ethics

Fact-checking is a critical process used in journalism to verify the factual accuracy of information before it’s published or broadcast. This practice is key to maintaining the credibility and ethical standards of journalism and media as reliable information sources. It involves checking statements, claims, and data in various media forms for accuracy and context.

Ethical standards in fact-checking

The ethical backbone of fact-checking lies in journalistic integrity, emphasizing accuracy, fairness, and impartiality. Accuracy ensures information is cross-checked with credible sources. Fairness mandates balanced presentation, and impartiality requires fact-checkers to remain as unbiased in their evaluations as humanly possible.

To evaluate a media source’s credibility, look for a masthead, mission statement, about page, or ethics statement that explains the publication’s approach to journalism. Without a stated commitment to journalistic ethics and standards, it’s entirely possible the website or outlet is publishing opinion and/or unverified claims.

Fact-checking in the U.S.: A historical perspective

Fact-checking in the U.S. has evolved alongside journalism. The rise of investigative journalism in the early 20th century highlighted the need for thorough research and factual accuracy. However, recent developments in digital and social media have introduced significant challenges.

Challenges from disinformation and propaganda

The digital era has seen an explosion of disinformation and propaganda, particularly on social media. ‘Fake news‘, a term now synonymous with fabricated or distorted stories, poses a significant hurdle for fact-checkers. The difficulty lies not only in the volume of information but also in the sophisticated methods used to spread falsehoods, such as deepfakes and doctored media.

Bias and trust issues in fact-checking

The subjectivity of fact-checkers has been scrutinized, with some suggesting that personal or organizational biases might influence their work. This perception has led to a trust deficit in certain circles, where fact-checking itself is viewed as potentially politically or ideologically motivated.

Despite challenges, fact-checking remains crucial for journalism. Future efforts may involve leveraging technology like AI for assistance, though human judgment is still essential. The ongoing battle against disinformation will require innovation, collaboration with tech platforms, transparency in the fact-checking process, and public education in media literacy.

Fact-checking stands as a vital element of journalistic integrity and a bulwark against disinformation and propaganda. In the U.S., and globally, the commitment to factual accuracy is fundamental for a functioning democracy and an informed society. Upholding these standards helps protect the credibility of the media and trusted authorities, and supports the fundamental role of journalism in maintaining an informed public and a healthy democracy.

Read more

A cult is a social group, usually insular, defined by unorthodox beliefs and/or practices. The cult usually shares religious, philosophical, or ideological values and goals. The cult definition of “values” may be greatly outside of mainstream norms.

The term cult is usually taken as a pejorative, for its connotation of excessive devotion to a charismatic leader with a shady past, or blind devotion to questionable practices and unusual precepts. Believers might say they are following a spiritual quest, while their estranged family and friends would say that are being exploited by unscrupulous conmen and con artists.

Cults employ various recruitment techniques to grow membership as well as to cement the new belief system into their minds over time. Brainwashing, phobia indoctrination, and other influence techniques, along with isolation, sleep and food deprivation, emotional blackmail (and actual blackmail) and other tactics help erode the resolve and individuality of recruits until they fully adopt the new way of being the cult leader would prefer for them. Be aware of the cult warning signs, and don’t get sucked in by warm promises from strangers that seem too good to be true.

Cult Dictionary

The destructive cult

There have been hundreds and even thousands of relatively innocuous cults throughout human history, but the most famous by far are the destructive cults. A cult of this type involves members physically harming or killing themselves, other members of the group, or other people.

A subset of the destructive cult, a Doomsday cult commits violence inwardly or outwardly due to adoption of an apocalyptic or millenarian belief system whose rules require anything from murder to mass suicide. These groups foretell disaster and catastrophe preceding a massive transformation, or potentially the destruction of the entire world. In the case of millenarian conspiracy theories, their cataclysmic predictions include a period of utopia following the upheaval.

Destructive cults are almost always run by cult leaders who are narcissists. They lack empathy for people, and do not care if they harm them — especially if they get something they want in the process.

A religious cult leader preaching to his followers with a projection of a god in the distance, by Midjourney

Millenarianism

Common themes among millenarian beliefs include claims that contemporary society and its leaders are corrupt, and will soon be destroyed by a more powerful force. The inherent evil of the status quo cannot be purged without this dramatic upheaval of society.

Within millenarianism there are finer groups still, including the easily linguistically confused Millennialism. Millennial movements are a type of Christian millenarianism in which the period of utopia following the apocalypse is expect to last 1000 years.

The Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler believed in a Millenial ideology, and that the Third Reich would rule for the next 1000 years after conquering the globe. Luckily, they were dead wrong.

Cults and Mind Control Books

Why do people join cults?

Cults often attract individuals through a gradual and subtle process, making it difficult for someone to realize they’re being drawn into a potentially harmful environment.

Initially, cults often present themselves in an appealing manner, targeting individuals during vulnerable times in their lives, such as after a personal loss, during a period of life transition, or when someone feels isolated or dissatisfied with their current life situation. They offer a sense of belonging, understanding, and purpose that might be missing from the individual’s life.

This sense of community and shared purpose is a powerful draw. Cults frequently use tactics like love bombing, where new recruits are showered with attention and praise, to create an instant connection and sense of belonging. They may also exploit personal crises, offering support and solutions that seem tailor-made for the individual’s problems.

Once involved, individuals may not recognize the incremental shifts in behavior and belief that are often demanded by the group. This process, known as indoctrination or brainwashing, can involve controlling aspects of a person’s life such as their relationships, information access, and even daily habits. Cults often encourage or enforce a separation from previous social support networks, making it harder for members to maintain perspective. Critical thinking is discouraged, and questioning or dissent is often met with punitive measures, reinforcing a cycle of compliance and dependence on the group.

Cult leader preaching to his flock in the garden, by Midjourney

How do people leave cults? (…or do they?!)

Exiting a cult is challenging, as it often requires individuals to recognize the manipulative and controlling nature of the organization, which can be a significant psychological hurdle. The process usually involves reconnecting with family and friends outside the cult, seeking support from former members, or getting help from professionals experienced in dealing with cults.

Recovery often involves deprogramming, counseling, and rebuilding one’s independence and critical thinking skills. Support networks play a crucial role in providing the emotional support and resources needed to rebuild a life outside of the cult’s influence.

Famous cults in history

  • The Peoples Temple — Jim Jones and the Jonestown mass suicide
  • The Manson Family
  • The Unification Church (aka The Moonies)
  • The LaRouche Movement
  • Ku Klux Klan
  • Sullivanians
  • Branch Davidians — aka the cult made infamous by the Waco Siege in 1993
  • Children of God — committed mass suicide during the approach of the Hale-Bopp comet
  • Heaven’s Gate Cult
  • Al-Qaida
  • Aum Shinrikyo
  • ISIL
  • Dominionists — a religious cult here in the U.S. that believes the nation must “get back” to a delusionally invented time when America was a Christian nation
  • Nxivm

More about cults:

Cult Warning Signs: How to recognize cultish groups ↗

Recognizing cult warning signs can be vital in identifying and understanding the risk before getting involved with a group who may not have your best interests in mind.

A Cult Dictionary of Mind Control, and the Language of Abuse ↗

One could argue the Confederacy was a kind of cult, and the KKK after it. America gave rise to cult leaders Charles Manson, Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Sun Myung Moon, among many many others who led cults big and small (Charles Koch, perhaps?! Certainly Donald Trump.).

Phobia indoctrination ↗

Phobia indoctrination is one of the principle ways a charismatic leader will lull potential followers into his thrall, by putting them into a state of perpetual fear and anxiety.

Read more

The concept of “flying monkeys” is a term that originates from popular culture, specifically the 1939 film “The Wizard of Oz,” where the Wicked Witch of the West employs winged monkeys to carry out her malevolent deeds. In the realm of psychology and interpersonal relationships, the term has been appropriated to describe individuals who act on behalf of a narcissist or emotional predator, often without full awareness that they are being used to harm others.

Psychological underpinnings of flying monkeys

Flying monkeys serve as extensions of the narcissist’s inflated ego and domineering will. They are often manipulated into believing that the narcissist’s cause is just, and they may even think they are helping to protect or defend someone they care about. This is achieved through a range of manipulative tactics such as gaslighting, projection, and triangulation.

Gaslighting is a hallmark of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) and emotional abuse that involves making someone doubt their own perceptions and memories, while projection shifts the narcissist’s negative traits onto the victim. Triangulation pits people against each other, creating a web of confusion and mistrust.

Usage by narcissists

Narcissists employ flying monkeys to extend their sphere of influence and control. These enablers can be friends, family members, or even colleagues who are manipulated into carrying out various tasks for the narcissist. These tasks can range from spreading rumors and gossip to more overt acts like harassment or stalking. The flying monkeys often believe they are acting out of loyalty or love, not realizing that they are pawns in a larger scheme.

