Esther Duflo, an MIT economist, won the 2019 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for her experimental approach to alleviating global poverty. Duflos early life working at a non-governmental organization in Madagascar and volunteering in soup kitchens in her native France inspired her to study economics and research the root causes of poverty. With her fellow Nobel winners Abhijit Banerjee of MIT and Michael Kremer of Harvard, Duflo showed that effective policies often go against conventional wisdom and popular economic models. The only way to find out what works, she argues, is to rigorously test solutions on the ground, and she encourages businesses to do the same. With Banerjee, Duflo also wrote the new book Good Economics for Hard Times.

Download this podcast

TRANSCRIPT

CURT NICKISCH: Welcome to the HBR IdeaCast from Harvard Business Review. Im Curt Nickisch.

The annals of business are littered with products that bombed and companies that went bankrupt because of one key mistake: They failed to account for actual human behavior.

Whether its assuming that people would always rent movies from a store, or that if you just build a multibillion-dollar satellite network people will buy your expensive phones, how consumers were expected to behave was quite different from how they actually behaved.

Our guest today says the same goes for economic policy. Too often, economic models project how people will respond to incentives or constraints. When in reality, things are quite different.

And when youre talking about educating a countrys workforce or promoting economic development in a poor region, getting it wrong can have sweeping consequences.

Esther Duflo is a cowinner of this years Nobel Prize for economic sciences. Along with Abhijit Banerjee of MIT and Michael Kremer of Harvard, she was recognized for their experimental approach to alleviating poverty. Her work shows that rigorous field tests can arrive at effective solutions that go against conventional wisdom and popular economic models.

Duflo is an economist at MIT. And shes the coauthor, with her fellow Nobel winner Banerjee, of the new book Good Economics for Hard Times. Esther thanks for joining us.

ESTHER DUFLO: Thank you, most welcome.

CURT NICKISCH: How did you first get interested in the economics of poverty?

ESTHER DUFLO: Well, my mom was a doctor, and she was spending some time in developing countries, in particular in countries, victims of war, where kids were victims of war, to kind of help out those children. And she would go on missions for some weeks at a time.

We kind of were always made aware that they were children who were living very different lives than we were. And I was always bothered by the difference in lifestyle and the luck that I had, and the responsibility that is implied for me.

CURT NICKISCH: When did you see poverty for the first time yourself?

ESTHER DUFLO: I saw French poverty quite early on. I started to volunteer in soup kitchen, that kind of thing, since I had that feeding the world kind of speaking to me. International poverty, I was 18 when I went to Madagascar for the first time with the goal of learning and helping if I could from an NGO that, from a local NGO there. So in a sense, I was always looking for what is the part that Im going to play in the world one day.

CURT NICKISCH: What steered you to economics and actually working on understanding policy and its effects, rather than just helping people whose lives you could see?

ESTHER DUFLO: Well, even in the soup kitchen experience that I had as a teen, I found it to some extent unsatisfactory, because I felt like you just do a small, small bit here. But do very little to try to think about what brings these people here in the first place. Already then, I was sort of thinking whether there might be something else that could be done.

When working with the NGO in Madagascar, that was a local organization, and I could see that they were doing good work, and that the way that they were doing it was not charity. They were trying to do, they were trying to organize economic systems for the people they work with to lead more fulfilling lives on their own terms.

And I thought this was eye opening, because until then I was more thinking of, you know, especially international aid, as you grow you provide food, and then people have food. And then I realized that the local organizations, so in that case it was an NGO, but it was a big, big organization, a big NGO, but it was entirely local. The local organization tries to set up systems to organize, to improve peoples lives in a more systematic way.

To me, it was just this shift of perspective, of saying, you know, what is the actual problem we are trying to solve here? And is there a, whats the best way to solve it? So economics only came later. I had a chance to do spend one year in Russia towards the end of my undergraduate degree, and I saw economists advising the government. And I thought, wow, these people, they have so much say. They can actually influence policy. And I thought this is probably what would suit me the best.

CURT NICKISCH: How do you think your experiences at a young age influenced how you wanted to go about doing your research and maybe doing it differently than customary ways of doing economic research at the time?

ESTHER DUFLO: What made it very clear to me at this, what it made very clear to me at this stage is that you have to go to the field, because if you want to study issues of global poverty, in India or in Kenya or in Ghana or in Madagascar, there is no substitute for going to India or Ghana or Kenya or Madagascar because our intuition from the comfort of our offices and our lives here on how people live their lives on the ground are just mostly worthless.

As a result, as soon as I became an economist, I immediately went to the field and then, and in particular, spent a lot of time in India, and then I in fact had a chance to realize how wrong many of the ideas that I had on the poor where, and how to set them right.

CURT NICKISCH: What youre saying sounds so familiar, probably, to people in a business audience, because this is just reminiscent of customer research and design thinking and really trying to understand the customer before you develop products for them. And essentially that was what you were doing maybe as an economist, seeing how people lived and behaved in the real world, and then trying to get those economic models to match up in a way that practically has impact. Does that sound right?

ESTHER DUFLO: Yes, it sounds absolutely right. The one difference is that when you are in business, in particular in customer-facing business, suppose your product is actually useless, then its going to be clear reasonably quickly. Its just not going to sell.

So once youve done your customer research and tried to come up with your product and come up with your product, say, you know, like an apple that folds itself, or something like that, like if nobody wants it, then the apple that folds itself is going to stay on the shelves, and then you are going to move to the next idea.

So the difference with policy is that in particular with some antipoverty programs is that that market test is usually absent, because when people say go to a school, even if its a terrible school, what are they going to do? They have nowhere else to go.

