Shame and Marketing

[7Wannabe5]

Interview of Seth Godin by Vicki Robin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xt5zWwhycg

At around 20:00, Godin talks about the Rogers' Curve of Innovation Adoption as it applies to carbon consumption, and they discuss the possibility that the reason that many people who are concerned about the problem/situation get stuck is that shame is a poor motivator. Elsewhere in the interview, Godin makes it clear that his take is that humans care about status and affiliation (end story), and no innovation is going to gain enough traction without accepting this reality of marketing.

Obviously there are some status markers associated with ERE, such as autonomy(free time) and optionality(savings.) It's even the case that some status markers that might initially seem oppositional to frugality can be promoted, such as in the book, "The Art of Frugal Hedonism." Still, it has been my experience that when I try to promote the notion that Spending = Carbon Burn to those in my social milieu who are very aware of the environmental problems, it is very difficult to get past the bad "Shame towards defensiveness " or similar reaction somebody who is currently spending middle-class or upper-middle class income may feel. I mean, it is even the case that I tend to get a bit bogged down in shame-towards-defensiveness when my monthly spending exceeds 1 eco-jacob, although I know that I am still spending fraction of most of my peers.

Godin's solution set seems to be some combination of more factual information desemination (his recent book "The Carbon Almanac"), increased political action by individuals, and pricing the solution into the market through mechanisms such as carbon tax. If I am following the math of his argument correctly, I think it would mostly result in something like retaining the spending levels at different status-affiliated levels of society, but changing the basket of goods. For instance, if it's "cool" to be Green and carbon tax is in place, air travel will be much more expensive and less the thing, but hiring a personal masseuse not so much. However, he doesn't discuss or offer a solution to the problems resulting from fact that carbon tax would be largely regressive.

[Western Red Cedar]

Thanks for the link. I look forward to checking it out.

Godin's solution set seems to be some combination of more factual information desemination (his recent book "The Carbon Almanac"), increased political action by individuals, and pricing the solution into the market through mechanisms such as carbon tax. If I am following the math of his argument correctly, I think it would mostly result in something like retaining the spending levels at different status-affiliated levels of society, but changing the basket of goods. For instance, if it's "cool" to be Green and carbon tax is in place, air travel will be much more expensive and less the thing, but hiring a personal masseuse not so much. However, he doesn't discuss or offer a solution to the problems resulting from fact that carbon tax would be largely regressive.

I heard him interviewed somewhere else and they specifically discussed the airline example. He mentioned extremely high taxes on personal jets, as that has a a very large per/capita impact and they represent a convenience rather than a necessity. Some billionaires would still opt to travel that way, but the cost would be significantly higher and the tax could be reallocated in a fashion that supports mitigation/adaptation/sequestration. (I heard this a few months ago so the details are a bit fuzzy, but I remember him specifically using private jets as an example).

It is probably worth mentioning for others reading this thread that these aren't necessarily Godin's ideas, but he's worked with scientists and policy makers to develop a collection of ideas to address climate change. The structure of the book is modeled after the old farmers almanac.

------

I've personally been thinking about the status issue lately after hearing a podcast discussing some of the tacit and explicit markers for attracting a mate. I've managed to transcend the need to display any kind of wealth, which is one of the markers, but I think I still have some underlying hangups with the status associated with my career/position. I'm realizing this may be deeply ingrained as status has been of particular importance for males from an evolutionary perspective.

[7Wannabe5]

It is probably worth mentioning for others reading this thread that these aren't necessarily Godin's ideas, but he's worked with scientists and policy makers to develop a collection of ideas to address climate change. The structure of the book is modeled after the old farmers almanac.

Right. The book is a compilation and not limited to Godin's take on the problem/solution. I've only read the first part which I could download for free. It starts by offering overview of the underlying science and other information for those who are just learning about the topic. One interesting piece discussed how consumers in the early-mid 20th century were mostly buying physical "conveniences" such as household appliances, but the 21st century consumer is also buying identity "conveniences." IOW, purchasing a market basket inclusive of internet attentional choices which easily adds up to an attractive identity. The takeaway was that if you move towards "inconvenient", you may be able to create overall better more authentic identity for lower price in carbon/$$. IOW, very coherent with ERE.

I've personally been thinking about the status issue lately after hearing a podcast discussing some of the tacit and explicit markers for attracting a mate. I've managed to transcend the need to display any kind of wealth, which is one of the markers, but I think I still have some underlying hangups with the status associated with my career/position. I'm realizing this may be deeply ingrained as status has been of particular importance for males from an evolutionary perspective.

It's true-ish for those who wish to signal something like "high quality feminine" also. Kind of in alignment with how Ginger Rogers had to do everything Fred Astaire did, but also "backwards in heels." OTOH, it has been my experience that the fact of my ridiculously low income has very little bearing on my ability to get a date, and it's not like I am compensating for it with my stunning beauty It might be the case that if I derived my ridiculously low income from working the fry basket at Burger King, I would be less dateable, but I think my three page long essay explanation for why I was doing such a thing would transcend the fact.

