Blog Post-April 2017

On April 3rd, 2017, I looked at the New York Times article by Noam Scheiber titled How Uber Uses Psychological Tricks to Push Its Drivers' Buttons. This article appeals particularly to the many users of Uber, as well as its plethora of drivers and those with concerns about the company's ethics. In the midst of controversies such as their chief officer quitting, driver counts decreasing, charges of a sexually tense work environment, and their CEO yelling at a driver, Uber hasn't seemed especially favorable in the public eye, so many articles have recently focused on the company. This article reveals yet another potential controversy: That Uber taps into the brain's reward and goal systems by using video game-like encouragement to get them to keep driving and ultimately make the company more money with little regard for their own well being. Uber aims to make its drivers more so permanent, tied down employees rather than freelance contractors; this is the basis of the company's goal of corporate growth. The author reveals their purpose to be portraying Uber's larger desires and the ways it will go about improving its driver relations while stimulating corporate growth and contractor commitment. Uber utilizes a variety of strategies to manipulate drivers. These include pre-loading a customer while a driver is still driving another client, encouragement to meet superficial 'goals' that have no substantive reward, and giving drivers locations where they will be able to give the most rides in a certain time, so that they will not be idle and cost themselves and Uber money. Interestingly many graphics are employed throughout the text to demonstrate how Uber drivers can make the most money that they possibly can within a certain area. These graphics make it clear that there are always a stream of clients needing to be driven, in some areas more than others, and that drivers will always have work in these areas. The problem, of course, is that it is often difficult for these drivers to stop, and they often work themselves to exhaustion or to the point of not wanting to even continue driving for Uber, which is a long term implication the company wants to avoid. Uber's biggest goal is committed drivers who stay with the company and have flexibility and willingness to drive, not on just 'slow' days but on busy days, like weekends, too. I wonder, is Uber's psychological motivation, while not illegal and technically not damaging, really an appalling thing? I personally believe that Uber's systems will definitely improve commitment to their brand and that it helps drivers to stay focused on their task of driving and picking up more and more people. I think that drivers must know their own limits and when they need to stop so that they will remain effective. Uber is an interesting 'gig-company' with some shocking, if not slightly revolutionary, business practices.



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/02/technology/uber-drivers-psychological-tricks.html?action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&module=Trending&version=Full&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article

Article: Donald Trump's Performative Presidency

I read the article Donald Trump's Performative Presidency from The Atlantic on February 14th, 2017. There was little bias in it; if biased at all, it was very slightly liberal. The purpose of this publication was to analyze president Trump's recent crises handling and his disregard of many routines and traditions of the presidency. The text was written by Editor David A. Graham on February 13th, 2017 and is likely intended for a broad, at least semi-educated audience with political interests and likely doubts on Mr. Trump's actions as president. With national security being touted as one of President Trump's top priorities, it is ironic to many that he seems very open in handling national security issues. This could be predicted by some, however, as Trump is obviously very candid and often blatantly honest. With North Korea becoming a threat to Asian-Pacific trade allies like Japan, the US must take a strong stand against North Korea and their missile program, sticking up for its alliances. Obviously, with a country as unstable as North Korea, handling information about their wrongdoings in such a public light is certainly unconventional and often frowned upon. The author's purpose was to offer insight on this unconventionality and highlight issues with Trump's public handling of highly sensitive information that has the potential to affect our entire country. The text says that the event with Japan's prime minister was the perfect time for Trump to show his unconventionality and transparency, which puts his own desires about his public image in front of the needs of the nation, security wise. This brings up the question, is Trump's transparency and honesty a strong attribute of his presidency, or is it a threat to our country? I believe that the presidency is often seen as over secretive and extremely rigid in its traditions, so I am not opposed to government transparency. Trump is certainly delivering on that campaign promise thus far. I do believe that national security is one medium that requires more censorship and sensitivity than other aspects of the presidency, so some caution should be used when dealing with those topics. This article was interesting because it highlighted Trump's honesty in carrying out campaign promises at least to some extent and dealing with even very sensitive material in plain sight, literally, of ordinary people (or however ordinary people are at the $200,000 a year club Trump was at when the North Korea announcement reached him).