So you are, have to test your ideas and any impact of your idea yourself. You have to set up an impact evaluation test because there is no automatic market test which you would get in a business setting. So I think thats a crucial difference between the business setting and the policy setting that in general that market test is not there.

Once youre lost your customer in the policy setting, then you know your product is really, really, really awful, so for example in some parts of India people have basically abandoned the public school system. But thats a bit late. It would have been better to intervene earlier and to try to make the public schools better. But you wouldnt be able to do that by just relying on people walking away from your schools.

CURT NICKISCH: A lot of what your research has done is tried to apply rigorous experimentation and market test it, in a way, to some of these questions, how to alleviate poverty. Can you talk about what youve learned by doing that?

ESTHER DUFLO: So precisely, its because you dont have this automatic markets there that you have to replace it with impact evolution of your idea. And whats an impact evolution is asking what happens, you know, how much better is the situation of this particular person with my idea than without my idea?

So we take an example of lets say you want to improve school quality, and youre saying, well Im going to provide remedial education to the kids who are reaching grade three and cannot read. Then the idea is, we would say, well, it might be a good intuition. It has a chance to work. But if you know, you want to know whether it works, you have to set up a test which is as rigorous as the way you would test a new drug.

So you take 100 schools or 200 schools, divide them in two. In half of the schools provide your program. In the other half you dont, or maybe in half of the schools your program, you provide a program for grade four students, and in the other half you provide it for grade three students. And then you compare the kids who were exposed to the program to the kids who were not exposed to the program.

So thats kind of the idea of the mass-controlled trial. So we started doing that about, or I started doing that about 20 years ago. Michael Kremer and Abhijit Banerjee who won the Nobel Prize along with me, started just before me, and initially it was a very small confidential, very few people were doing that, but one of the things we worked on is create infrastructure and a movement around that, so that now its really hundreds of researchers along with their partners, government, NGOs.

Together this has produced a very, very large number of those projects. And each of these projects is one answer to one specific question, like for example, would it work to provide remedial education? But together, they also have given us a much clearer understanding of what are the key constraints that the programs face in succeeding in their lives, and what are the levers we have to remove those constraints and allow them to lead their best possible life?

CURT NICKISCH: Can you give me an example of how applying this kind of thinking or experimentation can have really surprisingly good results?

ESTHER DUFLO: So we can use that example, if you take malaria, ever since the early 2000s, its been known that insecticide bed nets are a very good solution to prevent malaria cases. Less good than having a vaccine, and it is great that some people are working on a vaccine. But in the meantime, we dont have a vaccine yet.

So malaria, so to prevent malaria, the bed nets is a good solution. But then there was a lot of discussions of what is the best way to provide a bed net. Should they be provided in a big or large scale for free, or should they be sold? And there were arguments either way, and people were kind of arguing on that. And then there was a series of experiments showing that giving them away is actually the best way to proceed, because you cover many, many more people, and actually once people have the bed nets, they use it very well.

That had been the doubt before. Would they use it well? And it showed that even if people get a bed net for free, they use it very well. And thanks to this piece of research, which was then replicated in several ways, people, there was kind of a consensus formed around the idea of mass bed net distribution, which occurred in African countries in a massive way and was responsible for the decline in malaria deaths. So I think this is a good story, because it illustrates the, A, the importance of a focus on the problem, which is, lets try and get, reduce the number of malaria deaths while the scientists are working on the vaccine. Lets not just wait for that day. In the meantime, we have to act now. B, lets figure out the best way to do it and be practical about it, not be blinded by our intuition or ideology, and C, once we have the answer, lets go for it.

CURT NICKISCH: Many people think about poverty as, you know, an intractable problem. But you know, the world has actually improved a great deal for the worlds very poor over the last few decades. You know, with millions upon millions of people moving out of poverty. Why in your view has that been happening?

ESTHER DUFLO: So there has been tremendous progress in the lives of the poor over the last three decades. Some of it has been due to economic growth in China and India, which are not things that any individual person or policymakers control very well. So its hard to emulate to say, well, lets just be like China. But its great that it happened, and its not something we can directly copy, because we dont know even what to copy.

But another thing that happened is also an improvement, enormous improvement in the quality of lives of the poor, even in countries where GDP didnt increase as much as it did in China and India. For example, there was a reduction in about half of infant mortality, and of maternal mortality. There was also something like a reduction in about 450 million deaths were averted from malaria. Almost all of the children are now in school, at least at the primary level, worldwide.

So you have a bunch of improvements in the quality of lives of the poor over and above just an improvement in the income of the poor. And even in countries where the income of the poor didnt increase. And that I think has come from a greater policy focus on those issues, and in particular, willingness to go from despondency or poverty is too much of an intractable problem. There is nothing we can do. To a certain kind of can-do optimism, to say, OK, we can just focus on the problem, and we can make real progress. And we can do that by figuring out what works and then implementing it.

CURT NICKISCH: What can business leaders do to alleviate some of this poverty? If an individual comes up to you and says, what can I do where I am in my company, or country, what do you tell them?

ESTHER DUFLO: So it depends on in what capacity they are coming to me. It could be that the first thing you want business leaders can do in their capacity as a business leader is to run their business at some level, I mean, depending on what the business is. But one way in which people become less poor is by getting jobs.

And one of the constraints that exists certainly in many African countries is people finding good jobs that fit with what they are wanting to do in life, and with their skills. There are now more and more people who are actually educated to get jobs. And businessmen and firms, etc., companies are the ones that are going to provide the jobs.

