7 ms·

What happens when social media manipulation targets religious faith?

47 points by longdefeat 8y ago

seren 8y ago
What is interesting at the meta level is that some faiths, notably the Mormons, have a duty to proselytize, so if Facebook ad targeting is an efficient way to convert unbelievers, it becomes a moral duty to use Facebook ads rather than sending missionaries. This also sounds slightly nightmarish once every faith will start bidding wars for some piece of your soul.
- dpflan 8y ago
  Joking: consolidate and create a religion ETF?
- bargl 8y ago
  I can see a way that the Mormon church goes down that path, but the proselytize is typically a one on one nature by going on a mission rather than billboards. It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). I think the "moral duty" portion comes in on an individual basis within the church so it's a character building exercise to spread the faith as well as a moral duty. I can definitely see what you mean though there could easily be some interpretations that lead to Ads.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    > I can see a way that the Mormon church goes down that path, but the proselytize is typically a one on one nature by going on a mission rather than billboards. It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). I thought the two titles (LDS and Mormon) were basically synonymous?
    - CamTin 8y ago
      They basically are. There are some "Mormon" sects that aren't LDS but they are much smaller, and LDS adherents want to disambiguate.
    - andyv 8y ago
      They are, but "Mormon" is being phased out in favor of "LDS".
      - cmroanirgo 8y ago
        I had a dyslexic moment and read this as > "Mormon" is being phased out in favor of "LSD". Which is also very true at societal level.
        SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
        "Buckle up kids, church is about to get weird."
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > by going on a mission rather than billboards. Two on one in mission work, and they also use billboards, TV ads, and other media extensively. > It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). Presumably, this is a reference to the whole issue of the official name of the Church and the strong preference for it in media of all kinds, but ironically the the LDS official youth-oriented insipirational poster line is called “Mormonads”. https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/categories/mormonads?lang=eng https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/categories/mormonad...
  - mbowcutt 8y ago
    Funny, you won't see "Mormon" ads anymore but not too long ago (2011) they ran the "I'm a Mormon" campaign: https://www.mormonchannel.org/watch/series/im-a-mormon https://www.mormonchannel.org/watch/series/im-a-mormon
- jerf 8y ago
  "This also sounds slightly nightmarish once every faith will start bidding wars for some piece of your soul." That doesn't sound that materially different from the world we already live in....
  - jlawson 8y ago
    It's been the status quo for milennia. Just be glad they're bidding wars and not real wars (for the moment).
- justinpombrio 8y ago
  That's a pretty utilitarian outlook: "if we value Z, and approach X gets Z more efficiently than approach Y, then we should take approach X". A lot of ethical systems (e.g. virtue ethics) don't obey this rule. I wouldn't see any reason to expect the Mormons to obey it.
  - sverige 8y ago
    They won't. Much of the reason for their two-year missionary requirement is to solidify the "us vs. them" mentality at that critical age when young adults often abandon the faith they were raised with. The main strategy for growth of the Mormon church is still raising children as Mormon, retention of young adults, marriage within the church, procreation at higher than replacement rate.
  - claudiawerner 8y ago
    Also seems like a matter of instrumental rationality: >First, means to an end can be costly, or otherwise objectionable. Suppose that I ought to take a job in Alaska. One (sufficient) means is to fly there; another (sufficient) means is to take free passage on a merchant ship. But flying costs more than I would earn there. Presumably, I ought not fly. It may be said that I have some reason to fly, but that it is outweighed. This is an argument against Ought Sufficiency.
- downer52 8y ago
  Uh, pretty sure I don't have a soul anymore, but okay.
- tombert 8y ago
  Years ago, I got a video ad on my YouTube for the church of Scientology immediately after I had watched a few videos about it, so "bidding wars for some piece of your soul" really aren't new. It's refreshing that someone from the other side is doing something finally. Really, though, I wonder if these things really should be a non-issue, and we should teach kids to ignore all advertising, and give basic critical-thinking skills from a young age. Advertising and proselytization really shouldn't be as effective as they are; I think a large part of this is because (at least when I was a child) children aren't given the necessary skills to differentiate marketing from facts.
creaghpatr 8y ago
Good luck doing that campaign but for Islam on Facebook.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
FloNeu 8y ago
Well without reading... i guess we already know that - i am pretty sure religion was a big factor in the metrics which 'conservative' people to target in ongoing russian social-media propaganda campaigns. They are optimal targets, as they seem to not question or being subservient to authority - some of them are adults that haven't found out santa isn't real.
smcameron 8y ago
I think that while targeting specific faiths like this is interesting, targeting the very concept of faith itself is more interesting. What is faith? After more than a decade of thinking about it, I've concluded that what it means to exercise faith is to deliberately attempt to be more certain about something than the available evidence warrants. As such, faith is inherently dishonest, in that it involves lying to yourself about how certain you should be, and that faith is not a virtue, but a vice.
- DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
  Everybody could have a different definition of the word "faith", so perhaps there's some homework required every time you want a meaningful discussion on the topic. In traditional Christian theology, my understanding is that it's the willingness to live one's life on the premise that various propositions are in fact true. So in that context, exercising faith isn't some form of mental gymnastics; it's a willingness to bet everything on the hope that those propositions are true. I wouldn't call that definition of faith inherently dishonest. I think it as a decision about how to proceed in the face of uncertainty.
  - kup0 8y ago
    A willingness to bet everything on the hope that those propositions are true, to me, seems essentially equivalent to deliberately attempting to be more certain about something than the available evidence warrants And it does seem willfully intellectually dishonest to do that, no matter how you frame it. I say this as someone that was a believer for 20+ years and is no longer. That said, I am not ascribing a value to whether "being intellectually dishonest" is always dangerous or bad for everyone. Overall I'd be inclined to say yes, at some deep/base level. But, it depends on the person and the way they use it. There are plenty of caring people I know that are religious, and in some ways, they use that faith to inspire them to do good things. There is always another side to that coin, though.
    - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
      > And it does seem willfully intellectually dishonest to do that, no matter how you frame it. That's really interesting to me. Can you elaborate on what about that strikes you as dishonest? To me, that kind of decision in the face of uncertainty is a normal occurrence. For example, in college I had to pick some major, and despite uncertainty regarding what would give me the happiest life, I went with computer science. Or to use a more well-worn example, when my wife tells me that she loves me, I admit there's the possibility that she's wrong, but as far as making decisions in life, I'm willing to assume she's telling the truth. Neither of those two examples strike me as dishonest in any way, and the seem to fit the definition I gave.
GnwbZHiU 8y ago
“Why did Joseph marry a 14 year old girl?” Ex-Muslims can do similar thing with "Why did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) marry a 6 year old girl?"

