Not long ago I wrote about the military metaphors that dominate business.
We launch products. We target customers. We defend market share. We attack competitors. We build war rooms. We execute campaigns. We win battles and celebrate victories.
The language of commerce has been shaped by the language of conflict for decades. Even our organisational structures reflect military thinking—chains of command, strategy, intelligence, logistics, operations and command-and-control leadership. For generations, business has looked to the battlefield for its vocabulary.
Recently, however, I’ve noticed something intriguing.
The flow of influence has reversed.
War is beginning to borrow the language of business.
Or perhaps more accurately, war is borrowing the language of modern communication.
The caricatures of Putin. The memes of Trump. AI-generated images shared millions of times across social media. They aren’t simply political humour. They represent an evolution in how influence is exercised during conflict.
During the Second World War, propaganda was largely controlled by governments. Posters urged citizens to enlist. Radio broadcasts rallied the nation. Newsreels reinforced a carefully curated narrative. Information flowed in one direction—from governments to citizens.
The objective was straightforward: maintain morale, strengthen national identity and influence public opinion.
Television changed the medium but not the model. Governments still largely controlled the narrative. Public relations emerged from this era, becoming increasingly sophisticated in managing reputation, shaping perception and influencing behaviour. Many of the techniques that underpin modern public relations have their roots in wartime communications.
Then came the internet.
Then social media.
Then AI.
For the first time in history, governments no longer hold a monopoly over influence. Every individual with a smartphone can become a publisher. Every organisation can become a media company. Every citizen can become a propagandist—knowingly or otherwise.
That changes everything.
The most powerful messages today are often not carefully crafted speeches or official press conferences. They’re images. Symbols. Satire. Thirty-second videos. AI-generated artwork. Memes that travel across the globe in minutes.
A single image can communicate more emotionally than a thousand-word article. Before we’ve consciously analysed what we’re seeing, we’ve often formed an opinion. Images bypass our analytical mind and connect directly with emotion.
That is precisely why they are so powerful.
The battlefield itself has expanded.
Wars are still fought with soldiers, tanks, missiles and drones. But they are also fought through algorithms, hashtags, influencers and viral content. Public opinion has become another theatre of war.
Influence has become a strategic asset.
For business leaders, this should not be dismissed as merely an observation about international conflict.
The same forces are reshaping corporate communication.
Organisations increasingly compete not simply on products or services, but on narratives. Brand perception can rise or fall overnight because of a viral video. A CEO’s reputation can be enhanced—or destroyed—by a single image that spreads faster than any official statement can respond.
Marketing departments understand this.
Public relations professionals understand this.
Increasingly, boards of directors need to understand it too.
Corporate reputation is no longer managed exclusively through annual reports, media releases and carefully scripted interviews. It lives in an ecosystem where anyone can create content, challenge a narrative or redefine a brand in real time.
The barriers to influence have collapsed.
This has profound implications for leadership.
For much of the twentieth century, communication was about broadcasting a message. Leaders spoke. Employees listened. Organisations published. Customers consumed.
Today’s communication environment is fundamentally different.
It is conversational.
Participatory.
Visual.
Instantaneous.
Narrative no longer belongs to the organisation. It belongs to everyone participating in the conversation.
That requires a different kind of leadership.
It requires leaders who understand that communication is no longer simply about delivering information. It is about shaping meaning. Listening becomes as important as speaking. Context becomes as important as content. Symbols often carry more weight than statistics.
This is one of the defining shifts of our time.
Ironically, while business spent decades borrowing the language of war, modern warfare is increasingly borrowing the communication techniques perfected by marketers, advertisers, content creators and social media platforms.
The disciplines are converging.
The tools of persuasion once associated with Madison Avenue are now evident on the geopolitical stage. Likewise, the speed, symbolism and emotional impact once associated with wartime propaganda are now commonplace in corporate branding.
The boundaries are dissolving.
Communication has evolved beyond words alone.
It now encompasses images, animation, video, AI-generated content, emojis, icons and memes. The medium has become as influential as the message itself.
Marshall McLuhan’s famous observation that “the medium is the message” feels more relevant today than ever before.
As artificial intelligence accelerates this transformation, the next phase is already emerging. Communication will become increasingly personalised. Messages will adapt to individuals rather than audiences. Influence will become less about broadcasting and more about resonance.
That raises an important question for leaders.
If communication has changed…
If public relations has changed…
If marketing has changed…
If even wartime propaganda has changed…
Has leadership changed as well?
I believe it has.
And those who continue communicating as though it were still the age of newspapers and press releases may find themselves fighting yesterday’s battle while tomorrow’s leaders are already shaping the narrative.