I know I'm being manipulated and I'm ok with it

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say that is it really such a bad thing that we are constantly manipulated if at least we know and it are aware of it? For example, I feel like most days in class we joke about how we are manipulated by it and by Dr. J, but look how it has turned out: we are much more conscious and educated then when we came in. In this case, our inherent manipulation has actually been (arguably) a positive thing.

Even in the case of all the family manipulation we have discussed, though sometimes annoying and stressful, makes us work hard and driven. Maybe giving up a little free will is a good thing in the long run. Sometimes not; but I think we should be careful to assume that all manipulation is bad. I think it's absolutely important to realize you are being persuaded or manipulated, but sometimes that is ok.

Sometimes I even choose to ignore my manipulative sources. For example, we are condition to think that organic is good and everything else is bad, but honestly I would rather eat a perfect looking genetically modified (sorry!) apple, then the ones in commons that are mushed and have random black holes when you pick them up (I always get dirty looks when I put them back, but I'm not gonna eat that). I think it's important to recognize choices, whether being influenced or not and make a decision for ones self.

Don't Judge a Book...

The class discussion this week reminded me of one of my favorite quotes from Phineas and Ferb…

Candace: (pointing at a row of books, one by one) Boring, dull, stupid, lame, heavy-handed and derivative.
Candace's mom: Oh, thank you for those insightful reviews of books you haven't read.
Candace: Mom, that's why books have covers: to judge them! I mean, why did you choose these books from the library?
Candace's mom: They looked interesting.
Candace: So…
Candace's mom: …point taken.*

No one wants to admit it, but literally the only function of a book cover is to allow people to judge the text behind it. No one takes those grocery store novels seriously, primarily because their covers are filled with naked people fawning all over each other. Similarly, cheap beach-read romances boast the author's name in bigger letters than the title as a reminder that, "Hey! You liked the last predictable, heartwarming love story I cranked out. Good news: this one is exactly the same!" But if you look at "high-brow" literature, the covers are always artfully crafted. Once the image draws you in, you immediately think that a design so beautiful must be the gateway to something even more profound. (Side note: At least in my experience, this is often true. Then again, I tend not to pick up books with ugly covers. So I guess I only have half the story.)

The manipulations presented by a book are introduced long before the first page. I can't speak for everyone, but I had a strong feeling I would like Cat's Cradle the second I picked it up at the bookstore.  I thought the cover was intriguing, so I eagerly grabbed it and read the back. And just as my reaction to the cover predicted, I ended up loving the book. Was I primed to like it by some marketing strategist? I'd like to think that the cover can only take my opinion so far, but in actuality, I have no idea. In all honesty, though, it seems to me that cover art is a fairly accurate indicator of how much I'm going to enjoy a particular book. Regardless, until books are all bound in one uniform, colorless, author-less, title-less way, people will judge books by their covers.

*Quote provided by Phineas and Ferb Wiki.

Meeting the Wrong Expectations

I'm from a very small town in Massachusetts where half of my graduating class either didn't go to college or went to community college, and almost everybody else went to a state school nearby home. I was one of probably ten kids in my graduating class to go to a private school, and even though Hamilton is only four hours from my house, it's one of the farthest distances kids from my hometown went. At my school, there was an expectation that no one would really amount to anything, and that was represented by apathy in both the students and the administration. My math teacher once handed a kid a McDonalds application in the middle of class and told him he might as well start filling it out because he was going to fail the class, and was on his way to dropping out. When you face expectations like that, it's so much easier to go along with them instead of working hard and trying to rise above our sad little town. My friends would just shrug when they failed a test or a class, because it's not like they expected to do any better.

I was raised with a very different set of expectations from most of my graduating class, which made going to my high school a strange experience. My family always expected me to go to college, and told me to work hard, get good grades, be involved in extracurriculars so that i could get a scholarship and move far away. It was an odd expectation, though, because college isn't a normal thing in my family. My mom went to community college late in life, my dad and his uncle both bounced around a few different state schools before graduating, and my cousin dropped out during his freshman year at Ohio State. So when my family expects me to go to a competitive private school like Hamilton and be successful, there's no precedent. I try to meet their expectations, but it's difficult, especially when i talk to my friends at Worcester and Fitchburg State, a few of whom are already considering moving back home for community college second semester. 