The narcissist’s relationship with their flying monkeys is transactional. There’s an unspoken quid pro quo: the flying monkeys get to bask in the narcissist’s approval, and in return, they carry out the narcissist’s bidding. This dynamic allows the narcissist to maintain a clean image via plausible deniability, as they can always distance themselves from the actions of their flying monkeys.

Usage by cult leaders

In the context of cults, the concept takes on an even darker hue. Cult leaders often employ a cadre of devoted followers to enforce their will and isolate potential recruits from outside influences. These flying monkeys serve as a buffer between the leader and the outside world, allowing the leader to maintain an aura of mystique and unapproachability. They carry out tasks ranging from recruitment to punishment of dissenting members, all while believing that they are part of a grand, noble cause.

Evil flying monkeys are in every environment, by Midjourney

Ethical and social implications

The use of flying monkeys raises significant ethical and social concerns. It disrupts the social fabric, eroding trust within communities and families. Victims often find themselves isolated, as they cannot easily prove the manipulation at play. This isolation can lead to severe emotional and sometimes physical harm.

Flying monkeys and manipulation

Understanding the concept of flying monkeys is crucial for recognizing and combating manipulative behaviors in both personal and broader social contexts, and as an essential cult warning sign. Whether deployed by narcissists in interpersonal relationships or by cult leaders to maintain their power structures (or, often, both), flying monkeys serve as tools of manipulation, coercion, and control. Awareness of these dynamics is the first step in breaking the cycle and fostering healthier, more authentic relationships and societies.

Read more

Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) is a psychological approach that originated in the 1970s, primarily developed by Richard Bandler and John Grinder. It posits that there is a connection between neurological processes, language, and behavioral patterns that have been learned through experience. NLP is often used in psychotherapy, personal development, and communication training. It employs techniques like modeling, anchoring, and reframing to help individuals change their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

However, it’s important to note that NLP has been met with skepticism within the scientific community. Many critics argue that it lacks empirical evidence to support its efficacy. Despite this, NLP has found a broad range of applications, from sales and leadership training to self-help seminars.

Abuse in Cults

The darker side of NLP emerges when it is misused, particularly in cult-like organizations. Cults often employ psychological manipulation techniques to indoctrinate and control their members, and NLP can be a potent tool in their arsenal. Here are some ways NLP can be abused in such settings:

  1. Mind Control: NLP techniques can be used to subtly manipulate individuals into adopting the cult’s belief system. By using language patterns that bypass critical thinking, leaders can implant suggestions directly into the subconscious mind.
  2. Emotional Anchoring: This involves associating positive emotions with the cult and negative emotions with the outside world. Over time, this can make leaving the cult emotionally distressing, effectively trapping the individual.
  3. Reframing: Cult leaders may use NLP to reframe negative experiences as positive or necessary for personal growth, making it difficult for members to recognize the harm being done to them.
  4. Identity Shaping: Through continuous application of NLP techniques, cults can gradually alter a person’s self-concept, making them more susceptible to the group’s influence.
  5. Isolation: NLP can be used to devalue critical thinking and outside perspectives, encouraging members to isolate themselves from friends and family who might offer a reality check.
  6. Dependency: By using NLP to induce states of relaxation or euphoria, cults can make members dependent on the group for emotional well-being, further entrenching their loyalty.

The abuse of NLP in cults is a serious ethical concern. It exploits the vulnerabilities of individuals, often leading to financial, emotional, and sometimes even physical harm. While NLP itself is a tool that can be used for both good and bad, its potent psychological influence techniques make it particularly susceptible to misuse — including emotional abuse and an entire pantheon of greater transgressions.

Conclusion

Neurolinguistic Programming is a complex and controversial field that has both proponents and detractors. While it offers various techniques for personal development and communication, its lack of empirical support makes it a subject of ongoing debate. More alarmingly, when these techniques fall into the wrong hands, such as cult leaders, they can be used to manipulate and control individuals in harmful ways. As with any powerful tool, ethical considerations must be at the forefront when employing NLP techniques.

Learn More

Read more

The Stanford Prison Experiment is a seminal study in the field of social psychology, offering profound insights into the dynamics of power, authority, and human behavior. Conducted in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, the experiment aimed to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power and authority within a simulated prison environment. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment set the stage for deeper explorations of the ways in which individualist doctrines of western nations tend to overweight the role of the individual (dispensational attribution) while underweighting the role in the situation and social milieu of the setting.

