It's like FWR bingo
I'd like to know what these media strategists recommend when preference falsification means that so many people aren't aware of what's happening because MSM doesn't cover it or covers it with anti-woman rhetoric or 'both sides' at best.
A quick wave of apology to anyone who has read my concerns about preference falsification on previous occasions.
Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one’s wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies , Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. Drawing on diverse intellectual traditions, including those rooted in economics, psychology, sociology, and political science, Kuran provides a unified theory of how preference falsification shapes collective decisions, orients structural change, sustains social stability, distorts human knowledge, and conceals political possibilities.
A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.
In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.
www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674707580
80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/cass-sunstein-how-change-happens/
There are few mainstream outlets that will cover relevant stories. When MSM does run an item, it has a perspective that is not gender critical: IPSO also restricts the items that can be reported and how they can be reported.
Look how often MSM slots are cancelled because Stonewall or individuals refuse to appear on a programme with a GC woman or advocate. A case in point is the recent cancellation of the GOSH event. We're all familiar with the dis-invitations of women from conferences, workshops, journal positions etc.
The de-platforming of women and the gender critical perspective from social media facilitates preference falsification as it is only too easy never to see these perspectives and stories. MN is one of the few platforms to host our discussions; even so it's in a naughty corner with additional rules and restrictions. It's common for breakout threads in Chat or AIBU to end up here because so many people don't want it in the general or high-traffic areas.
Lifton outlines the Eight Criteria for Thought Reform and 2 feel relevant to some of the discussion about the appropriateness of media outlets:
Milieu Control. This involves the control of information and communication both within the environment and, ultimately, within the individual, resulting in a significant degree of isolation from society at large.
Demand for Purity. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.