It's confusing to live with such contradictory expectations, since both are such strong pressures. My hometown really pulls people back in for some reason; in high school, we used to joke that no one ever really leaves. Guys who graduated years ago still go to every high school football game and try to sell us weed in the parking lot. My Facebook news feed is always filled with announcements from girls i graduated with, that they're pregnant or that they're engaged. I have no desire to move back home and live like that, but sometimes it seems a lot easier than trying to fulfill my parents' expectations. My conversations with them are full of manipulation, with them trying to make sure that i'm doing all my work and am joining lots of clubs, and me trying to make it seem like I'm fulfilling their expectations. When I fail a test here, or skip my 8:30 class, I think of my high school friends shrugging it off, and I wonder how they could be so casual. But nothing more was expected of them, and in a way, that's freeing.

Internal Manipulation

In class we have talked a lot about how we are manipulated by objects, whether it be by the visual appeal, the labeling, who else has it, etc.  These discussions suggest the object holds the power.  However, often, I think I am manipulated by the meaning I impose on an object, placing some control back with me.  Thus in a way, I am manipulating myself.  Objects become symbolic of certain things with which I associate them.

For example, my swim bag.  It is a plain, navy blue, Speedo, with a yellow scarf-like cloth as a make-shift strap.  Nothing special.  But to me, it is the bag I’ve used since I was eight years old.  It has been to every practice, meet, and water polo game I’ve ever played.  Along with all the memories, I associate it with (among other things) hard work.  When I see it and carry it I am automatically in a certain mindset—excited, focused, prepared.

Another example is food.  In class we talked about how we, as consumers, are easily manipulated by labeling and the people who design the labels.  However, I am also manipulated by what the particular foods make me think of.  For instance, my family never buys the dried snap pea snack because my sister got sick after eating too many of them—so that is what comes to mind when I see that green and white bag.  I always get toffee at Christmas time because it reminds me of my grandma and how we make it from scratch every year.

Is manipulation from within oneself still manipulation?  I think it is because we do not have any control over it.  I cannot help what memories and/or characteristics I associate with what object, nor do I wish I could help it.  These connections each person creates makes the pieces that make up the world more significant to each individual.

What are you living for?

In class on Tuesday we talked about sports for a little bit.  Some people were complaining about sports and then some people disliked the culture of their sport.  I have been involved with sports my entire life and I began thinking what my outlooks are on sports, especially lacrosse.  I realized I spend about two and half hours training for lacrosse a day.  I asked myself if really enjoyed doing everything I was doing.  I quickly noticed that I loved every second of it.  Of course there are times running and lifting when it is not that fun, but in the big picture it is the best part of my day.  There is not anything I would rather be doing. 

This leads me to one of the biggest questions I have in my life.  I clearly enjoy playing lacrosse more than doing school work, yet I spend more time doing school work, why?  In high school I focused more on school and it showed.  I was a better student than athlete, yet I would have rather been a better athlete.  I know the term is student-athlete, but that is not what makes me happy.  I know it makes my parents happy because they would much rather see A’s on a report card than game winning goals.  I question everyday if I am doing the right thing.  I wonder if I should spend just a little bit more time training and a little less doing work.  Each day I want to chase what I love more and more.  I do not want to look back in four years and think that I missed something that made me happier than anything.  I am currently living my life for the future (med-school), while I could be enjoying every second of it now by living my life for what is currently happening.  I feel people have that something they want to do and then are pressured to do something else.  It is hard to fight those pressures because in the long run those things that you are pressured into are probably better, but those things you love won’t last forever and I think it is important that every person fights for that one thing they want more than anything else, no matter the circumstances.  

Peace, Love, and Foma

I hate the word manipulation. We have overused this word so much in our past few classes that I swear it’s almost as bad as people saying “like” all of the time. I get it; books manipulate us, advertising manipulates us, social norms manipulate us, grade inflation manipulates us, but our endless droning on about manipulation is beginning to manipulate me to not care anymore. Why is that? Manipulation is obviously an ever present and frequently harmful thing in my life. Why have I gotten to the point that I just don’t care? Because I know too much, and if I kept in mind every way in which I was being manipulated by every product and every stimulation at every moment in my life, I would undoubtedly go insane. In this course, we have examined the practical implications of the concept of manipulation to the point that we can just almost now see how it is all connected: how none of our decisions are really our own. How all people are simply in a “choose your own adventure” novel where they aren’t allowed even the control of realizing when they make the choice to change their stories. I feel that our class discussions have brought me all too close to realizing the implications of this concept. I feel like Mr. Tagomi from The Man in the High Castle: finally, when I begin to understand what I’ve been working and reading and striving and studying to understand, I realize that I’d prefer not to understand it after all. To recognize this, I had to be close enough to see this issue but far enough away that I’ve not yet been consumed by it. So I’ll not step any closer. I’m through overthinking my decisions and those of others. What I mean is: I get why the ‘foma’ is so appealing and I think I’ll give it a spin.

