tax-deductible donation today.

We Recommend


Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.