[Closed] Behavioural insights

Being bomarded with political correctness to nudge your behaviour is working

Good!

British society is being nudged into conforming with exactly the type of behaviour big corporations and the politicians that submit to them want

Why would "big corporations and the politicians" want me to be politically correct exactly?

I thought everybody already knew that most of 'polticial correctness' is just a way of controlling what we think and say, and that most of health & safety is just a way of controlling our actions and movements?

Edukator, are you a teacher?

Big corporations regularly try and nudge us into accepting a smaller state / no working rights. The IoD puts out nonsense press releases about red tape or a random Tory MP calls for an immediate 20% cut to the social security budget to boost competitiveness.

So you accept conditions that are not in your personal interest because your views have been "nudged" to the point you think they are.

It's sort of modern day brainwashing through propaganda but instead of rallies, speeches and advertising, the message is subliminally written into every document you receive. At the end of it you are more easily manipulated and will more easily go along with things that are not in your best interests because you are not prepared to be politically incorrect.

I have a PGCE, Singletracked, but haven't used it for over 20 years.

Edit: Exactly Footflaps - you are currently being "nudged" into binning your pensions rights.

Not sure why you are conflating "political correctness" and "nudging" (though I can guess).

Does no one get "nudged" towards bigotry and rudeness, perhaps by hanging out with other rude bigots that affirm their views?

Hardly news this, we are social creatures, so have millions of years worth of evolution developing groups skills / social influence / social pressures etc.

As for nudging etc, it's just a new word for things that have been known about for decades. Read 'The Hidden Persuaders', a 1950s book on advertising and you'll see there's not much new in the world of influencing people to buy / consume / vote in a certain way....

millions of years worth of evolution

Hmmmm, yes, a lot of people have been 'nudged' into this belief 😀

My observation is that it's gone beyond people trying to get us to buy things or vote for them, Footflaps. Governments/NGOs are now using it to modify our behaviour patterns, attitudes and responses. The overall impact of this nudging is a loss of personal freedoms including freedom of speech.

Scope for individual thought and expression is being nudged into the bright and distant past.

My views won't be 'nudged' anywhere - Never have been politically correct, never will be.

Seeing your other threads tho - you do get nudged about quite a bit and you starting this thread was only a matter of time.

something new under the sun?

I think there are two separate things although related. Political correctness is mainly a good thing, its to fight bigotry, racism, sexism and homophobia. Which all still have too strong a grip on many members of Society. Political correctness gone mad is an excuse used by those who want to continue their abuse.

The other problem is what I would call "the tyranny of empathy", where this is abused so you can't suggest someone was a nasty piece of work or a media manipulator because they are dead. Or death is used to garner support for politics, instead of a real evaluation we are sold the "our boys paying the ultimate sacrifice" card to insight nationalism and jingoism to cover up wars for profit.

Is political correctness always a good thing though MSP? And sometimes it's pretty clear to me it has gone mad, for example when someone that's had his window smashed uses the word "Chav" and gets flamed.

People have been nudged into accepting that only a very narrow range of views are accceptable and safe to be expressed in public, and at the same time learned that they can attack those who hold alternative views with impunity.

Edit: one man's political correctness is another man's unjust tyranny.

It's just propaganda, influence, or the art of suggestion.
It was there even before formalised verbal communication.
The printing press and subsequent innovations in mass communication just make it more obvious and effective.

And it's only a bad thing if you dissagree with it, otherwise it's generally called progress, or change if you're ambivalent.

My observation is that it's gone beyond people trying to get us to buy things or vote for them, Footflaps. Governments/NGOs are now using it to modify our behaviour patterns, attitudes and responses. The overall impact of this nudging is a loss of personal freedoms including freedom of speech.

Looking at things over a slightly longer time frame, I'd say we're doing OK. After all, it wasn't that long ago that we used to burn people at the stake for having the wrong 'opinion' / religion....

Edukator - Member
Is political correctness always a good thing though MSP? And sometimes it's pretty clear to me it has gone mad, for example when someone that's had his window smashed uses the word "Chav" and gets flamed.