And then sometimes business leaders are despondent because they could not find the people that they want to hire. So we are trying to work with farms and companies to think about what are, what makes it difficult to run a business in one of these countries. And what type of barrier exists to finding the right people, to retaining them, to giving them good wages and the like? What kind of stands in the way for business to operate in this way? So thats work that, to kind of improve their business, which will create the jobs that will employ people.

The second thing, sometimes people, businessmen come more in their corporate social responsibility, with their corporate social responsibility hat. And there I would say many businesses, in particular, the companies that have potentially a lot of money to spend on CSR, in a country like India its because its required by law. It is lots of money. Could, honestly, spend his money a little bit better in the sense that that money is often not used as thoughtfully as you might think. You have business leader who will be very careful for any business decision, and then as soon as its the corporate social responsibility to just like spend anything, any first idea that comes to mind. And here, applying the same kind of scrutiny and intelligence that apply in business to your corporate social responsibility investment would be great.

CURT NICKISCH: In your new book, Good Economics for Hard Times, that you wrote along with your fellow, your fellow Nobel winner, Abhijit Banerjee, you argue that the lessons from your research in developing nations, you know, that rigorous experimentation and clearheaded economic policy can have surprising gains. You argue that those should be applied more in developed nations as well. Can you talk about that?

ESTHER DUFLO: So in developed world as well, I think a lot of our policymaking has been dominated by a sort of basic understanding of economics that was not necessarily fitting with the facts. So in the same way that all my intuitions about what it is to be poor and the poor live their lives were shown to be inaccurate as soon as I set foot in Madagascar and then later on in India and in Kenya, likewise a lot of the intuitions that policymakers operate on in this country are also wrong, I think.

And a lot of the intuitions that also sometimes the public has are also incorrect. And in fact, sometimes the intuitions that economist have, and that they base their models and their policy recommendations on also are incorrect in the sense that they are not born out by fact. So what we are trying to do in this book, Good Economics for Hard Times is to do a little bit the same exercise that we did with development of saying, this is what the facts tell us, and this is how to understand them, and this is how we have to rethink some of our presumptions for how people behave, and therefore how we should do policy.

CURT NICKISCH: I mean, one thing you talk about in your book is that human behavior goes against a lot of standard economic theory, like people staying in the same place when there are no jobs, versus moving away. And how that, you know, those behavioral things go beyond financial concerns, maybe. How might that be useful for managers and policymakers to think about?

ESTHER DUFLO: So this idea that people are much more stuck in place than we think is really essential, because all of our economic policies, and to some extent, business decisions, are based on the idea that people respond to incentives.

So there is geographical movement, and movement across sectors. So if you were working in coal, and coal is losing jobs, but fracking is gaining jobs, then you will move into fracking. And if these jobs we have in the Appalachia, and then now they are not anymore, then you will move to New York.

And of course, by introspection or just looking around, we should have known that its not true, that for people, its extraordinary costly to switch careers, to kind of shed the identity and the pride that they had in one line of job, to shed the social relationships that they had formed in the community, and pick up and start somewhere else, we know that most people are not like that, in fact maybe we wouldnt be like that.

But this is not how we think about policy ever. We started thinking, well, you know, if we open to trade with developing countries, the wages of the low skilled worker will fall a little bit, but just a little bit, on average. And we can compensate them in other ways. Without realizing that the problem is not that the average wage will fall a little bit. The problem is that for some particular people, individual people, its going to be a catastrophe, because not only their job will disappear, but the job of all their neighbors will disappear, and the community in which they live is going to go into a tailspin, etc.

And that this individual suffering are going to be perceived as such, and people are not going to feel fine because on average it would have been OK. This would only be true in a world where people are mobile easily. And I think we need to put back the cost of transition, not only the financial cost, but also the psychological and social cost of transition, at the same time how we think about any policy. And also how we think about how we are, as a society we support the people who pay these costs in their body and in their lives.

CURT NICKISCH: Economists are often criticized for being out of touch with peoples feelings and always looking at everything through a strict macroeconomic model. And it sounds like the same way that you have to really listen to the people on the ground in places like Madagascar and India, and really respect their dignity, youre saying that we need to apply that same kind of approach to developed nations where inequality is growing, and where there are winners and losers, just like other places.

ESTHER DUFLO: Yes, and where the losers of the economic games also are often considered to be just plain losers, in the American middle school sense of the term. Which is, you know, add, I think, insult to injury in ways that contribute to fueling anger and polarization and difficulty to have conversations.

CURT NICKISCH: Esther I have to ask you a kind of a career question, a personal question. You, I think at 47 years old, are the youngest person ever to win a Nobel Prize in the economic sciences. Youre only the second woman to win one. Do you think of yourself as a role model?

ESTHER DUFLO: I think almost by construction I am by now, because just being a relatively young woman, and therefore Im at least an example of that its possible. And I studied actually women accessing for the first-time political position at the local level in India, since there is a reservation for women in political position at the smaller level of government, at the Panchayati level in India, and I

CURT NICKISCH: When you say reservation, like

ESTHER DUFLO: A set aside.

CURT NICKISCH: A quota, or a, yeah.

ESTHER DUFLO: So typically every third village must elect a woman as a head. And then it will take. So I studied the impact that it had, and that actually made me change my mind on the role of quota of a woman. Because Ive seen number one, that women, these young, these women, often young, make different decisions than men, and in particular, they invest more in good that women care about. I also found that after one cycle of reservation, people become much more willing to consider that a woman might be competent as a leader. And after two cycles of reservation, they actually vote for them in large numbers.

Once the seat goes back to regular general competition, women are more likely to run and to be elected. So in places that have never elected a woman ever, you have reservation for a while, and then women can run and be elected. And finally, it has, the fact of having a woman in position of power changes what parents think that their kids might do. And it makes them more ambitious for their girls. It makes them want their girls to have a career and to stay in school. And in fact, they stay in school longer.