I think this is a progression of signaling status that can be generalized. Appearances- Facts Easily Conveyed- Explanation Towards Purpose- Values. However, I would also note that Values should not be read as anything Pollyanna-ish. On my old dating profile, my opening joke was that I was looking for a man with the 3 "I"s, Intelligence, Initiative, and bIceps. Due to my ever advancing age, I have dated quite a few men who early-ish retired, and they continued to display the 3 "I" s, and other attractive qualities, in other ways in their retirement lifestyle project-scape.

[kane]

3 "I"s, Intelligence, Initiative, and bIceps

Enjoyed the linked conversation. I initially thought that this will be on a lower WL than it actually was and the guy's punchline was pleasant to hear.

(I still think that if your strategy for pushing an idea through is to write 90 books about it... )

This might be my personal feeling, but I think that Shame undercut some of the aspects of ERE1. You can see this in some of the old blogposts ("I bet you guys still do x...." attitude). That was something that was a little off-putting in the beginning for me and I bet for many people. You could argue that if someone doesn't have skin thick enough to persevere then "good riddance", but this conversation sheds a little different light on the topic, and the older I get I tend to think this is a better one. I mean, army has its place in forming strong people, but not all people are made for army, or something like that.

(I still believe that "be the change you want to see" and that it should start from within your backyard!!)

I'm still not sure whether "lets meet and talk" is the right attitude though. I mean, surely we have to come to an agreement about how to proceed somehow, but I bet that if we break the current consumer paradigm it will not be through talking but with someone Elon-like who will just give people something they will strive for and hopefully it will be more sustainable in the long run, but transparent in those terms to median folks.

I'm also not so sure about taxation as a tool to curb celebrity jet flying problem. I mean, "Man, Economy and State" was mind blowing for me and I'm looong past left-hating phase, but I think that this is not so easy. When EU made an infographic which boiled down to "Look guys, we have to eat less meat and travel less by car and jets", this was like a fuel for the right-winging guys in $MYCOUNTRY, as in "Orwell!!!!11 I will eat however meat I want dude!", which resulted in yes-manning in the comment section..... which in some countries led to some sad events in the last century. Complex stuff.

Anyway, I see Vicky and Seth here as people who are climbing the same mountain that ERE2 folks do, but from a different angle.

[7Wannabe5]

I mean, army has its place in forming strong people, but not all people are made for army, or something like that.

True, but I also kind of believe that when humans think they need an ass-kicking coach they might actually benefit more from compassionate therapist and vice-versa.

I bet that if we break the current consumer paradigm it will not be through talking

Nor through the kind of constant "more information" browsing Vicky nentions in the video, which I am definitely inclined towards.

Anyway, I see Vicky and Seth here as people who are climbing the same mountain that ERE2 folks do, but from a different angle.

I agree. It occurred to me, somewhat in alignment with Cippola's Law of Stupidity, that any of the individual actions anybody is taking at this juncture, whether consciously or de facto, are more or less likely to result in:

A) I will be okay. The poor humans will die.

B) I will be okay. The poor humans will be my serfs.

C) I will be one of the poor humans.

And ERE-FI Version is pretty much the most benign form of Option B that is available. ERE-Intermittent Employment and/or Green Business, Permaculture Project, or Community Beneficial Employment Version is IMO even more benign (less Bandit/Evil), but errs in the direction of Option C (Helpless.)

In fact, ironically, one of the difficulties I have in "selling" ERE to some Level Green humans in my social circle is that they already put in a lot of years in relatively low-paying socially beneficial employment (public defender instead of corporate law, raised 4 disadvantaged foster kids to IT career, etc.) and have only recently become cynical and taken on more lucrative Level Orange employment. So, they've temporarily burnt themselves out into Big Chill-like Option A apathy.

Anyways, it seems like all of the solutions or solution sets that are invented by/for the Intelligent are likely to have the tendency Cippola noted of weaving back and forth from Bandit/Hardass to Helpless/Helper.

Highlight from another interesting, related series of videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwKQw9p1wFs

[guitarplayer]

Hey, I got hooked on Seth Godin, thanks @7w5! He comes across a smart guy, and clearly reads a lot and pulls together insights from many fields even though it might not seem like it. Like, if you recall Hanzi who writes about the inevitability of putting up with lots of crap to occasionally spot a good thing - seems to be a good thing.

He is clearly in the 'inspire' industry together with Greenfield etc and some of this comments like 'the managerial and the nitty gritty are not leadership' + a perceived (I might misread it) implication there should not be too much focus on the technical might come across off putting because holism. That being said, it might be that he thought it through and is using those lines in the same way Holmgren uses lines of sd green in the effort of bringing balance to the ecosystem of human pursuits. So both working from the position of sd yellow.