People have been nudged into accepting that only a very narrow range of views are accceptable and safe to be expressed in public, and at the same time learned that they can attack those who hold alternative views with impunity.

Edit: one man's political correctness is another man's unjust tyranny.

This to a degree is the problem - a blurring of the lines. I believe I'm entitled to my opinion, I also believe its my responsibility to understand what is acceptable to others and how to expressed my opinion in a way that doesn't become unacceptable or offensive to them.

I don't agree that you can't disagree with people, express an opposing opinion or communicate your own opinion without going to jail. FWIW my workplace is quickly becoming just that. But its HOW you do it that makes the difference.

Edit: I believe we are [s]using[/s] "losing" (edit: sorry) the ability to communicate, and rush too much into opening out mouths. Think back a 100 years and see the thought that went into writing a letter, or the considered opinion of a thought leader.

This thread will be closed or off topic within three days I bet, but there is considerable thoought and discussion that could be has if all on here could keep a level of "acceptabiity" and "respectablity" about the conversation.

I have a PGCE, Singletracked, but haven't used it for over 20 years.

Can I ask that we keep things this way, please, Edukator??

Rachel

One man's unjust tyranny is the same man's refusal to be enlightened.

Can it not be a bad thing if it results in some, if not the majority, of people in society being objectively worse off as a result of the change. If the changes that are brought about by nudge making them acceptable include for example:

The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Less people receiving adeqate health care.
Less people receiving adequate pensions.
People paying more for education.
People paying more for goods and services.

Edit: Interesting you should use the word enlightened, Darcy. How would Galileo have felt about your statement?

this post removed by mods. final warning.

This thread will be closed or off topic within three days I bet, but there is considerable thoought and discussion that could be has if all on here could keep a level of "acceptabiity" and "respectablity" about the conversation.

this post removed by mods. final warning.

See?

It's human nature to attempt to influence others.

Simple as that.

understand what is acceptable to others and how to expressed my opinion in a way that doesn't become unacceptable or offensive to them

And on the other hand, sometimes people just have to learn to cope with being offended occasionally.

Nothing happens when you're offended.

You don't go to sleep at night being offended, and wake up in the morning with leprosy.

After a point, all this tip-toeing around trying not to 'offend' anyone is just a consequence of an immature/insecure mentality where people can't cope with other peoples opinions being different to their own.

(Although I'm not saying it's ok to go around being deliberately and overtly offensive. This is also an immature mentality.)

😀

Hmmm. Reading that back, it might or might not come across very well... Ah well, I know what I meant 😕

After a point, all this tip-toeing around trying not to 'offend' anyone is just a consequence of an immature/insecure mentality where people can't cope with other peoples opinions being different to their own.

I am guilty of this myself, yet also agree with it. Sometimes you don't agree with what's being said and / or don't like "losing" your standpoint - the latter btw usually is the catalist for the caveman in us all to start applying worse / more challenging output in order to defend our case / belittle the offender.

So what? Grow up and deal with it, and if you can't face it, leave the conversation gracefully*

* I am aware I need to take my own advice. :-/

Edukator

its fine to have discussion, if you are able to express yourself without recourse to abuse,incomprehension,and the usual no no's-- interesting you start this thread, as you identify plenty of injustices, yet appear to want to ignore use of language in that process-- denigration etc- flamed you call it for using a derogatory word. The N word to black people is derogatory-- among some it is used as humour-- comprehende ?

[i]It's human nature to attempt to influence others.[/i]

well you've convinced me with that point.

[i]people just have to learn to cope with being offended occasionally.[/i]

they do but not about how they are, just about what they think.

I'm certainly getting 'nudged' away from STW. cos bejeezus it's becoming boring.

On a lighter note and related to offensive language, here is a very funny Chris Rock comedy sketch, just showing that some people can get away with saying anything...

DezB- bye....

Footflaps-- thanks for that.. need some humour, its the best way sometimes--

DezB - Member
I'm certainly getting 'nudged' away from STW. cos bejeezus it's becoming boring.

Becuase?

