---- Social Media Mind Manipulation Tactics - "10 things you should know" ----
We have all been there right? scrolling through social media, checking whats happening out there in the "real world", lol, And there it is... another article telling you secrets of "how to find out 'x' about someone" in a few easy steps. They usually tend to something along the lines of:
- 10 Sure signs your partner is cheating
- 3 Things they do if the really love you
- 5 ways to tell if they are sociopath or narcissist
- 6 Traits of winners
You get the picture, and reading the titles they are very intriguing, i mean who wouldn't want to know if their partner is cheating or if they are interacting with a psychopath. And if there are traits winners have i want them too right ?
The problem is when we delve into the data being presented within these articles we hit a few major snags. Snags which can be incredibly harmful to those who take this data on as unequivocal truths which must be implemented immediately, and those who interact with these people in day to day lives who get to feel the repercussions of such careless writing.
Part of the issues we face when examining the data presented to us is that it seems as though the sources are legitimate, many of them claiming to have particular fields of expertise backing them within the entities self apposed name. This gives the illusion of credibility to whatever is published under the title of these online articles.
However, once we begin reading the articles themselves it becomes apparent that the presentation is fraught with confirmation bias, manipulated data, skewed perspectives, etc. Generally speaking it would seem that the perspective presented is that of one who has had an experience first hand themselves or has spoken to someone they know who has had the experience.
To be clear this does not constitute research that can be quantified in any meaningful way, for that the scientific method would need to be applied to particular samples, tested, retested, results quantified using statistics, and interpreted by a qualified statistician/scientist to give some kind of meaning to the numbers on the paper representing the results of the experiments.
Now some of you may say that no one would fall for this kind of thing, but i would counter with this, if that were the case then why would they continue to maintain a online presence and persistently present new articles of this nature? if no one is "buying" the product/articles then there would clearly be a change of formula to something more profitable.
These articles present data in a way which preys on the human condition, exploits the weaknesses of the psyche, and aims to create an emotional reaction. In this arena we are guided to familiar areas of high emotion and stress, then told to associate particular traits as indicators for the behavior that the reader should be on the look out for. Unfortunately, in many instances the data is incredibly flawed and could lead to more problems than solutions when applied outside of the articles paper thin walls.
The result of these articles can have the reader thinking they have psychopaths, narcissists and sociopaths as family members, partners , friends , work colleges etc. These articles can also take relationships which are perfectly healthy and fine, then destroy them by filling the person reading with fear uncertainty and doubt about their partner.
These articles can be so manipulative that they even have us questioning if we ourselves are horrible partners and people in general. The kinds of adverse behavior and thinking which can arise form this is astonishing, and the impact can be devastating to a relationships very existence.
What we need to understand is that the mind works in particular ways, none of us are immune from this as it has been part of our evolution and also how we have been taught to think through social structures and interaction. The human mind does tries to streamline thinking, it gravitates to the familiar, it does not like having to work too hard. This creates a fast and slow streams of thinking dependent of task difficult, however we will default to fast thinking as soon as possible to give the mind a break, these are just some of the traits associated with "cognitive ease".
Due to this, we try and package up ideas and concepts into pigeon holes for data to be allotted to, simply put this is the basis of various forms of stereotypes and "isms" (sexism, racism, etc.). However, this does not mean that this method is a bad way of interpreting information processed via our senses, in fact it is a great means to streamline thinking and processing, but it is the behavior which arises from that interpretation which can be questionable, but I digress.
The articles propose that they have done all the hard work for you and have a streamlined checklists which can be used to evaluate various scenarios, describing the problem and "solution", giving away the perfect packages for our pigeon holes, and some of us lap them up.
The issue is that human interaction is complex, there are in incredible number of variables which are at play at any given moment in time during human interactions. To boil them down to basic "this, plus this, equals that" is not only irrational, it is completely reckless to others well being... and from a false position of authority no less.
Jump To Conclusions Mat
The bottom line is, these articles influence readers to "jump to conclusions" via a basic equation, and equation that has no real scientific foundation. There is no "simple" way to discover a person is a psychopath/sociopath/narcissist, this is why there are psychological professionals who dedicate years of their lives to be able to try and make these kinds of assessments. There is no "simple" way to know if you partner is cheating on you, this why many are fooled for years by their partners after being committed and dedicated to the relationship. There is no "simple" way to always be a winner, that is why not all of us succeed at everything we do.
Life is hard and it would be nice if here were some cheat codes available so we could have things the way we want them to be, but that is just not how it works... so we have to do the leg work. There are means available to us to be able to discover what we need/want to know, one thing is for certain that these kinds of articles will not provide the answers we seek.
Honestly, I am strongly considering dissecting one of these kinds of articles, then performing a mild discourse analysis to pull apart some of the glaring flaws in the presentation of the data, the kinds of bias influencing the data, etc. I feel this may better reflect the damage which may occur when subscribing to these forms of literature on these subjects. I think that it would be interesting to make some observations as well as highlight what it looks like "in the field".
If there are still any doubts about how lacking in scientific basis and certification these articles are, let me leave you with this last image which indicates that the commitment level of another person can be identified by what time of year the person was born in...
OMFGs Yes! These listicles give me the shits!!
Coming from having worked in the field of ‘writing copy’... the only measure of success are clicks. So we have no real data on whether people clicking are even reading any of them or believing them.
And unfortunately, sales coaches are telling professionals to create this kind of simplistic garbage to help promote their services.
It’s just banal shit all round.
Posted using Partiko iOS
The way i see it we are speeding our way to Idiocracy ;) We churn the rubbish out and it keeps circulating until it becomes "common law/understanding" that these are legitimate "facts".... I am genuinely concerned for the people who do not question what, at a glance, can be puled apart and seen to be flawed, but take it onboard as "knowledge". We need critical thinking STAT !!!! lolz
You had me there for a second; I thought "Oh no, not another cheap check-list..."
Glad to read it's the exact opposite 😋
Ah come on mate you should know me better than that by now ;) Im a shit stirrer from way back and like to use the same "tactics" they do with a comedic flare , lol.
This story was recommended by Steeve to its users and upvoted by one or more of them.
Check @steeveapp to learn more about Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface.
thanks for the support :)
I wholeheartedly agree. Though the main reason I left Facebook is because of the Outrage Industry, (all my friends reposted political stuff rather than these sorts of articles), you can't help but see their influence everywhere.
Particularly on some of the witchcraft groups that I once was in (emphasis -once-) among crap-tons of people mistaking Hypervigilance for "Empathy" and endless memes about "What's your fairy space dragon name?" you would frequently see this sort of thing.
It's one of the main reasons that I came to Steemit; because that sort of crap can be downvoted into oblivion here, and the community has a damn good reason for doing it.
The Outrage Industry makes use of these same behavioural exploits, and overall, the internet has become a terrible mockery of what it once was.
And it's fallen to us to save it; for ourselves, if nobody else. <3
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
Thanks for your comment mate, Yeah we can have a laugh about some of these articles that indicate meaningless garbage, but where it gets scary is when it becomes the same game but with serious matters, such as politics etc. as you mentioned.
In this realm the stakes are much higher and the "agenda" is lost in the debate.... bottom line we fall for the same crap, but we think we are "too smart" to be manipulated in such a way. It all starts with the conditioning on these less relevant subjects and we apply the same logic when dealing with more important issues.