The Experiment Setup

Zimbardo and his team transformed the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building into a mock prison. Participants, who were college students, were randomly assigned roles as either “guards” or “prisoners.” The guards were given uniforms, sunglasses to prevent eye contact, and batons, while the prisoners were stripped of personal identity, referred to by numbers, and subjected to various forms of psychological manipulation and humiliation designed to dehumanize them in the eyes of their faux captors.

Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment, by Midjourney

The Unfolding

The Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment was initially planned to last two weeks but had to be terminated after just six days due to the extreme and disturbing behavior exhibited by the participants. The guards became increasingly sadistic, employing psychological torture techniques, and the prisoners showed signs of extreme stress, depression, and helplessness. The environment became so toxic that some prisoners had to be released early due to emotional breakdowns.

Ethical Concerns

The study has been widely criticized for its ethical shortcomings. Zimbardo himself acted as the “prison superintendent,” and his failure to intervene has been seen as a significant ethical lapse (he shares this sentiment, and has been vocal about examining his own role in the profoundly disturbing results of his experiment). The lack of informed consent and the emotional and psychological harm caused to the participants have also been points of contention in the academic community.

Before this study, though, I think it was counterintuitive to assume that otherwise decent, law-abiding good people could be turned into snarling sadists so quickly, in the right circumstances. And the reality of that truth disturbs us and the field of social psychology to this day.

Social Psychological Learnings

Despite its ethical issues, the Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment offers invaluable insights into human behavior and social psychology:

  • Deindividuation: The guards’ uniforms and sunglasses served to deindividuate them, making it easier for them to engage in cruel behavior without feeling personally responsible.
  • Social Roles and Conformity: Both guards and prisoners conformed to their assigned roles to a disturbing extent, highlighting the power of social roles in shaping behavior.
conformity, by Midjourney
  • Authority and Obedience: The experiment showed how ordinary people could commit atrocious acts when they perceive themselves to be following authoritative commands.
  • Situational vs. Dispositional Factors: The study emphasized the influence of situational factors over dispositional ones in determining behavior. It argued that the environment could significantly impact how individuals act, as opposed to inherent personality traits.
  • Ethical Considerations in Research: The study serves as a cautionary tale for ethical considerations in psychological experiments, leading to stricter guidelines and review boards for research involving human subjects.

Implications and Legacy

The Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment has had a lasting impact on psychology, ethics, and our understanding of human behavior. It has been cited in various contexts, from understanding the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison to corporate misconduct a la Enron, et al. While the study’s ethical lapses have led to ongoing debates, its findings remain a crucial part of social psychology curricula and continue to inform our understanding of the human psyche.

Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment serves as both a revealing exploration of the dark corners of human behavior and a cautionary tale for ethical conduct in scientific research. It provides a complex, multifaceted look into the social psychological mechanisms that can lead ordinary people to commit extraordinary acts of cruelty or submission.

Read more

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological concept that can be understood as the mental discomfort or tension a person experiences when holding two or more contradictory beliefs, values, or attitudes simultaneously. The concept was first introduced by psychologist Leon Festinger in 1957.

The term refers to the internal conflict that arises when a person’s beliefs or values clash with new information or actions. This conflict leads to an uncomfortable feeling — motivating the individual to reduce the dissonance by either changing their beliefs, acquiring new information, or minimizing the importance of the inconsistency.

Examples of cognitive dissonance

  1. Smoking and Health Awareness: A person who smokes but is aware of the health risks associated with smoking may experience cognitive dissonance. They may try to reduce this discomfort by downplaying the risks, avoiding information about smoking’s dangers, or quitting smoking altogether.
  2. Environmental Concern and Behavior: Someone who is concerned about the environment but continues to use plastic bags may feel a similar tension. They might resolve this by justifying their behavior (“It’s just one bag”) or by making a change to reusable bags.

Mechanisms to reduce cognitive dissonance

People employ various strategies to reduce the discomfort caused by cognitive dissonance:

  1. Changing Beliefs or Behavior: This involves altering one’s beliefs or actions to align with the conflicting information, such as quitting smoking in the first example.
  2. Seeking Supportive Information: People may seek out information or opinions that support their existing beliefs, thereby reducing the conflict.
  3. Minimizing Importance: By downplaying the significance of the conflicting belief or action, individuals can reduce the discomfort they feel.