I'm guessing either

a) because the mods in thier view of protecting the innocent, have moderated out your view of "excitement"

or

b) The current posters aren't or aren't capable of making an effort to hold a discussion without resulting in a) above being enforced.

getting flamed myself for feeling threatened by people who hide their faces in public

Someone is currently doing 12 weeks jail for making jokes in poor taste on the Net.

Pootr tatse - it is illegal to make a poor taste joke then is it
You are misrprepresenting the reason he was sent down

I am sorry you cannot join the 21 st century and feel unciomfortable becaus ewe have all been mind manipulated to be thoughtless PC saps

As i repeat to yo often you are just massively out of touch with everyone
Keep you notion that you are fighting for freedom

It's sort of modern day brainwashing through propaganda

Can it not be a bad thing if it results in some, if not the majority, of people in society being objectively worse off as a result of the change.

The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Less people receiving adeqate health care.
Less people receiving adequate pensions.
People paying more for education.
People paying more for goods and services.

Edit:

Interesting you should use the word enlightened, Darcy. How would Galileo have felt about your statement?

Galileo was correct in a matter of fact re a heliocentric solar system and ioppressed by the church to recant this view under threat of death - what is your point?

FWIW I am more left wing than most folk but i cannot get all conspiracist about why my view is not he majority
You takes some extreme or unpopular positions then you complain that they are unpopular and get attacked.
To suggest it because we are all brain washed PC nudgess and you are a free thinker is self aggrandisement of the highest order.
I have come to expect nothing less from you
Your views are discussed because the majority think they are wrong - blame who or what you want for this.

I miss the good ole days when i could beat the missus with a stick, and life is really quite hard without a slave and i have no idea where I'm going to the surplus chemicals i got in to castrate the neighbours for being an abomination in the eyes of the sweet baby Jesus. It's political correctness gawwn maaaaad! I also find it hard to drink my lovely can of the real thing with all those nudges making me spill it. I wonder when the the powers will realise nudging is inefficient and they could just get back to say, gunning down say a load of protesting miners to influence them......oh yeah. Two separate issues here, neatly confused into one, i wonder why.....

Edit: Interesting you should use the word enlightened, Darcy. How would Galileo have felt about your statement?

It was the church that was refusing to be enlightened; and using its power to stop others being enlightened. So I would liken the Galileo situation to someone like Richard Littlejohn screaming about "Political Correctness gone mad" from his widely read Daily Mail column.

Scope for individual thought and expression is being nudged into the bright and distant past.

yes. along with the constant wet nursing as people loose the ability to think for themselves also with criticism being labeled 'negative' so mediocrity is championed and any questioning or objective view is suppressed.
the public need to corralled guided and warned of any behaviour outside the norm.
thing is most of the moronic public are happy with this.

See, it works!

Major Misunderstanding- a la viz- place has gone to the dogs, can't get a good slave for love nor money

criticism being labeled 'negative'

damning with faint praise ....or should that be feint...

I struggle with long sentences

I’m with Edukator on this one - mostly. I don’t know from where it stems but I feel there’s definitely a social meme of some description - a pernicious encroachment on what people can say without the risk of disproportionate censure from certain quarters. This ‘PC’ness’ serves to moderate communication to the point of banality and stifles free speech.

There’s a line between communications that engage criminal offences, i.e the idiot that posted vile comments about Tom Daily and those that just happen to upset someones sensibilities - I appreciate it’s a little nebulous and what upsets some might not others. I get annoyed at third party indignation and people fainting like Victorian spinsters when they hear something they ‘take offence’ at.

I think in general we just need to toughen up and be a little more robust.

I mean, come on, calling a polis a "prole", and all the polis getting uppity about it. They need to toughen up, be a bit more robust and not be getting upset at a bit of sweary name-calling.

I love being different, and thank god/Allah/Buddha/flying spaghetti monster/ etc that I am, who would want to be like some of the chavs/lefties/atheists/french/southerns who have an opinion different to mine, how dare they

'Plebgate' never bothered me DD. I wasn't 'offended' - I can assure you I've been called worse!