My Life is a Sitcom... and I'm Just Like LOL

I think a less talked about source of manipulation occurs from our own commentary on our lives.  I find this most relevant whenever someone asks me, "How are you doing?".  The answer that always comes out is something of the following:

A) It's great! (I just accomplished something great or am very excited by a new prospect!)

B) Nothing much, you? (The 95% of your life when nothing particularly remarkable is happening)

C) Kind of terrible. (Reserved for the most awful of situations, or as a comment on the weather here)

Then, the exchange is done.  The answer isn't necessarily "real" in any sense, but just a quick response that isn't too untrue to our feelings.  This XKCD comic basically iterates the same idea. (http://xkcd.com/222/)

I feel like the way we sell our lives to others who aren't ingrained in our lives is a particularly interesting sort of manipulation, because we are active in it and how we relate it.  The two reasons I've divined for this are as follows:

1) We give answers we think others want to hear.  You'll tell your parents you're having a great time here when you just sat in a booth in the library for the past hours, or when no one asks you do hang out at night.  Could they really handle knowing that college life isn't the constant whirlwind of happiness and inspiration that their kid thought it was?  When Janelle asks us about the relevance of The Man in the Glass Castle, do you tell her that you were actively complaining about it to your friends prior, or just give a passive shrug?  What would she think of you if she knew you actively disagreed with one of her choices?  Will she be heartbroken if you have an uninspired post on the blog? (Does she even read all the blog posts at this point anyway?)

2) We give answers we want to be true.  Hate to bring this into cliche technology territory because I am trying to write outside of the tech standpoint but look at social media - Facebook in particular.  A profile picture encapsulates a  person's life in a 160 x 160 pixel square.  Am I going to emphasize my outgoingness, my ease of getting pictures taken at night time with attractive people, my family, my latest Adirondack Adventure?  How do I want people to think of me as?  The answer usually isn't usually you being you, its you being the you you want to be you.

Putting this in the context of my life, and possibly helping my title make sense, I notice I usually try to market my life as a sitcom when talking with others.  I want them to think, "Oh, what zany and unexpected event happened to little innocent Richard this time?", so I emphasize my ups and downs in a comedic standpoint, always looking back on the events with a smile and assuring them it was all laughs, kind of like a San Lorenzan.  I've kind of got realizing that this is such an inaccurate (not to mention sophomoric) view of my life.  The problem is, if I don't do this, it might lead to the thought, "Who will think my life is interesting?" which leads to "Is my life actually interesting?" which then would go down a rabbit hole of self pity and the like.  Not the kind of spiral we all want to think about, obviously.  So they'll manipulate us and we'll manipulate them and pretty soon everyone's thinking everyone else has the craziest and coolest lifestyle, and we learn to deal with the normal parts of life less and less.  If we take this back to Facebook for emphasis, this effect is amplified as we scroll down the "infinite scroll" (borrowed that word from Hayley's wonderful post) that are the exciting events that everyone's friends have chosen to show about themselves.  Thus, the manipulation is harmful and can lead to adverse effects, like a study linking Facebook usage to lesser general well-being.(http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0069841)

A person's life can be many things, but I do see why it's hard to express that completely without really knowing a person for an extended period of time.  I'm just a little more cognizant at this point of how I present myself, or evaluate others based on what they say. 

Let's Make A Difference?

On at least a basic level, we all try to be activists. We donate our old clothing to goodwill; we give money to charity when we can; we Facebook post; or, as I'm going to talk about, we buy products that supposedly endorse a cause. You see it all the time, some product that says they'll give a little bit to charity- and it's just a few cents more! It always seems great, buying something and doing good, but how much good are you really doing. Not that much, arguably.