I was going to be reading about graph theory in my month off, but might sneak in some of Godin's work - it seems a quick read anyway.

[7Wannabe5]

@guitarplayer:

Yes, I agree that his thinking is approaching Level Yellow, but from different direction. I am also currently re-reading "The E-Myth Revisited" by Gerber, which tends towards much more conventionally Orange franchise model of business. It's much more interesting to me from my current perspective of somebody whose lifestyle business eventually failed then the first time I skimmed it. As I was reading along, and Gerber shared a bit of his own life history, I suddently realized "This is a Pick-Up Artist book!" and a little avalanche took place in my brain, because according to some Integral Theory video I watched, the Con-man and the Pick-up artist are both Level Red like the Warrior, which didn't make sense to me initially, but now it does!

The Level Blue/Green "nice guy" (even if actually a female "nice guy" which is not the same thing as being a "nice girl" ) has to go back to Level Red to acquire Fight Club and/or Pick-Up Artist skills in order to transcend to Level Yellow through alignment with Purpose and Values. So, in theory, all too-nice-version ENTP me has to do to be more successful in business/money flow is to acquire/apply the same sort of Fight Club/Pick Up artist skils I applied to improve my sex/love life back in my 30s. The INTJ style of doing Fight Club is more like Old Guys Looking at Maps/Screens/Chessboard in the War Room.

[mountainFrugal]

"This is Marketing" is a good book on the marketing mentality especially for lifestyle businesses. I listened to it as an audio book that was read by Godin. I fell into his soft marketing speak and he lulled me with his ideas as a good marketeer should.

tl;dr - make good shit. share that shit. build a community around that shit. repeat.

[zbigi]

He is clearly in the 'inspire' industry together with Greenfield etc and some of this comments like 'the managerial and the nitty gritty are not leadership' + a perceived (I might misread it) implication there should not be too much focus on the technical might come across off putting because holism.

I've considered this fact (99% of management is not leadership) as obvious for me for a long time. Leadership is about leading people - i.e. people want to go in some general direction, and you lead them there, perhaps while also providing additional inspiration along the way. As in: "I want to make English american colonies into an independent country/colonize Mars/end the French monarchy/repel Russian invasion etc. WHO'S WITH ME?". That's leadership. Whereas management is just about organizing work of some people employed by some organization. It's telling that a lot of the modern management techniques (meticulous tracking and measuring of everything and everyone) actually originated in the US slave plantations.

[guitarplayer]

and yet management is a necessary condition for change, even if it ends up being self management. It's a balancing act to put a metric and be detached from it enough not to fall victim of Goodhart's Law. In the vernacular used by Godin, it works against the basic human need for status (i.e. scoring high at a metric).

Or if you speak ERE: even you have discontent and a vision, you still need a way to get there.

[7Wannabe5]

I fell into his soft marketing speak and he lulled me with his ideas as a good marketeer should.

make good shit. share that shit. build a community around that shit. repeat.

I read it more as - identify a community/market niche, determine their psychological needs, make good shit to meet that need/solve that problem, repeat.

Two related questions:
1) How can you market anything to a niche that prides itself on frugality? IOW,what are the psychological needs most associated with frugality?
2) How can you market frugality to a niche that does not particularly value frugality? IOW, how can the "product" of frugality be re-marketed?

@zbigi:

Gerber does a pretty good job in "The E-Myth Revisited" of selling the need for technician, manager, and entrepreneur/visionary. The quantified management piece only degrades into oppression and/or dull meaningless routine if the more important over-riding vision composed of values that can only be measured qualitatively is missing. A simple example would be that you as Visionary would like to prepare a meal for yourself as customer which is delicious, nutritious, and environmentally sustainable, so you as Manager might create a template of recipes that fulfill initial quantifiable quidelines towards achieving your qualitative goals, then you as technician will actually prepare the meals within the quantified template, but the feedback from you the customer is what ultimately drives further innovation resulting in change of metrics.

Or if you speak ERE: even you have discontent and a vision, you still need a way to get there.

Yes, and you still need somebody(the technician) to actually carry through the steps of the plan with vision in mind, which is why I have sometimes wished I had a solar-powered garden robot. The interesting thing about permaculture is that it is such an inspiring vision some humans are willing to partipate as technicians in exchange for just room and board and a bit of a learning curve. One of the projects I most admire is Kat Lavers "The Plummery." She meticulously measures her production on her tiny urban site, so it's pretty easy to workout that if only considered at Level Orange equation of how much work she is doing in exchange for organic produce, she would probably only be making/saving maybe $7.50/hr., but there's so much more going on there in terms of quality of life and fully integrating vision.