For me it was an insight into how the government views the public sector, of which I am a part of and feel strongly about. I thought the whole debacle was hugely funny if anything.

I struggle with long sentences-- attention span too short- don't want to read anyone else's posts, just my own.....

I'm sure you've been called worse del. I routinely refer to you in very colourful terms. 🙂

The language used to refer to (mostly) minority groups also gives lie to the user's underlying attitude towards them. Challenging those views often starts (but of course, shouldn't end IMO) with the words used. Making an assumption, I'd guess that Bizzies are always being told, from on high, how to refer to various members of society. Can you tell me out of interest where you think this has gone too far? (genuine question)

I've just read this back and I apologise for overuse of the word "refer".

[b]OP:[/b] Are you being "nudged" too far....

So, you're arguing that people disagree with you because they are brainwashed?

It's because of us being members of STW. Internet home of fad diets and fad bike trends.

As deluded notes plebs gives away the attitude - I am superior to you - and that is why iot is bad - we cannot pretend words dont have meanings and that they show our attitudes. However it depends on what you mean by PC

I would be concerned if in private between mates we spoke like this - though this geberally only holds true if you know the person is nopt a racist homophobe /whatever.

In public on a forum of strangers it is probably better we adopt a more inclusive style of language lest we are mistaken for a racist xenophobe rather than someone with a bad sense of humour.

Behavioural insights

Where?

Someone is currently doing 12 weeks jail for making jokes in poor taste on the Net.

Jeez, sorry, it was "Pleb" not "Prole" 😳

Public discourse demands inclusivity,as JY says-- private talk amongst friends-- well anything goes.....context is all

been a lovely morning, must go now, housing benefit issues to sort......

fnord

"comments were so serious and abhorrent that he deserved the longest sentence they could pass"

If I create a Facebook account, lock the privacy settings right down, have 0 friends so no other user can read what I write, is what I post on it 'private'?

The data is being sent through servers, it is stored, there is no guarentee that it will remain out of other users' view. A facebook employee could potentially take a printscreen of my name next to a sick joke I posted, and post this image on the official 'Hunt for April' facebook page in full view of her family.

However, I intended it to be private.

Do my intentions count for anything in this situation?

Is political correctness always a good thing though MSP? And sometimes it's pretty clear to me it has gone mad, for example when someone that's had his window smashed uses the word "Chav" and gets flamed.

And the vast majority of people in that thread 'flamed' those criticising the use of the word. So anti-political correctness has gone mad? It's a lame cop-out of those who have no argument to start crying about political correctness.

It really worries me that 84% of this audience agrees with that statement, because the kind of people that say "political correctness gone mad" are usually using that phrase as a kind of cover action to attack minorities or people that they disagree with. I'm of an age that I can see what a difference political correctness has made. When I was four years old, my grandfather drove me around Birmingham, where the Tories had just fought an election campaign saying, "if you want a **** for a neighbour, vote Labour," and he drove me around saying, "this is where all the ****s and the coons and the jungle bunnies live."

And I remember being at school in the early 80s and my teacher, when he read the register, instead of saying the name of the one asian boy in the class, he would say, "is the black spot in," right? And all these things have gradually been eroded by political correctness, which seems to me to be about an institutionalised politeness at its worst.

And if there is some fallout from this, which means that someone in an office might get in trouble one day for saying something that someone was a bit unsure about because they couldn't decide whether it was sexist or homophobic or racist, it's a small price to pay for the massive benefits and improvements in the quality of life for millions of people that political correctness has made.

It's a complete lie that allows the right, which basically controls media now, and international politics, to make people on the left who are concerned about the way people are represented look like killjoys. And I'm sick, I'm really sick-- 84% of you in this room that have agreed with this phrase, you're like those people who turn around and go, "you know who the most oppressed minorities in Britain are? White, middle-class men." You're a bunch of idiots.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Stewart_Lee#On_political_correctness

Grum-- saw Reginald D hunter , he is very very good, made a lot of people squirm any many more laugh for a long time, whilst discussing race, class and gender-- man is worth catching live...

