This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
They say that human beings only use ten per cent of their brains. They say the corner office is a position of power. They say you can earn u10,000 a week in your spare time. But who, exactly, are they? And why do we listen to them? We each have our own theys - bosses, experts and authorities who seem to dictate our lives and create our futures. Like parents, in the best of circumstances they can make us feel safe. But where power and profit are at stake, they can try to make us do what they want: buy their product, vote for their party, support their cause."… (more)
elenchus: Two sides of the same coin: Rushkoff's Coercion examines how influence or manipulation is to the detriment of the individual's self interest, precisely in order to benefit someone else (usually selling something); Thaler's Nudge as a deliberate effort to influence an individual in the direction of their own self interest, when typical behavior is found to be against their own interests (such as unhealthy eating habits or overspending).… (more)
elenchus: Gaventa proposes three dimensions of power, from the familiar physical force of the 1st dimension, to the more subtle forms of the 2nd and 3rd dimensions. He supports his argument with reference to a case study of an Appalachian mining town, particularly helpful in reference to the 2nd & 3rd dimensions. Rushkoff illustrates further the 2nd & 3rd dimensions in a consumer-centric set of examples, though apparently without being aware of the link. Both are key conceptions in the analysis of power, and Gaventa's is itself a key work in the field.… (more)
▾Lists
None
▾Will you like it?
Loading...
Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.
The first chapter of Rushkoff's Coercion is a dense overture of themes and examples, highlighting the various ways commerce exploits discoveries in psychology, neurolinguistics, and social behavior to bend a person's decision-making to the benefit of the seller, only incidentally if at all consistent with the self interest of the buyer. It's Rushkoff's particular achievement that he catalogues the varied & increasingly sophisticated manifestations of this deliberate intent to manipulate the consumer. Later chapters focus on specific themes brought up in this first chapter.
Rushkoff distances himself from previous arguments in Cyberia and Media Virus, in which he staked out internet-optimistic positions based upon its potential to counter coercion. Primarily the fault in these arguments was in thinking the popular will would realise this potential, whereas what appears to have happened is that sales & marketing have done so belatedly but far more systematically than have the consumer. But Rushkoff can't shake his optimism entirely, making for an ambivalence throughout the text, as though he keeps cautioning his over-enthusiastic self.
Rushkoff's argument here also is ambivalent on just what constitutes coercion. His narrative is best understood as an exploration of manipulation, one less concerned with the theory or over-arching account of what it is, than with identifying the repeatedly harmful outcomes such manipulation visits on unsuspecting consumers. At various points, Rushkoff characterises coercion as: -- Consistent with Dale Carnegie's 1936 approach outlined in How to Win Friends and Influence People [37] -- Exemplified in the CIA's 1963 Kubark Manual on interrogation (interrogation here evidently intended to be distinct from physical torture) [38] -- In some instances distinct from persuasion or simple influence, but at others an extreme form of them [303] -- Lying to oneself [212]
Rushkoff establishes the systemic nature of manipulation as the premise of modern business: consumer manipulation succeeds by identifying tactics and then adapting to the defenses people instinctively and deliberately put in place, more quickly, consistently, and broadly than any individual reacts, precisely because the factors driving commerce are organized and outfitted with resources to achieve results. And while its adherents build and employ this system of influence, it operates separately from any one of them. The victims of manipulation, on the other hand, are primarily individuals who build defenses in a scattershot and inconsistent fashion, and at present do not display a defense corresponding to the systemic efforts to influence. The dynamic at play, then, is that of a system operating upon a dispersed and only loosely conscious and integrated population, and it is small wonder the system has the upper hand.
Rushkoff's concerns lie within Gaventa's second and third dimensions of power, though he does not reference Gaventa in this work. Rushkoff's conclusion is that ultimately, no conspiracy exists in the sense of a cabal of oppressors: there are no coercers except "us", in that those behind the manipulation are the same people who at other times are the targets of those techniques. In our occupational roles, especially in the advertising / marketing / sales trades, we build the coercive machinery which operates on us outside these roles, as consumers. A valid insight, which unfortunately leads Rushkoff to suggest we should "shrug off" this manipulation, simply stop acquiescing to its pressures. This conclusion is facetious at best. What is needed is a means of countering the power brought to bear against individuals through a matrix of manipulative tactics, a parry or posture equal to the attack. What that might be, and whether it may avoid utopian ideal or a Pyrrhic victory, is unaddressed here.
Coercion is meant as a popular book, certainly, but the argument is too loose and the prescription far too weak given the underlying premise. There is a raft of suggestive data, and a broad frame (manipulation) in which to organise it. Perhaps sensitised to the techniques he studies, does Rushkoff undermine his own argument in an effort to avoid performative contradiction?
//
Another example of social sciences used in support of tyranny, though the research originally was undertaken with the intent of assisting or at least understanding the exploited. (BC's instance of efforts at community building used later as target lists following a change in administration.)
Individual defense against influence of emotion and confusion aligns with the arguments for meditation: be in the moment; ground self in principles; be present / dispel automata.
