For The Time Being




Advertisement 1



Advertisement 2





Advertisement 3


Mark

Andrew Raine

 

Who do I trust ?

Introduction

Social theorist, Nathan Jurgensen, in his retort to the “sudden” post-truth genre of think-pieces that emerged as a liberal temper tantrum after the 2016 presidential election wrote, “Truths contestability means that the meaning of your life, or anyone else’s, is a question that is possible to ask, and possible to get wrong.” I bring up truth, because like trust, you can’t really talk about either without talking about time. For some reason, we desire truth and trust to be fixed positions, but to quote a popular meme that’s been circulating lately, “normalize changing your mind when presented with new information.” The temporality of both trust and truth should be considered as we think about “Who do I trust ?” as we try to sustain and maintain our humanity through this pandemic. CV-19 isn’t just a public health crisis, or a scientific crisis, but also an information crisis.

Truth and trust have always been in question...

Despite that many will try to tell you that the 2016 presidential election is what gave rise to the post-truth genre, both truth and trust have historically been in question and in decline. The Image (1962), by historian Daniel Boorstin, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (1963), by Richard Hofstadter, Society of the Spectacle (1967), by Guy Debord, Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), by Neil Postman, Trick Mirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion (2019) by Jia Tolentino – these texts argue that both truth and trust are eroding beneath us due to a cascade of misinformation made possible through new modes of dissemination: the circulation of images in newspapers and magazines, print journalism, radio and television, and now, the Internet. From The Enlightenment to Occupy Wall Street to Black Lives Matter, the temporal plane of these movements illustrates that both truth and trust have historically always been in question. CV-19 is the latest plotted position.

Seeking clarity but met with more confusion...

We’ve seen global political leaders tell us this isn’t a big deal only for them to fall victim to this virus. We were told masks were unnecessary for public use, now we require the public to wear masks at all times outside the house. We’ve seen doctors panic about ventilator shortages as they were initially seen as an essential tool to combat CV-19, to ventilators being linked to exacerbating the respiratory complications of CV-19. In the US, almost 90% of intubated patients have died. Ventilators have now been replaced by pregnancy pillows. What I’m saying is that like truth, trust is a moving target, that exists on a temporal plane, because information is always limited. And because information is always limited, it’s possible that the experts you trust might get some things wrong. “Epidemiology is a science of possibilities and persuasion. Not of certainties or hard proof.” But this lack of epidemiological certainties, coupled with the severely damaged credibility of mainstream media, creates a cytokine storm of its own. The absence of clarity and consistency of information is exactly what made the public susceptible to these fake social media posts. Found on both Instagram and Twitter, the posts claim to have a source within the Department of Homeland Security that told the recorded individual that President Trump was going to lock-down the entire country and to pack and be prepared for more orders. Many unwittingly shared this information, watering the seeds of panic already sown by an unprecedented amount of media coverage – creating more dissent and distrust among the population, similar to the epistemic bubbles made infamous by Cambridge Analytica. And although we’ve seen this tactic before, it still proves to be highly effective. CV-19 is not just a public health crisis, but an information crisis.

Big Reappraisals
The return of the reliable

In this information crisis, people are looking for guidance, clarity, and reliability. These things seem difficult to get from our trusted government officials and media outlets, so we’ve turned to brands and experts to help safeguard ourselves. Prior to CV-19 it was fairly easy to buy Lysol and Clorox. “Harsh chemicals” had pushed many customers towards new products that seemed more “ethically responsible.” But how quickly the tide turned when the enemy became a virus – how quickly we relinquished those moral platitudes in favor of proven effectiveness. This is the reason why Lysol and Clorox are sold out, yet Mrs. Meyers and Seventh Generation remain on the shelves. What’s not on the shelves is mac and cheese. As people hole up, we’re also seeing a resurgence in comfort foods. Kale and quinoa are being dropped in favor of chips and Oreos as people seek solace in the familiar comforts of snacks and other foods from our childhoods. Consumers are also rethinking what it means to be “prepared.” As access to healthcare becomes a luxury, even to those still employed, consumers have begun to see wellness, health, and hygiene as weapons of preparedness to combat CV-19. Many consumers who used to be quite pessimistic about vitamins are now advocates as they begin to seek alternative ways of healing, and new old-world remedies. In the wake of this global pandemic, vitamins, supplements, and homeopathic remedies have experienced an unprecedented surge in demand. With this resurgence of comfort foods and vitamins, people are looking for ways to both, soothe the soul and boost the body. Could this lead towards a more comprehensive versioning of the “wellness” category ? Wellness was largely inaccessible – created by the well-off, the rules to the wellness category were written by the elite and disciplinarian-minded. But as the Kraft Mac and Cheese buyer is now also trying to decide whether to add ashwagandha or rhodiola to their breakfast smoothies – could a more accessible wellness philosophy be emerging ?  As trust in government and media continues to slide, people will seek to find the answers with experts, through their shopping habits, and within themselves. People are returning to reliable and proven methods of health, hygiene, and comfort. We should expect brands that help consumers maintain a ready-state of preparedness and calmness to thrive as long as the threat of CV-19 continues to linger.

Now What ?

Brands should be operating and donating from the goodness of their heart. This collective traumatic experience has made the population much more sensitive to corporate bullshit.
                  – The difference between Ruth Chris Steakhouse and Shake Shack, although both are publicly traded companies, both met the legal parameters to receive stimulus funding, and both returned their PPP loans – is that one had to be told to do the right thing, and the other didn’t. Sincerity hit different when it's not requested.

As everything that people have formerly relied on comes under greater scrutiny, brands need to be working overtime to garner loyalty and prove their utility in people’s lives.
                  – Big brands used to be synonymous with bad brands, giving rise to this new crop of “ethically responsible” brands. But when shit hits the fan and people rely on your products, big brands have the scale and proven functional attributes to meet demand that a lot of the newer ethical darlings lack. If big brands can dial up their sincerity quotients while delivering products that are truly helpful, they’ll emerge from this trust deficit with new ardent loyalists.

Although we’re seeing increased trust in non-traditional/ alternative medicines, “Big Pharma” has the potential to become the most trusted industry should they find a cure for CV-19 – a much needed image reappraisal.
                  – 4 in 10 Americans say they now have a more favorable image of pharmaceutical companies. Finding a cure for the current CV-19 public health crisis will not only lead to the reopening of the global economy, but also restore faith in both expertise and big business.


Andrew Raine            
Brooklyn, NY
Mark