So, in my own work, Ive seen the impact that there is in having women being in positions where you dont expect them. So in that sense, the very fact that there is a woman as a Nobel Prize winner in the type of work that I do also that is more socially minded than most Nobel Prizes before us, I think will have a consequence, and Im, I certainly hope it will, because I do think there are not enough women in the economics profession, and economics is a social science. And we need a diversity of experiences and perspectives. And I hope that I can contribute to making that happen.

CURT NICKISCH: Esther, thank you so much for coming on the HBR IdeaCast to talk about your research. And congratulations on your win.

ESTHER DUFLO: Thank you so much.

CURT NICKISCH: Thats Esther Duflo of MIT, and the newest winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, along with Abhijit Banerjee of MIT and Michael Kremer of Harvard University. With Banerjee, she wrote the book Good Economics for Hard Times.

This episode was produced by Mary Dooe. We get technical help from Rob Eckhardt. Adam Buchholz is our audio product manager.

Thanks for listening to the HBR IdeaCast. Im Curt Nickisch.

Link:
A Nobel Prize Winner on Rethinking Poverty (and Business) - Harvard Business Review

House Democrats and Republicans didnt agree on much during the public hearings held as part of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. But both sides and the witnesses did utter the same pair of words every day of the hearings 50 times overall. And those two words were conspiracy theory.

From CrowdStrike to speculation about Jeffrey Epsteins death, conspiracy theories have become central talking points in American politics and culture or at least thats how it feels on the internet.

Its common for people to believe in conspiracy theories. So common that recent work suggests everyone believes in at least one conspiracy theory. But being common does not necessarily mean these unfounded assertions are becoming more widely accepted.

Journalists are saying that now is the time of conspiracy theory. But theyve said that almost every year since the 1960s, said Joe Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami who studies the origins and behaviors associated with conspiracy theories. At no time do they present any systematic evidence to back that up.

Five years ago, Uscinski and political scientist Joseph Parent reviewed more than 100,000 letters to the editor received by The New York Times and the Chicago Tribune between 1890 and 2010 arguably the only long-term survey of conspiratorial beliefs. Aside from spikes in the 1890s due to distrust in rising industrialization and during the Red Scare in the 1950s, public belief in conspiracy theories remained stable. Picking up where the survey leaves off, polls show this flat trend has continued over the last decade.

Based on the research that Ive done and that other psychologists have done, conspiracy thinking seems to be a fairly stable predisposition, said Robert Brotherton, a psychologist and lecturer at Barnard College, who studies conspiracy theories. He and other cognitive scientists describe being conspiracy minded or conspiracism to be like any other personality trait, with some people more predisposed and others less so.

Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California and chairman of House Intelligence Committee (left), and Devin Nunes, a Republican from California and ranking member during an impeachment inquiry hearing in Washington, D.C on Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019.Photo by Andrew Harrer/Pool via REUTERS

Polling over the last decade has consistently found that most Americans approximately 55 percent believe in popular and unfounded conspiracy theories, such as the idea that the Iraq War was a globalist plot to control oil reserves, or the suggestion that airplane chemtrails are used for mind control.

So why does it feel like we talk about these theories more? Its not a change that originates from our own susceptibility to conspiracy theories, but appears to be the news medias growing attention on them, as exemplified by this passage from Uscinskis 2018 book Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them:

In November 2017, The New York Times published an article with the term conspiracy theories in it nearly every day. For comparison, the Times published zero such articles that same month, forty years prior.

Part of this uptick in news coverage is due to political leaders who are so often invoking conspiracy theories in their rhetoric, Uscinski said. Politicians mentioning conspiracy theories like QAnon, the system is rigged, Russian assets or the deep state seem to break the threshold, and news outlets feel compelled to explain what they are or explore their validity.

An attendee holds signs a sign of the letter Q before the start of a rally with U.S. President Donald Trump in Lewis Center, Ohio, U.S., on Saturday, Aug. 4, 2018. QAnon is a far-right conspiracy theory alleging that President Trump is conducting a purge of non-existent deep state actors from the government. Photo by Maddie McGarvey via Bloomberg / Getty Images

Conspiracy theories are being overplayed in the news, Brotherton said. Conspiracy theories can affect some peoples beliefs and choices, such as with the El Paso shooter or with anti-vaxxers. But for the most part, they dont.

Yet the news medias fascination with conspiracy theories and its regular attempts at debunking them through fact checking may reinforce misplaced beliefs and perpetuate public trust in conspiracy theories. Thats because of how the human brain works and the way messages now echo across the internet and social media.

But done correctly, debunking can combat peoples faith in false conspiracy theories.

Thats why, before you join family members around the holiday table and try to explain why 9/11 wasnt an inside job while grabbing an extra helping of cranberry sauce, you should read PBS NewsHours neuroscience-backed guide to approaching your loved ones conspiratorial beliefs.

People even smart and savvy ones mix up conspiracy theories, falsehoods and myths. Here is the key difference: A conspiracy and by extension a conspiracy theory must involve a group of people conducting secret deeds that disadvantage or infringe on the rights of others.

Conspiracy theories lack public, objective and verifiable proof.

For instance, linking vaccines to autism is a false belief. If you think vaccines cause autism because health officials deem it so, then you believe in a conspiracy theory. Another falsehood is that fluoride is harmful to your body. A conspiracy theory is that fluoride is harmful to your body and a form of mind control perpetuated by government officials.

The central component of conspiracy theories the difference between them and real conspiracies is proof. Conspiracy theories lack public, objective and verifiable proof.

