I loved it. I think an additional matter linked to these two issues is misinformation spread through people but that might arise from consulting LM bots for information. Since it frequently comes up with evidence that does not exist, but we tend to trust it as a source of true, maybe we put an excess of credibility in such info and thus share it as facts, with good intention, in official means, and thus may lead in another societal issue - an excess of trust in such tools.
I am in Abrahams corner here. She runs more towards the traditional definition and she is correct in her worrying of whitewashing. The same had happened with empathy. Pseudoscience and pop psychology dominate the western world. It doesn’t take as long to become conventional wisdom and then you’re fighting an uphill battle. Then the depth of this article brings out the impact of gaslighting with misinformation. Just fascinating, thank you Colin!
This is very timely and helpful thank you! Hadn't heard of lots of these refs thanks.
I am running a project called The Addiction Economy which proposes that companies involved in the development and marketing of products which seek to 'undermine our ability to control our usage of their products beyond the point at which it harms us' the NHS definition of addiction - eg cigs, vapes, ultra processed foods, alcohol, gambling, social media and computer games.
Where gaslighting comes in is through misinformation - but a specific type - that which deliberately leads users to view the problem as one of our own making - and others, such as politicians and healthcare providers to see it as a problem with the biology, psychology or social status of the individual. So we think this really does fit the traditional use of the term whilst also showing that it is initiated structurally, and the actions which need to be taken to prevent them also begin structurally, ie politically..
We have all read reams of articles saying that your weight/socialmedia/cigarette/gambling/vape problems is Eg it's your lack of will power (other people can resist, why can't you?). Or companies promote an academic view that addiction is a disease of the brain, (hard luck, we will donate money to help cure the awful disease you have which means you can't stop using our products). The issue is exercise, your really shouldn't be so lazy, its not our products which have been designed specifically to undermine your ability to stop eating and through lack of satiety keep on going. Or Social media is specially good at that 'people need to control their use of the product, by buying phone cages or showing more willpower and turn their machines off, or have social media fasts. Not that they should stop the product design which creates addiction in exactly the same way as drugs and all the old school addictions do!
We would LOVE to attend a meeting or host a meeting or zoom on this if you and other readers are interested to discuss this more?
Please feel free to tag me in any other posts or books or any references on this.
I loved it. I think an additional matter linked to these two issues is misinformation spread through people but that might arise from consulting LM bots for information. Since it frequently comes up with evidence that does not exist, but we tend to trust it as a source of true, maybe we put an excess of credibility in such info and thus share it as facts, with good intention, in official means, and thus may lead in another societal issue - an excess of trust in such tools.
I am in Abrahams corner here. She runs more towards the traditional definition and she is correct in her worrying of whitewashing. The same had happened with empathy. Pseudoscience and pop psychology dominate the western world. It doesn’t take as long to become conventional wisdom and then you’re fighting an uphill battle. Then the depth of this article brings out the impact of gaslighting with misinformation. Just fascinating, thank you Colin!
This is very timely and helpful thank you! Hadn't heard of lots of these refs thanks.
I am running a project called The Addiction Economy which proposes that companies involved in the development and marketing of products which seek to 'undermine our ability to control our usage of their products beyond the point at which it harms us' the NHS definition of addiction - eg cigs, vapes, ultra processed foods, alcohol, gambling, social media and computer games.
Where gaslighting comes in is through misinformation - but a specific type - that which deliberately leads users to view the problem as one of our own making - and others, such as politicians and healthcare providers to see it as a problem with the biology, psychology or social status of the individual. So we think this really does fit the traditional use of the term whilst also showing that it is initiated structurally, and the actions which need to be taken to prevent them also begin structurally, ie politically..
We have all read reams of articles saying that your weight/socialmedia/cigarette/gambling/vape problems is Eg it's your lack of will power (other people can resist, why can't you?). Or companies promote an academic view that addiction is a disease of the brain, (hard luck, we will donate money to help cure the awful disease you have which means you can't stop using our products). The issue is exercise, your really shouldn't be so lazy, its not our products which have been designed specifically to undermine your ability to stop eating and through lack of satiety keep on going. Or Social media is specially good at that 'people need to control their use of the product, by buying phone cages or showing more willpower and turn their machines off, or have social media fasts. Not that they should stop the product design which creates addiction in exactly the same way as drugs and all the old school addictions do!
We would LOVE to attend a meeting or host a meeting or zoom on this if you and other readers are interested to discuss this more?
Please feel free to tag me in any other posts or books or any references on this.