Let's look at this through the pink ribbon campaign. So many things are pink and marketed of breast cancer awareness, but so few of them actually give anything. You don't actually need to do anything for breast cancer to make your product pink. Even those that do give, don't give much at all. You could much more effectively donate to breast cancer research and make a difference by actually donating to breast cancer research. So why do companies effectively lie about their charitable actions (or, at the very least, misrepresent them)? People buy more. Companies make a killing by pretending to be charitable and consumers feel better about themselves for "doing something for the cause".

If you want to give money to breast cancer research, do it, but don't think that you're doing so effectively by buying pink products.

This phenomenon isn’t actually unique to what we buy. A lot of our activism and charitable giving is done from a figurative armchair.The problem with this is that we’re complacent with what we do to the point that charities not only receive less, but, without realizing, we give or work for some pretty ineffective or even downright bad groups because they either hide some shady stuff, effectively self promote, or are generally promoted by society in the same way pink products are (or a mixture of all of the above). We’re not only manipulated into not making that much of a difference, we’re also manipulated into thinking that we have made a difference.

Anyhow, I’m going to stop here, but I gave a 15 minute speech to my entire school about armchair activism last year and, if you’re interested, you can check out the text- https://docs.google.com/document/d/16esln9nK-JeVBXYc3PQ-JazJJMjYxzzhxIvfDZBJg98/edit

A Younger Dan

            Manipulation entails a disparity of particular information between two parties, which enables the party “in the know” to exert some form of influence. The puppet-master knows how to move the strings, the puppet does not: the master can control the puppet. So when I manipulate myself, part of me knows something that another part does not. The conscious, rational sections of my mind can wield experience, imagination, and logic to trick my reflexive mind into doing its bidding (to a degree).

            Throughout high school, I was fascinated with controlling emotions. Common wisdom seems to be somewhat split between: “You must control your emotions!” and “Emotions are uncontrollable.” which seems to put us in a tight spot. However, the dictates can be reconciled by reading the first notion as “despite your rogue emotions, control your actions,” which I believe to be the general interpretation. Amiable but impulsive, Dan the sophomore wasn’t particularly focused on controlling his actions. I, who believed through early high school that the sole objective of life is happiness, was concerned with disproving the second maxim.

            I viewed my conscious mind and my emotional mind as distinct, but interactive. What I thought had an impact on how I felt and vice-versa. I began tracking these impacts in order to discover whether the side I could directly control had any useful hold over my emotional self. Eventually, I found that emotions would inevitably suffuse my mind, and determine my mood. I could not alter this entry; however, I found that my conscious mind had some power over the exit of such moods. When I thought “this emotion is wrong” or “I am wrong for having this emotion,” the negative mood would be cemented in. This conscious layer, the evaluation and feeling about the emotion that floated in, would preclude the emotion from departing naturally. The sense that my life or myself were wrong would endure until I decided it was untrue, and the negative emotion would be trapped below just as long. I realized: “I must accept the emotions that float into me, not letting them bear on my sense of my life, so that they can pass through me.” Sadness is okay. Anger is okay. Happiness is okay, and when it comes again, I can grab it.

            I could not always make myself happy through sheer will, thereby perfecting my life by my past definition. Yet, through my method, I gained some control over my negative feelings by trying not to control them, by letting them be, so they could be gone. What did part of me know how to do that another part didn’t such that I could manipulate myself? It’s difficult to identify. But the fact that I could “trick” myself exemplifies the leveled nature of me, and suggests the ambiguity of what “I” consists of. Manipulation is connoted to be beneficial for the controller, and damaging for the controlled, if only because his or her autonomy is compromised. However, if I am both parties, is manipulation neutral? If I am one party more than the other, can manipulation be all good? 

Everything is Natural

            All natural foods hold a special place on the supermarket shelves. Suburban soccer moms are drawn to them like Gollum to the One Ring. They’re better for you. I mean, how could they not be? I’m sure Abby’s off-brand cheese puffs are hand made in Greece and lathered in the country’s finest goat cheese, fresh from the pasture. I have no doubt in my mind that some master chef gave his blessing to each individual puff as it came out of his Italian-made brick oven. Abby then, I’m positive, savored each bite as an individual work of art. There is no finer pleasure in the world than off-brand Greek cheese puffs. That bag deserves to be labeled “all natural.” So what does this prestigious title even mean?

