Episode 233: Critical Massholes

November 28, 2023

Central Thesis

The relentless pursuit of data by tech giants like "the Searchies" (Google/Alphabet) for advertising purposes constitutes a hidden, yet massively profitable, form of surveillance capitalism that threatens user privacy, stifles competition, and demands dismantling.

Key Arguments

• Data collection is the "secret sauce": The Searchies' dominance in search isn't solely due to superior innovation or talented employees, but stems from the constant, dynamic analysis of user-side data (clicks, scrolls, mouse hovers, etc.). This data fuels their algorithms and strategic development, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of improvement and market dominance.

• Behavioral surplus is undervalued, but profitable: "Behavioral surplus" (data we assume nobody has) is the core of the Searchies' business model. While society may not "put a price on it," the Searchies exploit it for immense profit.

• Anti-competitive practices: The Searchies pay the Fruities (Apple) billions to be the default search engine on their devices, effectively creating a "hidden tax" on every ad placed on those devices. This arrangement discourages the Fruities from entering the search market themselves.

• Advertising corrupts content: Even seemingly "inoffensive" advertising inherently corrupts content by forcing moderation to appease advertisers, suppressing important topics, and prioritizing puffery over genuine value. Jim references the "grapes must not clash" stinger he introduced in episode three.

• The ad blocker battle reveals the underlying problem: The Searchies' attempt to force users to disable ad blockers or pay a premium underscores the fundamental dishonesty of online advertising, which promises advertisers things it can't deliver, keeps content providers teetering on the brink of unviability, and maximizes its own returns. The fact that people use ad blockers is the symptom of the "disease" that is unwanted advertisements, not the disease itself.

Notable Passages

• "Surveillance capitalism got started in the world of online advertising, but this has moved way beyond. The way in which it's reaching into these intimate aspects of our lives and our rights and our freedoms is introducing fundamentally new dimensions of social inequality specifically designed to be hidden from us."

• "According to privacy advocates, trouble is, its ad blocker detecting mechanism doesn't exactly comply with European Union law. Oh, it's fucking illegal. That is a problem."

• "Advertising destroys content by, forcing the moderation of that content, even a moderation that rescinds social value in favor of puffery toward products that are on the ads. For that reason, they are shit."

• "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

Rhetorical Approach

Jim employs a combination of deep research, acerbic wit, and personal anecdote to make his case. He presents complex legal arguments and economic data in an accessible way. His use of sarcasm, colorful language ("shit river," "critical massholes"), and pop culture references ("The Brady Bunch," The Wizard of Oz) keeps the episode engaging. The listener shout-out adds a sense of community. Analogy is also employed to explain the nature of surveillance advertising.

Connections

References Shoshana Zuboff's The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, and Upton Sinclair's 1934 book, I Candidate for Governor and How I Got Licked. Explicitly references previous episodes: 133 (The End of the Myth), 130 (Vermin Feed on Forgotten Trash), 200 (She's Reminded Me of Science), 217 (Chopping at the Golem), and 37 (The Sound of One Hand Applauding). Refers to articles from the "Big Tech on Trial" series by Lee Heppner and Matt Stoller, and an article from The Register.