Does anyone else remember back when the internet started giving us advice on how to poop better? And of course the very smartest people felt compelled to point out how stupid it was that some people need to be told how to poop because of course they never needed help pooping! But then it turned out actually it was great advice that relatively few people knew about and so millions benefited from it.
A lot of things are like that.
Here is a simple test of human trust: the phrase “bringing issues to your attention”.
What does that phrase mean to you? If someone you didn’t know was committed to bringing issues to your attention (say, via TV broadcast), what would you assume about that person? How much would you need to trust someone before you would accept as real the issues being brought to your attention? What if that person was your partner? Your mother? Your spiritual leader?
What if the issue in question was something you didn’t want to know about? What if it was an advertisement? What if it was something that would improve your life dramatically? What if it was impossible to tell without first volunteering your attention? What if it was all of the above?
Recently I’ve started trying to see proprietary brands as people with personalities, goals, and consciences. Not “real” people of course because the brand itself is not alive, but brands are conscious by way of the collective of people that believe in them. If the brand enables people to act a certain way, this is a true expression of the brand.
I mean isn’t that why Harvey Weinstein got fired?