            Absolutely nothing. The FDA and USDA have exactly zero standards for the labels “natural” and “all natural.” Sure, they vaguely discourage misleading labels for food products, but then again, “natural” really isn’t all that misleading. All foods are derived from animals and plants. Everything in the world was, at some point or another, natural. Even when foods are made entirely from chemicals, those compounds must exist in nature in order to, well, exist. Sure, many are man-made in a factory, but in a broad definition of “natural,” nothing can exist if it does not have the potential to exist. If I had the power to create food with spontaneous combustion, I could still come to the United States and jump through a few loopholes to sell it as “all natural.” When you think about it that way, “natural” labels seem like a huge scam. Yet these products continue to sell in supermarkets nation-wide. But why?

            The answer is simple: people are stupid and easily manipulated. I know I am. Especially for off-brand products, the “all natural” label is a selling point. Sure, it’s cheap, but it seems like it’s also better for you. Without those few words on the bag, Abby’s cheese puffs would look like a disgusting factory-made knock-off, especially when compared to a product like Pirate’s Booty, which made its name for being the only good-tasting snack sold at Whole Foods. The case of the off-brand cheese puffs is one of manipulation by appearance. People generally buy into ideas when those presenting them sound intelligent and look like they know what they’re talking about. The same goes for food products. Companies draw people in with price and make the sale with labels. At the same price point, the better looking bag will sell every time, no matter the quality. I know that I fall into the trap all the time. I did it with the iphone, and I do it in the grocery store all the time. If something looks cheap and processed, the obvious assumption is that it is cheap and processed. “All natural” is a simple phrase that whisks those fears away.

Organic?

My mom is all about organic and local foods. She will spend a significant amount of money to buy an organic chicken breast over a big brand name chicken. She claims to know that these companies treat their chickens better, using fewer hormones and keeping them in better conditions. Unfortunately, this information is coming from a manipulative, biased place. We generally get our information about a certain company from said company. And, because they are trying to sell a product, we will only hear the positive aspects of their work. As an average consumer (as Hayley mentioned in class) it is close to impossible for me or my mom to parse out the details of where our food is coming from and how it is produced. Without doing research before, and probably during, our grocery shopping, we cannot fully understand what the label on each product truly means. We are manipulated by the big colorful sticker that says "Organic!" on the packaging, and we choose to buy the more expensive product despite the fact that we have no idea how much of the food item is actually organic. 

In my family's constant search for healthy, organic, and inexpensive food (yes, it's hard to find foods that share those qualities), we often end up taking trips to the closest Trader Joe's. This Trader Joe's is almost an hour and twenty minutes away from us. Not really close at all. Somehow my mom can justify making a trip of this length if we are buying organic and local foods. But, is it really justified? Realistically, there is probably a store significantly closer to us with the same or very similar quality food as Trader Joe's. In the end, I think we care more about the name Trader Joe's than the food itself. It is what we know, and we go to great lengths to get it, despite the fact that there is most likely an easier alternative. 

Basically, I need to do more research so as to avoid manipulation through food packaging and advertisements. Everyone does. 

Those Fucking Giant Vegetables in McEwen

We all see them. They stare from on high like delicious idols, perhaps slightly too big for one student to eat alone. But still, we try. We bring giant backpacks and coats, wait for the kitchen workers to turn their backs so we can stuff whole raw peppers and stalks of corn inside, and run. It feels like a victory, until you realize: how am I going to cook an entire raw eggplant? How am I going to eat ten giant celery sticks in one week?
The vegetables are too large in size to eat at McEwen in one sitting, and we all know that we're not supposed to take food back to our dorm rooms. So what, exactly, are they doing there, artfully arranged in their rustic bushels? And why does that celery, green and fresh, look so much better than the paling, wet, celery, we are invited to take from the salad bar?
The messages are implicit and explicit. "Fresh" proclaim some bushels, in chalk (read: rustic.) "Local." While some of the food in McEwen is locally sourced, the fruits and vegetables that live in the "local" bins are not always. Everywhere you go in McEwen, the "healthiness" of the dining hall is proclaimed, from the gluten-free deserts (because of how we have been conditioned to think, somehow we all believe that these are healthier, though studies show that eating a gluten-free diet has no health benefits for people who don't have a gluten allergy) to the "Stem to Root" section.
If you actually looked at what we eat for dinner in McEwen versus what we eat at Commons, we probably do eat less trans fats and more veggies at McEwen. But I would also argue that the (somewhat false) advertising at McEwen does a lot more to boost its reputation as the "healthy" dining hall than the food that is actually served there. Still, there is something to be said for placebo effect in all of this. Maybe all of the subliminal messaging actually does cause us to feel better, which motivates us to live healthier lifestyles. Who knows?