Impact on Decision Making

Cognitive dissonance plays a significant role in decision-making processes. When faced with a choice, people often experience dissonance after making a decision, wondering if they made the right choice. This can lead to a phenomenon known as “post-decision dissonance,” where individuals overemphasize the positive aspects of their choice and downplay the negatives to feel more comfortable with their decision.

Cognitive dissonance summary

Cognitive dissonance is a complex but relatable psychological phenomenon that affects many aspects of our daily lives. It’s the mental tug-of-war that occurs when our beliefs, values, or actions are in conflict. Understanding this concept can provide insight into human behavior and decision-making, shedding light on why people sometimes act in ways that seem irrational or contrary to their stated beliefs.

By recognizing cognitive dissonance in ourselves and others, we can better navigate the complexities of human thought and behavior, fostering empathy and self-awareness. Whether it’s making a significant life decision or understanding why we feel a certain way about a minor inconsistency, cognitive dissonance is a valuable lens through which we can explore the human psyche.

Read more

Longtermism is an extreme ideology that has gained traction in Silicon Valley and the technosphere: both Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are acolytes. In this worldview, the far future of humanity will have colonized the stars and number in the trillions — therefore making all the puny little humans alive today essentially worthless and expendable in their eyes (except themselves, of course). As long as climate change doesn’t kill *absolutely all* 7 billion of us, we’ll manage to soldier on — therefore we should focus on AI instead, they say.

Their breezy tossing aside of morality on anything with effects less than 100 years is also chilling. By use of the frame-shifting device of the far far future, longtermism is able to render basically anything a rounding error of no importance, from the Holocaust to the dropping of atomic bombs to the famines of Stalin and Mao. That is just not going to sit well with most people who have empathy — which is most people.

Related terms:

  • existential risk
  • effective altruism
  • non-linear climate change
  • “vast and glorious potential”
Read more

speak, sistah!

see also: Shoshanna Zuboff (who wrote the seminal work on surveillance capitalism), Don Norman, Dystopia vs. Utopia Book List: A Fight to the Finish, surveillance capitalism dictionary

Some takeaways:

  • surveillance won’t be obvious and overt like in Orwell’s classic totalitarian novel 1984 — it’ll be covert and subtle (“more like a spider’s web”)
  • social networks use persuasion architecture — the same cloying design aesthetic that puts gum at the eye level of children in the grocery aisle

Example:

AI modeling of potential Las Vegas ticket buyers

The machine learning algorithms can classify people into two buckets, “likely to buy tickets to Vegas” and “unlikely to” based on exposure to lots and lots of data patterns. Problem being, it’s a black box and no one — not even the computer scientists — know how it works or what it’s doing exactly.

So the AI may have discovered that bipolar individuals just about to go into mania are more susceptible to buying tickets to Vegas — and that is the segment of the population they are targeting: a vulnerable set of people prone to overspending and gambling addictions. The ethical implications of unleashing this on the world — and routinely using and optimizing it relentlessly — are staggering.

Profiting from extremism

“You’re never hardcore enough for YouTube” — YouTube gives you content recommendations that are increasingly polarized and polarizing, because it turns out that preying on your reptilian brain makes you keep clicking around in the YouTube hamster wheel.

The amorality of AI — “algorithms don’t care if they’re selling shoes, or politics.” Our social, political, and cultural flows are being organized by these persuasion architectures — organized for profit; not for the collective good, not for public interests, not subject to our political will anymore. These powerful surveillance capitalism tools are running mostly unchecked, with little oversight and with few people minding the ethics of the stores of essentially a cadre of Silicon Valley billionaires.

Intent doesn’t matter — good intentions aren’t enough; it’s the structure and business models that matter. Facebook isn’t a half trillion dollar con: its value is in its highly effective persuasion power, which is highly troubling and concerning in a supposedly democratic society. Mark Zuckerberg may even ultimately mean well (…debatable), but it doesn’t excuse the railroading over numerous obviously negative externalities resulting from the unchecked power of Facebook in not only the U.S., but in countries around the world including highly volatile domains.

Extremism benefits demagogues — Oppressive regimes both come to power by and benefit from political extremism; from whipping up citizens into a frenzy, often against each other as much as against perceived external or internal enemies. Our data and attention are now for sale to the highest bidding authoritarians and demagogues around the world — enabling them to use AI against us in election after election and PR campaign after PR campaign. We gave foreign dictators even greater powers to influence and persuade us in ways that benefit them at the expense of our own self-interest.

Read more