Edukator, I remember when I posted that me and my girlfriend were spat at in the street, you suggested it was partly our fault for daring to walk hand in hand in public.

Maybe a little nudge might not be a bad thing...

I think some people get so overly worked up about political correctness that they either:

a) They blame all kinds of random shit on it and do the whole political correctness gone mad thing
b) They don't understand the purpose and look for offence where it doesn't exist

Not being racist, sexist or homophobic and generally polite it doesn't effect me really. I don't consider it an erosion of my rights that I can't call people rude names because of something that is genetic or even because of their social or economic situation which may also not be their choice.

There are plenty of rude names left I can call people though so I don't feel my insult vocabulary has had to suffer.

Thanks for that grum 🙂

Edukator, I remember when I posted that me and my girlfriend were spat at in the street, you suggested it was partly our fault for daring to walk hand in hand in public

you serious-- him say that !! why him use that moniker--he sounds like he's trapped in the wrong century --Victorian Dad ?

[quote=emsz]Edukator, I remember when I posted that me and my girlfriend were spat at in the street, you suggested it was partly our fault for daring to walk hand in hand in public

Maybe a little nudge might not be a bad thing.

That's what he was trying to do. Nudge you into the closet.

Edukator, I remember when I posted that me and my girlfriend were spat at in the street, you suggested it was partly our fault for daring to walk hand in hand in public.

Maybe a little nudge might not be a bad thing...

Now this is where it becomes a bit of a minefield.

Was it that he said the others actions were justified, which would of course be completely wrong. Or was it that he said, due to knowing the possible reaction from some lowlifes you put yourself in an avoidable situation.

a link to the thread may be useful.

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/homophobia-alive-and-well-on-the-streets
more the later IIRC but he argued it poorly, again iirc

If I create a Facebook account, lock the privacy settings right down, have 0 friends so no other user can read what I write, is what I post on it 'private'?

The data is being sent through servers, it is stored, there is no guarentee that it will remain out of other users' view. A facebook employee could potentially take a printscreen of my name next to a sick joke I posted, and post this image on the official 'Hunt for April' facebook page in full view of her family.

However, I intended it to be private.

Do my intentions count for anything in this situation?

[b]If a message sent is grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, menacing or false it is irrelevant whether it was received. The offence is one of sending, so it is committed when the sending takes place.[/b]

Untrue, no-one has been jailed for that reason. Someone has been jailed, however, for committing a criminal offense under section 127 of the Communications Act - and not just "a joke" but (according to the judge) "comments were so serious and abhorrent that he deserved the longest sentence they could pass". If these cretins fail to realise that what they type in a drunken stupor can and will be widely broadcast then that is their problem.

+1

I'd counter the notion that the censure of offensive tweets is less manipulative of public opinion than the deliberately vague reporting of these cases - encouraging the reader to presume an over-reaction to a minor infraction. In the case where a kid was arrested for tweeting about Tom Daily it was reported as if one off-colour message was all that had prompted the reaction when infact it was a deluge of pointed and viscious attacks and threats of harm.

These things are news generally because the medium is new. Individually and culturally (and legally it seems)we haven't managed to distinguish whether twitter (or facebook - or this forum) is like whispering behind someones back, standing on the rooftops with a loudhailer or shouting your insults straight in someones face.

Was it that he said the others actions were justified, which would of course be completely wrong. Or was it that he said, due to knowing the possible reaction from some lowlifes you put yourself in an avoidable situation.

It's not really a minefield. Girl hand in hand with another girl in maybe not the nicest part of Oxford(?) during the day gets spat at by homophobic dick. There is no way the action of the spitter is reasonable however what she got from Edukator was basically "you should have known better than to behave like a lesbian in public".

Didn't help with this corker either:

[quote=Edukator]I can't help thinking that it's easier to adapt to one's environment than go on a crusade to change it.

So basically, don't try to change the minds of bigots just work around them which I think is a pretty awful statement.