This may be hard to fathom, but conspiracy theories are essential to a well-functioning society. Investigative journalism thrives on exposing conspiracies or what experts call the process of epistemology. That applies to the Panama Papers, the Flint water crisis, the Edward Snowden revelations about domestic surveillance, the CIAs role in the cocaine epidemic in the 1980s, or President Richard Nixons Watergate scandal. Many of those events started as conspiracy theories until their underlying evidence was discovered and made public.

A protestor holds a sign claiming the September 11 attacks on the U.S. were an inside job near the White House in 2007. Surveys show that Democrats are more likely to believe this unfounded conspiracy theory. Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP via Getty Images

Conspiracy rhetoric is a fundamental strategic tool employed in politics across the partisan spectrum. An opposition party typically the party in the minority tends to push the concept that the people in charge are working against the interests of the populace.

Its certainly strategic to say that you are the victim of a conspiracy, that there is a witch hunt out to get you. Because it sort of throws those accusations into a negative light, Uscinski said. It turns the attention away from you trying to defend yourself, to finding the truth. Now the accuser has to defend themselves.

News outlets sometimes cite Republicans as being more prone to conspiracy theory beliefs. Studies find the right and left are actually equally susceptible, but their reasons for adopting such thinking are different. For example, studies show Republicans are more likely than Democrats to believe a conspiracy theory if it fits their ideology.

The problem is not that these conspiracy theories exists, but rather that people blindly trust that these assertions are true without evidence.

Correcting a misconception a falsehood that someone believes is accurate is really hard to do, even if the message isnt as complex as a conspiracy theory, said Nadia Brashier, a cognitive scientist at Harvard University who studies the cognitive shortcuts people use to evaluate the truth.

To understand why people believe in conspiracy theories, you need to ask yourself how the human brain decides any piece of information is true.

To understand why people believe in conspiracy theories, you need to ask yourself how the human brain decides any piece of information is true.

There are three essential keys behind how our brains judge a piece of information as being true, according to a comprehensive review of the current thinking in this field, co-published by Brashier and Duke University cognitive psychologist Elizabeth Marsh in September. Those keys are base rates, emotional feelings and consistency.

The base rate refers to the research-backed tendency of humans to inherently think that what they encounter is true, no matter the circumstance. We are mentally biased toward wanting to believe what we encounter is real. Humans are naturally trustful, rather than distrustful.

Brashier said thats because most of what we confront in our day-to-day lives involves events that are objectively true.

Its not the case that most of the images we see are Photoshopped or even that most of the headlines we encounter are fake, Brashier said. Most of what people tell us interpersonally is true. There might be lies mixed in, but its not the majority of what we hear.

The second key to judging truth emotional attachment helps solidify those misconceptions. Our emotions evolved over millions of years as a survival mechanism. Being able to associate positive or negative feelings about certain colors may have served as a reminder for our primal ancestors about which foods were safe. Social emotions like anger, gratitude and guilt guide how we weigh our welfare versus that of others.

As a result, our emotions help craft our identities, which we defend fiercely, even when were wrong. Look no further than how political divisions influence perceptions of the objective truth.

The third key to judging truth is consistency when our brains encounter the same concept or claim repeatedly, they become more likely to believe it.

As the NewsHour reported in March, political tribalism is one of the strongest motivators for human behavior. We derive pleasure and social capital from being members of a clique, and consequently, our minds exert tremendous energy to signal our beliefs to those who might agree with us.

The third key to judging truth is consistency when our brains encounter the same concept or claim repeatedly, they become more likely to believe it. Brashier said thats why social media has become such a natural habitat for perpetuating conspiracy theories.

Theres always been false advertising or other kinds of misinformation campaigns. It just looks different now with the rise of social media, Brashier said. Social media makes this kind of content quickly accessible to a lot of people.

So even if the base rate has remained steady over time people havent inherently become more skeptical it may feel like conspiracy theories are flourishing because of how they spread on social media. Just think of the echo chambers you see grow in your friends feeds with people piling on misinformation post after post.

Beyond those three keys, researchers point to three more factors. People and echo chambers feed on conspiracy theories because of proportionality bias, Brotherton said. Thats the idea that the bigger an event is, the bigger an explanation we seek.

This does seem to be a fundamental aspect of our psychology. Its intuitively unsatisfying to think that something very small could cause something very big, Brotherton said. That a lone gunman could kill John F. Kennedy, the president of the United States, and change the course of history its not intuitively satisfying. We want to think that there was some much bigger cause.

An inscription reading RIP JFK meaning Rest in Peace, John F. Kennedy adorns a slat of the wooden picket fence at the top of the Grassy Knoll in Dealy Plaza in Dallas, November 22, 2013. The picket fence plays a major role in many conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination, with some theorists believing that one or more gunmen may have fired on the president from behind the fence in addition to suspect Lee Harvey Oswald who was in the Texas Schoolbook Depository building behind the president. Photo by REUTERS/Jim Bourg

In his book Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories, Brotherton argues this tendency in conspiracy-theory believers is supported by a human desire to search for patterns, especially when it comes to the intentions of others.

If youre more inclined to think about other peoples motives, youre probably a little bit more receptive to conspiracy thinking, Brotherton said. But when people are faced with an ambiguous pattern (whats harder to decipher than another persons intentions?) they try to connect the dots.

Those six elements base rates, emotions, consistency, proportionality bias, intentionality bias and pattern searching help explain why people believe in conspiracy theories. Now the question is, how do you dissuade them from doing so?

1. Accept that you probably wont change their mind. If a conspiratorial belief is foundational to a persons identity or understanding of a certain subject, it will be extremely difficult to displace. After debunking, we often see what we call the continued influence effect, where [that] original false belief persists, Brashier said. That can happen even if a person knows and can recount the actual facts.