47 points by longdefeat 8y ago

What is interesting at the meta level is that some faiths, notably the Mormons, have a duty to proselytize, so if Facebook ad targeting is an efficient way to convert unbelievers, it becomes a moral duty to use Facebook ads rather than sending missionaries. This also sounds slightly nightmarish once every faith will start bidding wars for some piece of your soul.

dpflan 8y ago
Joking: consolidate and create a religion ETF?
bargl 8y ago
I can see a way that the Mormon church goes down that path, but the proselytize is typically a one on one nature by going on a mission rather than billboards. It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). I think the "moral duty" portion comes in on an individual basis within the church so it's a character building exercise to spread the faith as well as a moral duty. I can definitely see what you mean though there could easily be some interpretations that lead to Ads.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  > I can see a way that the Mormon church goes down that path, but the proselytize is typically a one on one nature by going on a mission rather than billboards. It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). I thought the two titles (LDS and Mormon) were basically synonymous?
  - CamTin 8y ago
    They basically are. There are some "Mormon" sects that aren't LDS but they are much smaller, and LDS adherents want to disambiguate.
  - andyv 8y ago
    They are, but "Mormon" is being phased out in favor of "LDS".
    - cmroanirgo 8y ago
      I had a dyslexic moment and read this as > "Mormon" is being phased out in favor of "LSD". Which is also very true at societal level.
      - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
        "Buckle up kids, church is about to get weird."
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > by going on a mission rather than billboards. Two on one in mission work, and they also use billboards, TV ads, and other media extensively. > It does happen I've seen Ads for the LDS Church before (you'll never see one for Mormons). Presumably, this is a reference to the whole issue of the official name of the Church and the strong preference for it in media of all kinds, but ironically the the LDS official youth-oriented insipirational poster line is called “Mormonads”. https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/categories/mormonads?lang=eng https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/categories/mormonad...
- mbowcutt 8y ago
  Funny, you won't see "Mormon" ads anymore but not too long ago (2011) they ran the "I'm a Mormon" campaign: https://www.mormonchannel.org/watch/series/im-a-mormon https://www.mormonchannel.org/watch/series/im-a-mormon
jerf 8y ago
"This also sounds slightly nightmarish once every faith will start bidding wars for some piece of your soul." That doesn't sound that materially different from the world we already live in....
- jlawson 8y ago
  It's been the status quo for milennia. Just be glad they're bidding wars and not real wars (for the moment).
justinpombrio 8y ago
That's a pretty utilitarian outlook: "if we value Z, and approach X gets Z more efficiently than approach Y, then we should take approach X". A lot of ethical systems (e.g. virtue ethics) don't obey this rule. I wouldn't see any reason to expect the Mormons to obey it.
- sverige 8y ago
  They won't. Much of the reason for their two-year missionary requirement is to solidify the "us vs. them" mentality at that critical age when young adults often abandon the faith they were raised with. The main strategy for growth of the Mormon church is still raising children as Mormon, retention of young adults, marriage within the church, procreation at higher than replacement rate.
- claudiawerner 8y ago
  Also seems like a matter of instrumental rationality: >First, means to an end can be costly, or otherwise objectionable. Suppose that I ought to take a job in Alaska. One (sufficient) means is to fly there; another (sufficient) means is to take free passage on a merchant ship. But flying costs more than I would earn there. Presumably, I ought not fly. It may be said that I have some reason to fly, but that it is outweighed. This is an argument against Ought Sufficiency.
downer52 8y ago
Uh, pretty sure I don't have a soul anymore, but okay.
tombert 8y ago
Years ago, I got a video ad on my YouTube for the church of Scientology immediately after I had watched a few videos about it, so "bidding wars for some piece of your soul" really aren't new. It's refreshing that someone from the other side is doing something finally. Really, though, I wonder if these things really should be a non-issue, and we should teach kids to ignore all advertising, and give basic critical-thinking skills from a young age. Advertising and proselytization really shouldn't be as effective as they are; I think a large part of this is because (at least when I was a child) children aren't given the necessary skills to differentiate marketing from facts.