"you should have known better than to behave like a lesbian in public"

I have just been reading the thread, that's not what he said, in fact apart from a crappy joke he was putting the same point I made above pretty well, but people kept pushing and misrepresenting his point, until he lost the plot.

He does seem to be one of those guys that can be pushed over the edge by some posters.

But it does backup my original post on this thread.

What happened to emz is a reason for the need for political correctness.

But it was turned into something else (what I called the tyranny of sentimentality), a pretence of siding with the op to abuse, provoke and push for a reaction from someone with a known weakness for going off on one.

I would have an opinion on this, but alas I am too busy buying things I see in adverts and trying not to offend people... apparently

Plebs, odd insult really. They did all right for themselves in certain respects. Not that I have my own opinion on the matter obviously.

Anyway, back to being patronized.

If a message sent is grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, menacing or false it is irrelevant whether it was received. The offence is one of sending, so it is committed when the sending takes place.

So violence rather than doing as the Roman's when in Rome is your answer, Crankboy. Isn't avoiding behaviour some find provacative in public more peaceful?

Edukator from the other thread. Apparently free speech is very important to him - isn't this the equivalent of telling, say, political dissidents in a repressive country that it would be better if they just shut up so as not to cause trouble?

To understand this forum better, I would suggest reading Dr Steven Peter's "The Chimp Paradox" rather than the "nudge stuff". Not only does it have (a slightly spurious) link to bikes (via Team GB) but his description of The Chimp is one of the best descriptions of forum behaviour that I can find 😉

[quote=MSP]But it was turned into something else (what I called the tyranny of sentimentality), a pretence of siding with the op to abuse, provoke and push for a reaction from someone with a known weakness for going off on one.

I don't disagree that some of it was baiting but as grum has said, Edukator seems to believe that the best way to deal with bigots is let them get on with their issues and don't expose them to anything that might offend, even if their opinions are in the minority. We're not even talking about protests or anything designed to shock/confront, just walking down the street hand in hand in this case. I don't really think that pandering to the lowest common denominator is really the way to create an equal society.

Thanks for posting the link to the holding hands thread, Junkyard, much better than misquoting. Have you got last week's "face covered" one book marked too so people can see I object to people covering their faces whatever they use to do it.

We have an exchange student staying with us at present. Before she went into town yesterday I suggested she remove her waist pack and put her camera and cash loose in her pockets. STwers have previously misinterpreted/misrepresented my pragmatism as "racism" and "homophobia". What word have the over-sensitive got for suggesting a young female make herself less of a target for our local scooter-riding robbers?

Edukator seems to believe

Is being "street wise" pandering to the lowest common denominator, Atlaz? I don't think so.

[i]What word have the over-sensitive got for suggesting a young female make herself less of a target for our local scooter-riding robbers? [/i]

nanny state?

Have you got last week's "face covered" one book marked too so people can see I object to people covering their faces whatever they use to do it.

It was a thread started by emsz so was easy enough to find by searching her profile - i dont have any thread bookmarked but thanks for the dig you are ever so witty with your ad hominems. If only you were allowed to be ruder about folk whilst misrepresenting yourself eh adamn those PCers eh.
I will route that out so peole can indeed read that your account of what happens is fanciful and they can read all about you and your very own version of tolerance
http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/wtf-naked-rambler-jailed-for-5-months

STwers have previously misinterpreted/misrepresented my pragmatism as "racism" and "homophobia".

I really believe that people should [s]stick to believing what I type rather than putting words into my mouth[/s] read what you say rather than listen to you describe what you think it means

FWIW in the emsz thread i think you wer esayin be careful there ar enumbnuts out there as you are doing in the theft one
On the issue of the Burkha I shall let the thread do the talking.
No one agreed with you on the thread

Nanny state solutions would include more police officers watching more cameras and compiling more statistics, fitting all scooters with tracking devices and bio-metric ignition systems... .

"Nudge" state tactics would involve building fear around city centre shopping whilst promoting out-of-town sotores and car use so no young women felt the need to go into town anymore.

Edit: thanks for the link to "naked" rambler thread, Junkyard. Some impressive conclusion jumping in there.