Moreover, there is a hot debate right now in cognitive science over whether repeating misinformation in order to correct it makes things worse. Thats known as the backfire effect, and there is support both for and against it.

If the backfire effect exists, then people might forget or ignore the context of a fact check and be left with a stronger belief in a conspiracy theory. Some recent research in neuroscience shows that peoples brains can store an original piece of misinformation and a correction at the same time, but the memory of the correction fades at a faster rate.

2. Be kind. That said, if youre going to try to correct a conspiracy theorist, one important thing to keep in mind is that you dont want to ostracize them. Ostracism actually encourages people to believe in things like superstition and conspiracy theories in the first place, Brashier said.

CrowdStrike is a California cybersecurity company that investigated how the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee network and leaked emails ahead of the 2016 presidential election. A debunked conspiracy theory about CrowdStrike has been invoked in the ongoing impeachment proceedings. Photo Illustration by Rafael Henrique / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images

3. Do your homework. Correcting someones thinking can work if a piece of misinformation can be replaced with something concrete, Brashier said. But the need for replacement facts also explains why some popular falsehoods can be so hard to combat.

Scientists have shown repeatedly that vaccines dont contribute to autism, but they also arent entirely sure what actually causes autism. So it becomes hard to replace vaccines cause autism with something else, despite loads of evidence supporting vaccine safety, Brashier said.

4. Push the objective truth, whenever you can and as early as possible.

Take more time than a single dinner to make your point about the objective truth. Remember, consistency is one of the reasons people trust an idea, even if that idea includes misinformation.

Conspiracy beliefs are hard to switch back and forth, Uscinski said. If somebody has a strong belief in something, youre not going to change their belief just by giving them one piece of information or having one conversation with them.

Brashier added the ideal scenario is preventing our friends and families from falling prey to misinformation in the first place. In news media and academic publishing, corrections seldom if ever reach as many people as the initial publication of a falsehood. But Brashier said we can train our friends and family to be less vulnerable to fake news.

Taking a little more time to rethink gut reactions improves accuracy. Some of my recent work suggests that we should ask ourselves, Is this true? Or, Does this fit with facts that I know? Brashier said. This prompts people to internally fact check, by comparing a claim against facts stored in memory.

This task may be as simple as telling your relations to seek better information, or by pointing out that most conspiracies are revealed by journalistic endeavors or legal investigations and not in chatrooms nor on social media.

Here is the original post:
How to keep conspiracy theories from ruining your Thanksgiving - PBS NewsHour

As artificial intelligence drives a fourth industrial revolution, fears and doubts about AI are pervasive. In the first industrial revolution, machines began replacing manual labor, and there were human concerns over the change. Here is demystifying AI. Whats fiction and whats worth the fanfare?

At hand today, in the fourth industrial revolution, are rational and irrational fears. With any new radical thinking and ideas, disruption in the status quo and an influx of unknown information people have fear. Think caveman and fire. Great idea but it was scary because it was unknown.

To embrace and benefit from AI, its important that we take a moment to reflect on the lessons of past technological change in order to better plan for minimizing risk. We want to maximize the value of AIs increasing importance.

In addition, we also must find ways to convince skeptics that AI, ultimately, will help people in innumerable ways.

When machine production began replacing some types of manual labor in the 18th century, unemployment rose for a period of time. But thats not the whole story, and not whats happening now.

Implementing new technologies changes human jobs, but it doesnt necessarily remove them. We see the new AI technology as a great addition to most human jobs.

The data bear this out: Gartner has made a case for just how many jobs AI will add, claiming that, by 2020, AI will take 1.8 million jobs and replace them with 2.3 million new ones. Thats a net gain of 500,000 jobs. AI will benefit our employment landscape.

What these jobs will look like is described somewhat in a PricewaterhouseCoopers study gauging the long-term impact of AI. While PwC found that there will be some job displacement, as some positions would be made redundant by AI technologies, new jobs will be created.

PwC also predicted a need for new types of workers who will focus on thinking creatively about how AI can be developed and applied [and to] build, maintain, operate, and regulate these emerging technologies.

It will be exciting to watch a whole new landscape of creative tech jobs unfold due to advancements in AI. For example, theres already an emerging field dedicated to AI marketing tools that specialize in helping businesses take that creative and targeted next step.

Beyond concerns of job loss and job change, though, are some general stressors about what it means for AI to be better than humans at just about everything in a little over 40 years. If youve read any sci-fi novels or seen any sci-fi movies in which Robot Overlords are in control, this fear will be familiar.

Realistically, though, there are some places AI cannot, and will not, go. For example, the Gartner study found that attempts to have AI replace sales associates at real estate agencies will be unsuccessful. Most individuals prefer interacting with knowledgeable people over interacting with machines. We associate more pleasing experiences and empathy with real humans.

For example, have you called for help with a transaction and found yourself responding to computer prompts? That is AI in action. Customer service call centers are a huge AI success story, and its not because the tech is replacing humans.

The success is because tech is helping humans to provide better customer service. Helping each other, especially in tech support is an important distinction that still may feel a little sci-fi but is to everyones great benefit.

The fact is that AI isnt trying to be human. Just ask your AI device: Alexa, would you pass the Turing test? Shell respond: I dont have to. Im not pretending to be human.

For centuries, businesses have been about tangible things: brick-and-mortar places, hardware, stuff. Now, what businesses capitalize on is more nebulous. Dollars are realized by how well customers are treated, how well their data is protected, and how trustworthy they feel a business is.

