#2: Maybe "They" Aren't ALL Bad

In his book introduction called, “They Say,” Douglas Rushkoff challenges readers to think about how often we let people with power dictate our lives. He asks why we listen to them, and whether it’s a good idea to let them have such a strong influence over us. In answer to these questions, Rushkoff points out that people who tell us what to do don’t always have our best interests in mind. Often they want to get something from us, like money or votes, and their words my not be trustworthy. Rushkoff says that when consumers are coerced into buying something, they are often unaware that they are being influenced at all, because salespeople know techniques to subtly get buyers to do what they want. For a while in the eighties and nineties, Rushkoff believed that consumers were getting back the power over their thoughts which powerful people had seized through the media. With the internet and video cameras, average people had gained the ability to spread their own ideas, and they were getting too smart for advertisers’ old tactics of coercion. However, after a while advertisers learned to use the new media phenomenon to their advantage, once again coercing the general population to do what they wanted. Therefore, Rushkoff decided to write a book about how “marketers, politicians, religious leaders, and coercive forces of all kinds influence everyday decisions.” He wanted to help people recognize and resist the influence powerful people were exerting over them. One interesting piece of information he found was that coercion is now automated. Computers decide, based on our actions, how best to manipulate us. Rushkoff ended the introduction by revealing the ways he had used marketing techniques to get us interested in his book, without us being aware of them. In this way he proved to us that we aren’t as immune to marketing tricks as we’d like to think.

I agree with Rushkoff that it would be helpful for us to be aware of the techniques people use to get us to do what they want. It’s not good to be pushed around against our will, buying things we don’t really want, and voting for people just because they have the best PR people, and are the best at all the sales tricks. However, I don’t think powerful people are always as bad as he thinks they are. I think there are many politicians, doctors, and corporations that actually want to do quality work that benefits the common good. Why do people assume that huge categories of people and organizations are lying, cheating weasels? Why can’t there be scientists who want to develop high-quality, safe products, and companies who want to employ them? Sure, there are people who want to lie and cheat, but they’re always running the risk that they’ll get caught and lose a lot in terms of money and reputation. In the same way, I think many politicians want to make a positive difference in the world. Of course, to “play the game” of politics, they have to be savvy and let only their best side show, but once again, I think it’s arrogant to assume they’re all despicable, as Rushkoff seems to do. As a reader, I find myself reflecting, "He wants me to distrust huge groups of people, but why should I trust him?" 

In the first paragraph, Rushkoff asks us why we listen to "them." He defines "them" as "bosses, experts, and authorities." I think we do ourselves a disservice if we treat all experts like doctors, scientists, and other highly educated people as enemies without good reason. Rushkoff uses terms like “hunters,” “prey,” “weapons,” and “war” to describe the average person’s relationship with “them.” I think those terms are overly dramatic when referring to many experts, and can harm us if they lead us to think we know more than people who have devoted many years of their lives to studying things we know little about. Rumors spread like wildfire on the internet about things that can supposedly harm us, and they are often completely bogus. It’s bad for our mental health to be constantly worrying about every little detail of our lives. It can also be dangerous to disregard the advice of some experts just because we generally distrust them. For example, if someone decides to disregard the advice of a doctor because of a rumor, it could cost them their life. I believe there's a balance between looking out for ourselves and choosing to trust certain sources that we discern are reputable. I appreciate Douglas Rushkoff contributing his thoughts to the debate on this issue.