The Nudging Divide in the Digital Big Data Era

International Journal of Research In Business, Economics and Management, 4, 11-12, 49-53.

5 Pages Posted: 1 Aug 2017 Last revised: 15 Jul 2018

See all articles by Julia M. Puaschunder

Julia M. Puaschunder

Harvard University; New School for Social Research; Princeton University; George Washington University Center for International Business Education and Research; The New School - Bernard Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (CEPA)

Date Written: July 22, 2017

Abstract

Since the end of the 1970ies a wide range of psychological, economic and sociological laboratory and field experiments proved human beings deviating from rational choices and standard neo-classical profit maximization axioms to fail to explain how human actually behave. Behavioral economists proposed to nudge and wink citizens to make better choices for them with many different applications. While the motivation behind nudging appears as a noble endeavor to foster peoples’ lives around the world in very many different applications, the nudging approach raises questions of social hierarchy and class division. The motivating force of the nudgital society may open a gate of exploitation of the populace and – based on privacy infringements – stripping them involuntarily from their own decision power in the shadow of legally-permitted libertarian paternalism and under the cloak of the noble goal of welfare-improving global governance. Nudging enables nudgers to plunder the simple uneducated citizen, who is neither aware of the nudging strategies nor able to oversee the tactics used by the nudgers. The nudgers are thereby legally protected by democratically assigned positions they hold or by outsourcing strategies used, in which social media plays a crucial rule. Social media forces are captured as unfolding a class dividing nudgital society, in which the provider of social communication tools can reap surplus value from the information shared of social media users. The social media provider thereby becomes a capitalist-industrialist, who benefits from the information shared by social media users, or so-called consumer-workers, who share private information in their wish to interact with friends and communicate to public. The social media capitalist-industrialist reaps surplus value from the social media consumer-workers’ information sharing, which stems from nudging social media users. For one, social media space can be sold to marketers who can constantly penetrate the consumer-worker in a subliminal way with advertisements. But also nudging occurs as the big data compiled about the social media consumer-worker can be resold to marketers and technocrats to draw inferences about consumer choices, contemporary market trends or individual personality cues used for governance control, such as, for instance, border protection and tax compliance purposes. The law of motion of the nudging societies holds an unequal concentration of power of those who have access to compiled data and who abuse their position under the cloak of hidden persuasion and in the shadow of paternalism. In the nudgital society, information, education and differing social classes determine who the nudgers and who the nudged are. Humans end in different silos or bubbles that differ in who has power and control and who is deceived and being ruled. The owners of the means of governance are able to reap a surplus value in a hidden persuasion, protected by the legal vacuum to curb libertarian paternalism, in the moral shadow of the unnoticeable guidance and under the cloak of the presumption that some know what is more rational than others. All these features lead to an unprecedented contemporary class struggle between the nudgers (those who nudge) and the nudged (those who are nudged), who are divided by the implicit means of governance in the digital scenery. In this light, governing our common welfare through deceptive means and outsourced governance on social media appears critical. In combination with the underlying assumption of the nudgers knowing better what is right, just and fair within society, the digital age and social media tools hold potential unprecedented ethical challenges.

Keywords: Class Struggle, Big Data, Inequality, Nudging, Social Class

Suggested Citation

Puaschunder, Julia M., The Nudging Divide in the Digital Big Data Era (July 22, 2017). International Journal of Research In Business, Economics and Management, 4, 11-12, 49-53., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3007085 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3007085

Julia M. Puaschunder (Contact Author)

Harvard University ( email )

24 Oxford Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

New School for Social Research ( email )

6 East 16th Street
New York, NY 10003
United States

Princeton University ( email )

22 Chambers Street
Princeton, NJ 08544-0708
United States

George Washington University Center for International Business Education and Research ( email )

2023 G Street NW
Washington, DC 20052
United States

The New School - Bernard Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (CEPA) ( email )

80 Fifth Ave.
5th Floor
New York, NY 10027
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
261
Abstract Views
1,509
rank
135,475
PlumX Metrics