Among the three tied-together concerns, privacy is paramount, and theres no way to sugarcoat it. Tools such as facial recognition expose valid concerns regarding a persons right to privacy.

These fears are discussed a lot today with regard to the use of such tools in crime-stopping. And in many cases, its unclear what a persons rights are or will be, as the legal system hasnt caught up to the technology with regard to the transparency, procedures, and other concerns at play.

When a customer uses a free tool think Google or Facebook their data is gathered and their patterns monitored, and all of this information is fed into machine learning tools. No surprise that all of it is used to create targeted ads.

Consumers of these free sites waive their rights to privacy, effectively allowing this type of data mining. The data mining softwares terms and conditions are ones that most agree to blindly. These terms are seemingly impossible to opt-out of at this time if you want to use that tool.

Then, the big data sets created by customers of freeware isnt used only in such seemingly-innocent ways as target marketing. Machine learning algorithms can track behavior patterns across apps and platforms, creating a semblance of human behavior that can be used in more nefarious ways.

Wed be naive to think that isnt a possibility, even a likelihood. Ethical debates about AI and the privacy challenges it presents are ongoing. As AI is used more and more, such ethical debates will heighten. Undoubtedly, there will be legal challenges, too. All of these things in tandem will define AIs boundaries.

While AI could ruin privacy, I dont think its going to. Customers arent going to spend their money in places that will allow their data to be exploited in ways that undermine their interest.

As AI grows and changes our jobs, business, and lives what do we need to worry about, if not these myths?

We need to worry about the people who will be left behind by tech advances instead of seizing opportunities to learn and improve from such advances. We also need to worry about dispelling fear and increasing buy-in.

What we stand to realize from AI is far greater than what we stand to lose. It has life-saving potential, even: Stanford has published that AI is better at predicting pneumonia than radiologists are.

As more and more of these kinds of advances are discovered and embraced, well realize that just as the first industrial revolution raised our overall quality of life, so, too, will this one.

Fear will lessen and trust will build in AI as a necessary and welcome part of our future.

Curtis Peterson, the SVP of Operations at RingCentral, has more than 20 years experience managing information technology and carrier-scale data and packet voice communication networks. At companies ranging in size from startups to Fortune 500 firms, Curtis has managed teams responsible for engineering, project management, automation, operations, data security, network security, data center, carrier operations, and internet backbone design and operation. Curtis has been a pioneer in VoIP services in the business communications space and has been developing, launching, and operating Class 4 VoIP and customer-facing hosted PBX systems since 2002.

See the article here:
Demystifying AI: Whats Fiction, and Whats Worth Fanfare? - ReadWrite

Leaders from more than 40 psychological associations across the globe agree that climate change is a serious global threat.

The representatives met in Lisbon for the first-ever International Summit on Psychologys Contributions to Global Health earlier this month. Summit participants signed a resolution and committed to conduct further research, obtain more cross-cultural data, and launch advocacy campaigns.

PsyGlobalHealth agreed that climate change is a serious global threat. The representatives also said that climate change is occurring faster than previously anticipated, and is contributed to by human behavior.

Participants spent nearly three days discussing the impact of climate change in their respective countries. They workshopped plans for advocacy, potential media campaigns, and further research. They also developed a toolkit to meet the goals laid out in the resolution.

The resolution included specific commitments to inform our respective members and the public about climate change. Signatories agreed to continue emphasizing scientific research and consensus on its causes and short- and long-term harms.

The organization says psychology is important in helping people adapt to climate change. Psychologists can help to build resilience, foster optimism, cultivate active coping, increase preparedness, and emphasize social connections.

Psychology as the science of behavior change must be actively involved, said Arthur C. Evans Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the American Psychological Association. There are psychological consequences in terms of the anticipatory challenges and in terms of how we help people recover after climate events.

The summit included representatives from, Brazil, China, Cuba, Jordan, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, South Korea, and Uganda.

Climate change is affecting communities around the world, and PsyGlobalHealth is just one of the organizations taking action. Schools and universities, in particular, are implementing new environmental policies.

At the University of Sheffield, a course on climate change is compulsory for all students. The university will also embed Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) into the curriculum for every single course at the university.

From the start of next year, Italian public schools will spend nearly an hour a week learning about climate change and sustainable development. Students will also study traditional subjects including maths and physics with an emphasis on sustainability and the climate.

Summary

Article Name

Psychologists From 40 Countries Say Climate Anxiety Is a Global Threat

Description

The new International Summit on Psychologys Contributions to Global Health says it will study climate change, the climate crisis, and global warming.

Author

Liam Pritchett

Publisher Name

LIVEKINDLY

Publisher Logo

Read the rest here:
Psychologists From 40 Countries Say Climate Anxiety Is a Global Threat - LIVEKINDLY

Automation is no longer the future, for it is the present. From autonomous home appliances to delivering food, from luggage check-ins at airports to automatic check-in at hotels, from doctors appointment booking to doctorless surgery, automation has become an integral part of our everyday living.

Customer service is no exception to automation. A survey by Gartner predicts that more than 80% of customer handling will be done by autonomous systems. The deployment of AI-powered automatic systems is not only going to benefit your customers (by enhancing customer experience) but will have a tremendous performance improvement of your agents. Agents can avail virtual assistants to go through rigorous data searches easily, saving time and effort.

Thishassle-free support system enhances customer satisfaction and reduces agentdistress. Powered by smart systems agents become even smarter and the reducedresolution time with increased accuracy saves a lot of expenditure on thesupport paradigm of your business.

