3 ms·

Why are those mutually exclusive? Ethical grandstanding can be a method to motivate change. To me it seems like a stronger argument than economics as those inc

by slg 5y ago

Why are those mutually exclusive? Ethical grandstanding can be a method to motivate change. To me it seems like a stronger argument than economics as those incentives are all currently pushing in the opposite direction.

vasco 5y ago
The only change grandstanding does is enlarge the ego of the writer and add to the confirmation bias of those who already agreed.
fennecfoxen 5y ago
Grandstanding is typically meant to reach the masses. Are the masses interested in this kind of letter? Letters are not an ideal medium to change things via ethical grandstanding. Most people just aren't concerned with what random strangers write to large companies. Grandstanding may have a role in effecting change, especially political change, and letters may play a role in a larger grandstanding campaign led by someone with an influence and following — but in the era of the Internet and television, it is often an ancillary role. The more successful campaigns of grandstanding via letters have often included strongly principled letters with sharp yet carefully restrained language. The contents of such a letter are published as a full-page ad in a major newspaper such as the New York Times, Washington Post, or Wall Street Journal. Ideally, they will be signed by credible authors, often many of them. Something like this: http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf Or this: https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/oq9su1/let_cuba_live_full_page_ad_in_todays_ny_times/ https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/oq9su1/let_cuba_li... But even these have had limited direct impact. What hope does your letter have? If your grandstanding target is more specific than the general public, the question still remains: will this letter reach and affect them?

by slg 5y ago

vasco 5y ago

The only change grandstanding does is enlarge the ego of the writer and add to the confirmation bias of those who already agreed.

fennecfoxen 5y ago

Grandstanding is typically meant to reach the masses. Are the masses interested in this kind of letter? Letters are not an ideal medium to change things via ethical grandstanding. Most people just aren't concerned with what random strangers write to large companies. Grandstanding may have a role in effecting change, especially political change, and letters may play a role in a larger grandstanding campaign led by someone with an influence and following — but in the era of the Internet and television, it is often an ancillary role. The more successful campaigns of grandstanding via letters have often included strongly principled letters with sharp yet carefully restrained language. The contents of such a letter are published as a full-page ad in a major newspaper such as the New York Times, Washington Post, or Wall Street Journal. Ideally, they will be signed by credible authors, often many of them. Something like this: http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf Or this: https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/oq9su1/let_cuba_live_full_page_ad_in_todays_ny_times/ https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/oq9su1/let_cuba_li... But even these have had limited direct impact. What hope does your letter have? If your grandstanding target is more specific than the general public, the question still remains: will this letter reach and affect them?