Coercion is perhaps the obverse of the coin explored in Thaler's Nudge, and highlights the drawbacks of instinctual thinking as explored in Gladwell's Blink. It lays out the case for media literacy as a life skill in post-industrial society. ( )
This book was highly informative and interesting to read. Many of the ideas addressed in this book were beliefs that I myself have had about big media. It is nice to see other people researching and writing about what is really going on. Brilliant. ( )
For Bennett - my trusted brother, sometimes teacher, and always friend
First words
They say human beings use only 10 percent of their brains.
Quotations
Companies using the soft sell fool us into believing they have abandoned the cruelest coercive practices of their predecessors, when all they've really done is replaced them with kinder-looking ones and shifted the direct abuse onto their salespeople. [61]
The true outcome of the [coercion] arms race is that it makes the coercer and coercee indistinguishable. We are all coercers, and we are all coerced. Ultimately, there is no 'they'. As a result, we are suffering a collective confusion: a culture-wide inability to make choices in a rational way. [302-03]
Our ruthless commerce is no longer limited to products but now includes lifestyles, political candidates, morality, and even religions. [309]
They say that human beings only use ten per cent of their brains. They say the corner office is a position of power. They say you can earn u10,000 a week in your spare time. But who, exactly, are they? And why do we listen to them? We each have our own theys - bosses, experts and authorities who seem to dictate our lives and create our futures. Like parents, in the best of circumstances they can make us feel safe. But where power and profit are at stake, they can try to make us do what they want: buy their product, vote for their party, support their cause."
Rushkoff distances himself from previous arguments in Cyberia and Media Virus, in which he staked out internet-optimistic positions based upon its potential to counter coercion. Primarily the fault in these arguments was in thinking the popular will would realise this potential, whereas what appears to have happened is that sales & marketing have done so belatedly but far more systematically than have the consumer. But Rushkoff can't shake his optimism entirely, making for an ambivalence throughout the text, as though he keeps cautioning his over-enthusiastic self.
Rushkoff's argument here also is ambivalent on just what constitutes coercion. His narrative is best understood as an exploration of manipulation, one less concerned with the theory or over-arching account of what it is, than with identifying the repeatedly harmful outcomes such manipulation visits on unsuspecting consumers. At various points, Rushkoff characterises coercion as:
-- Consistent with Dale Carnegie's 1936 approach outlined in How to Win Friends and Influence People [37]
-- Exemplified in the CIA's 1963 Kubark Manual on interrogation (interrogation here evidently intended to be distinct from physical torture) [38]
-- In some instances distinct from persuasion or simple influence, but at others an extreme form of them [303]
-- Lying to oneself [212]
Rushkoff establishes the systemic nature of manipulation as the premise of modern business: consumer manipulation succeeds by identifying tactics and then adapting to the defenses people instinctively and deliberately put in place, more quickly, consistently, and broadly than any individual reacts, precisely because the factors driving commerce are organized and outfitted with resources to achieve results. And while its adherents build and employ this system of influence, it operates separately from any one of them. The victims of manipulation, on the other hand, are primarily individuals who build defenses in a scattershot and inconsistent fashion, and at present do not display a defense corresponding to the systemic efforts to influence. The dynamic at play, then, is that of a system operating upon a dispersed and only loosely conscious and integrated population, and it is small wonder the system has the upper hand.
Rushkoff's concerns lie within Gaventa's second and third dimensions of power, though he does not reference Gaventa in this work. Rushkoff's conclusion is that ultimately, no conspiracy exists in the sense of a cabal of oppressors: there are no coercers except "us", in that those behind the manipulation are the same people who at other times are the targets of those techniques. In our occupational roles, especially in the advertising / marketing / sales trades, we build the coercive machinery which operates on us outside these roles, as consumers. A valid insight, which unfortunately leads Rushkoff to suggest we should "shrug off" this manipulation, simply stop acquiescing to its pressures. This conclusion is facetious at best. What is needed is a means of countering the power brought to bear against individuals through a matrix of manipulative tactics, a parry or posture equal to the attack. What that might be, and whether it may avoid utopian ideal or a Pyrrhic victory, is unaddressed here.
Coercion is meant as a popular book, certainly, but the argument is too loose and the prescription far too weak given the underlying premise. There is a raft of suggestive data, and a broad frame (manipulation) in which to organise it. Perhaps sensitised to the techniques he studies, does Rushkoff undermine his own argument in an effort to avoid performative contradiction?
//
Another example of social sciences used in support of tyranny, though the research originally was undertaken with the intent of assisting or at least understanding the exploited. (BC's instance of efforts at community building used later as target lists following a change in administration.)
Individual defense against influence of emotion and confusion aligns with the arguments for meditation: be in the moment; ground self in principles; be present / dispel automata.
Coercion is perhaps the obverse of the coin explored in Thaler's Nudge, and highlights the drawbacks of instinctual thinking as explored in Gladwell's Blink. It lays out the case for media literacy as a life skill in post-industrial society. ( )