governmental stakeholders), or product interface development (with the technology industry) — which take place primarily in Silicon Valley, Geneva, Brussels and New York. Engaging with prevention work challenges the traditional reach of humanitarian, development and peacebuilding organizations and calls for engagement with relatively new stakeholders, not least of all the technology industry. That said, there remains value in peacebuilding organizations continuing to implement traditional activities with established partners, including advocacy, awareness raising and training, and conflict mitigation and social cohesion activities. Effective response requires integration, bridging domains and working at local and global levels. The problems of weaponized social media stem partly from the disconnect between how the value of technology platforms was originally conceived in the West, and how their functions actually manifest in the spectrum of global contexts. The architects of these platforms, or the personalization algorithms by which they were monetized, never intended adverse outcomes, yet they are susceptible to hijacking for nefarious ends. Responses to weaponized social Iraq | Nigel Downes for Mercy Corps media need to mirror these transnational and localto-global relationships. There is value in a “brokerage” role between the NGO/civil society and private sectors to bridge the gap between detection and assessment (a specialty of the private sector) and resilience building and mitigation work (strengths of NGOs and civil society). There is also a need for bridging knowledge gaps across geographies. For example, organizations like Mercy Corps often have a longstanding presence, deep contextual knowledge and relationships in places where weaponized social media is causing problems, whereas technologies and relevant policies are developed in relatively insular and mostly Western locations (e.g., Silicon Valley). Influential stakeholders — technology companies chief among them — are often unaware of the extent of the harm they are creating. Given the slow pace of government in the immediate and dynamic evolution of these problems, humanitarian, development and peacebuilding organizations can play important roles in filling the knowledge gaps in private companies and encouraging more accountability and responsiveness to weaponization threats. Implications for humanitarian, development and peacebuilding organizations Weaponized social media has a range of implications that might drive organizations to develop programmatic responses. Impact on communities at risk of or experiencing crisis Weaponization phenomena directly or indirectly impact the populations that humanitarian, development and peacebuilding organizations serve, by causing harm in a variety of forms, including:    Physical: when an individual or group is targeted by violent action Psychological: when an individual or group is harassed, intimidated or exploited Social: when an individual or group is ostracized or defamed by their community MERCY CORPS The Weaponization of Social Media: How social media can spark violence and what can be done about it 24