No more awkward Situations

Today we talked a lot about technology and how we are manipulated by different brands. Just like the brands manipulate us, I think we are easily manipulated by the technology itself, too. Nick brought up the point that whenever someone feels like they are put in an awkward situation, they can just whip out their phone and go on twitter or text one of their friends. Sure it's comforting to look down at your screen when you feel like looking at any of the people you are with would make you feel uncomfortable, but the fact that individuals are so ready to just engage with their phones instead of people they are with to me seems somewhat cowardly. At some point or another we were unintentionally taught that when placed in a difficult situation, simply playing on our phones will make everything better. But imagine a situation where 5 kids are "hanging" out together, but all of them are glued to their screens. The fact that phones are replacing personal contact manipulates us into thinking that the cyber world gives us a comforting and inviting environment. People feel like "themselves" so much more on Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr than they do in real life, which is a 180 to how people felt probably no more than 5 years ago. Technology has given us the fantasy than on the Internet, we can create our best possible self, even if it's not completely accurate. Because Facebook has features like "likes" and "comments" it compels its users to do whatever necessary to get a high status. Just the other day, a girl in my dorm was asking the other girls on the floor to go on Instagram and like her picture so she could get more views. She has clearly been manipulated into thinking that in order for her picture to be pretty or impressive she would have to get an abundance of likes. It would make her feel more popular which in turn would make her feel almost successful in a way. It's really not surprising that studies prove Internet use leads to a decrease in self esteem, because the only individuals who do feel good about themselves are the ones that get 200 likes or comments from their friends saying "aww so pretty <3." The internet has compelled us to yearn for approval from all of our cyber friends. It dictates what we should post, to what activities we should participate in, to what profile picture will get us the highest recognition. 

iPhone 5c cases look like they could help prevent pregnancy...

Birth control. I told you.

Who are you to tell me?

In applying to colleges, we are often asked the question of what we like about a school or what makes us suited for that college. I have recently been asked questions by Seniors in high school who are applying to college for advice on how to improve their resume, how to write their essays and whether they are ‘good’ enough to apply to certain colleges. Without even thinking, I automatically ask questions regarding their grades, standardized tests, extracurricular activities, and awards. However, when I further thought about this, I questioned, “who am I to be the judge of whether they are good enough and who am I to determine their compatibility?” Similarly, and more boldly, who are college administrators to judge what makes us good enough and why do we never question their decisions of whether we should be accepted or rejected? Not only are we manipulated into believing that we ‘should’ be going to college, but we are also manipulated into believing that there is a certain standard that we have to reach in order to qualify for these colleges. In writing your application, they give you advice that you should be yourself, but lets be honest- how many of us were truly ourselves? If you were to write you “why do you like Hamilton” essay on the quality of Commons food (just an example) or how attractive the student body is, I don’t think that would impress the administrators. We give them what they want to hear because we have been shaped into thinking that those are the acceptable criteria. Why is playing a certain amount of video games or how many Facebook friends you have not something you would put on your application? When I got my rejection letter, the responses from my friends and family members were “well that’s life, its ok, it happens” and I just accepted it and moved on. What if I were to write a letter disagreeing with their decision?

This role is also switched when we are accepted. When we come for college visits and accepted student day, they show us the best dorms, give us the best food, and exaggerate the positive attributes of the school in order to sell the school back to us.

When you think about it, this process makes no sense. Colleges sell the school to us so that we apply. Once we are applying, we are trying to convince them that we deserve to be there. Once we get accepted they must then persuade us to come. This endless cycle just results in another big sequence of manipulations. We get to college and they further manipulate us into becoming the ‘perfect’ Hamilton student.

When you look in the mirror – whom do you see? Who you want to be or who everyone wants you to be?