creaghpatr 8y ago

Good luck doing that campaign but for Islam on Facebook.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

FloNeu 8y ago

Well without reading... i guess we already know that - i am pretty sure religion was a big factor in the metrics which 'conservative' people to target in ongoing russian social-media propaganda campaigns. They are optimal targets, as they seem to not question or being subservient to authority - some of them are adults that haven't found out santa isn't real.

smcameron 8y ago

I think that while targeting specific faiths like this is interesting, targeting the very concept of faith itself is more interesting. What is faith? After more than a decade of thinking about it, I've concluded that what it means to exercise faith is to deliberately attempt to be more certain about something than the available evidence warrants. As such, faith is inherently dishonest, in that it involves lying to yourself about how certain you should be, and that faith is not a virtue, but a vice.

DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
Everybody could have a different definition of the word "faith", so perhaps there's some homework required every time you want a meaningful discussion on the topic. In traditional Christian theology, my understanding is that it's the willingness to live one's life on the premise that various propositions are in fact true. So in that context, exercising faith isn't some form of mental gymnastics; it's a willingness to bet everything on the hope that those propositions are true. I wouldn't call that definition of faith inherently dishonest. I think it as a decision about how to proceed in the face of uncertainty.
- kup0 8y ago
  A willingness to bet everything on the hope that those propositions are true, to me, seems essentially equivalent to deliberately attempting to be more certain about something than the available evidence warrants And it does seem willfully intellectually dishonest to do that, no matter how you frame it. I say this as someone that was a believer for 20+ years and is no longer. That said, I am not ascribing a value to whether "being intellectually dishonest" is always dangerous or bad for everyone. Overall I'd be inclined to say yes, at some deep/base level. But, it depends on the person and the way they use it. There are plenty of caring people I know that are religious, and in some ways, they use that faith to inspire them to do good things. There is always another side to that coin, though.
  - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
    > And it does seem willfully intellectually dishonest to do that, no matter how you frame it. That's really interesting to me. Can you elaborate on what about that strikes you as dishonest? To me, that kind of decision in the face of uncertainty is a normal occurrence. For example, in college I had to pick some major, and despite uncertainty regarding what would give me the happiest life, I went with computer science. Or to use a more well-worn example, when my wife tells me that she loves me, I admit there's the possibility that she's wrong, but as far as making decisions in life, I'm willing to assume she's telling the truth. Neither of those two examples strike me as dishonest in any way, and the seem to fit the definition I gave.

GnwbZHiU 8y ago

“Why did Joseph marry a 14 year old girl?” Ex-Muslims can do similar thing with "Why did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) marry a 6 year old girl?"