Manipulative Designs

I remember in the very beginning of the year, Janelle told us that even the layout of Hamilton was created with manipulation in mind; the admissions offices are tucked away in a back corner of campus, behind the library and down the road from some of the nicest dorms and buildings that we have. By making prospective students drive through half of campus just to find the admissions house, the college lures them into campus and effectively forces them to look around for a bit before they can find their way back out.

The same principle is applied in a less subtle way by commercial stores. I remember middle school shopping trips to stores like Hollister, who divided their stores into several interconnected rooms with sale items at the back--a layout purposefully designed to lure people in and force them to look around before leaving. And even in a more widespread example, there's always the manipulative "impulse buy" counter right in front of the check-out area so when you wait in line to pay for your groceries, you also pick up a few magazines and some candy bars.

But apart from being sold something--like a pack of gum at the check-out counter or a "coincidental" tour of a college--what else are we manipulated by?

My immediate thoughts jump to social psychology (as I mentioned in the post with the Solomon Asch experiment). If you're watching a sports game and someone starts the wave, then you're incited to join in because everybody else is, because your participation is vital for the stunt to work, and probably because you have a preconceived notion that doing things like the wave are to be expected at sports games. So the way that you are enticed into the crowd atmosphere relies on the way that you are manipulated by those around you.

And then there's technology. Netflix has its automatic "play next" feature that sucks its viewers in, Facebook has an infinite scroll and ticker tape designed to get you more interested in other people's social media personas, and even Gmail has advertisements picked out specifically for you based on the content of your emails. As each of these platforms attempt to become more individualized, they each also become more manipulative.

To an extent, we are even manipulated by our own senses. When we smell good food, our brain releases all kinds of fancy chemicals that make us feel hungry. When our sensory input tells us that we have been in a similar situation before, we subconsciously color the way that we will act in the current situation.When we hear the person sitting next to us humming a Beach Boys tune that we may not even like, we often end up humming it along with them. When we see a lot of words on a blog post such as this one, many of us will be manipulated by the apparent length and decide to not read it.

While this post is clearly a fairly cursory survey of the multitude of things that manipulate us, it goes to show the variety, intensity, and extent to which all of us are manipulated each and every day--often times without and realizing it. So the next time that you're craving a slice of pizza, ask yourself if that's what you really want or if you've just been manipulated, perhaps by an advertisement, by seeing a friend eat some, or just by being hungry.

Social Manipulation

With all this talk about manipulation I can't help but think of the social psychology principles that work to explain how people are manipulated by others when placed in a social situation. One important principle is that of conformity, which psychologist Solomon Asch experimented with in the 1950s. Here's a pretty entertaining video of one of his experiments that documents how one person can be easily manipulated by a majority group:

P.S. I was laughing while watching this, but then again, was I laughing because I really though it was funny or was I being manipulated by the background laughing track?

home(WORK)

In all honesty, I hate homework, but then again, who doesn’t? Think about it for a minute, we have literally been doing homework nonstop since the 1^st grade. Thirteen years of our live with homework always looming over our heads. Each year it seems like it can’t possibly get harder or more time consuming, but here we are. One of my biggest regrets in life is complaining about the one-sided math sheet that constituted my math homework in 6^th grade. What the heck was I thinking? We grow up being told by our teachers and parents how important homework is, but really, all these years we could have just rebelled. We are manipulated into doing our homework because it has consequences that affect us in the long run, and we can’t have that…

I know, just as well as my friends and family, that I spend too much time doing my homework. Maybe it is partially my slightly OCD nature, but then again maybe it is the fact that I have been manipulated into giving homework such a high level of importance. It has been engrained into my mind that homework is so important and that I don’t want to disappoint my teachers, but really what would they be loosing if I spent a more normal amount of time on my homework? The only person I am affecting is me.

As an example, I spend an average of five hours on my calculus homework every Sunday and Tuesday night. Then, I spend more time finishing it in office hours the next day. I spend twice the amount of time that my friends do on their calc homework, not because I don’t understand it, but because I make sure that I do my best work and write down all my steps. We will have done a total of about thirty separate math assignments by the end of the semester, and TOGETHER they are 10% of our grade. That means that they are each about 0.03% of my total grade. So why do I spend so much time on them? I literally have no idea. Do I get pride out of completing something that I was supposed to be able to do? I have been manipulated into putting my homework on such a high pedestal that I now know I am doing it, and still can’t help myself.