Ifthis wasnt enough, virtual assistants today are backed by ArtificialIntelligence that can handle most queries on its own. So now as anorganization, you can fully automate front end support. Your back-end team canavail the required information automatically to enhance performance andaccuracy. This paves the path to AI-powered resolutions occurring in real-time.Here are 10 reasons why AI-powered automated customer support is the future:

Alot of startups dont have the resources to empower themselves with AI-backedcustomer support. Because of this organizations can produce a tremendous amountof revenue. All they need to do is to find a win-win situation while providingAI-backed customer support service.

Andthe fact that the new age businesses prefer opting for automated servicesrather than manpower-oriented services, provides the perfect timing to come upwith an AI-powered customer support center.

Itcan be developed once and delivered it to multiple organizations which makes ita revenue stream of indispensable income at a fixed investment.

Thefact that this is primal of the win-win situation which is considered as the boonof new age success for any organization itself speaks for the importance ofautomation of customer services. When combined with the tremendous bettermentit brings along for the organization acquiring the service, it brings about thebest possible mutual growth scenarios that b2b organizations thrive for. Theimplications of AI-powered automated customer support are monumental, to saythe least.

Asa customer, a company gets to enjoy the benefits of automation that may takeseveral weeks and a generous amount of expenditure. This can be availed at a fractionof the cost to build it. Also, when acquired as a service, it is available onan immediate basis.

Thesetwo factors when combined not only saves expenditure but the valuable time thatcan be utilized at developing business. As for developing business (startups),since the elementary need is business development, they will opt for such aservice any time of the year.

Soundoubtedly automated customer service is one of the best and in-demand ideasto generate revenue.

Thesuccess of apple can be credited to Steve Jobs understanding of customerrequirements. To put it exactly in his words People dont know what they wantunless you give it to them. Artificial Intelligence can bring this to realityat the customer support paradigm.

BecauseAI-powered customer support systems can track user behavior at every minor step, when powered with deep learning, these systems can predict theproblems that may be faced by your customers way before they even face it. Oneway to do this is by realizing how your brand interacts with your customers orvice versa.

Thebiggest advantage of having an automated customer support system is that it canaudit an unending list of applications and websites. When backed by artificialintelligence, an automated system can figure out the elements of distress thatmay be faced by a customer during the whole process. When realized, aresolution may be preempted before even the query is raised.

Thesesolutions may be offered with virtual assistants or added as a part of the FAQsto smoothen customer queries. This greatly enhances customer retention rates ascustomers can get pre-emptive messages about the problem they might face.Imagine having a resolution delivered to yourself about a problem you are yetto encounter! Will you ever rather choose a different service?

Mostbusinesses today have already opted for automated message delivery. Because ofthis they can provide a better customer service. As soon as a customer opts forany service, the automated system can deliver the conformation, invoice andother relevant information instantaneously.

Thisalso helps the organization by reducing the manpower that would have beeninvested in delivering messages and maintaining the customer database. Becauseof automation of messaging, organizations are now able to automate databasemanagement. Delivered messages are automatically stored in the database and canbe easily pulled out for future references.

Messagingservices have overtaken not just social media, but all digital platforms thatsend messages. Be it your cab service, hotel service, airline service, fooddelivery, or banking for that matter, they all utilize automated systems todeliver the messages, so how can you as a customer tell the difference? Well,you cannot! These messages may come from an autonomous system, but they are ascustomized as customization gets, courtesy of AI.

Thisway organizations can preserve the personalization factor of customersatisfaction even while going autonomous.

Asignificant amount of time and capital is invested in training and hiringsupport agents. One of the biggest hurdles faced by most call centers acrossall industries is staff attrition. Staff attrition is a fancy way to elaborateon the reduced strength or effectiveness of a call center that may occur due todecreased employee strength.

Thiscalls for a recurrence of the hiring and training process that requiresreinvesting in the resources already once invested in. This, when combined withthe increased customer handling time, caused because of frustrations thatdevelop in the course of elongated call, leaves a bad customer experience.

Whencompared against the automated service available at the fraction of the priceof setting up once own call center, the former is unequivocally superior. Also,even if your employees are very satisfied, there may be an alteration orrevision of the process following which the employees need to be retrained.

An AI-backed service center, however, is built to be able to cope up with thechanges (at worst, requiring minor reconfiguration). Combine all of this whilestill emancipating your workforce from the mundane tier-1 tasks, you not onlysave capital but are able to utilize your workforce at more complex problemsthat still cant be resolved without human intervention.

Whilea company needs to follow the respective government regulations in defining itscustomer support policies, it can utilize the automated counterpart of humanagents which is not bounded by any regulations. The implications of this areimmense. The most prominent of these encompasses catering to your customerseven on public holidays!

Thereis an add on advantage of time efficiency. What may require a few days for anagent to resolve can be resolved by an AI-backed automated service in a fewhours. Consequently, the brand image and brand value are greatly enhanced asthe customers feel more satisfied. When topped with the personalization of the cadreof human interaction that comes with automated customer service, it serves asthe perfect icing on the cake.

Automatedservice support backed by AI can provide the ideal service environment thatcustomers stipulate, and organizations solicit. One of the greatest advantagesof using automatic customer support is that it comes with all thepersonalization possibly available with no emotions.

Becauseemotions form an integral part of human nature, a human agent is very likely toget biased by the interaction with a customer. An automated agent, however, isdevoid of these emotions and consequently is capable of catering to customersof all varieties.

Havingsaid this, if you are wondering how then do you cater to a client that mayrequire complex reasoning that can only be provided by humans, well, AI-backedautomated systems have the option of transferring the query to a humanagent/manager shall that be the need of the hour.

Theagent/manager being backed by AI has the minutes of the issues andconsequently, the required beforehand and underlying information at fingertips.This helps them resolve the issue in minimal time possible, with little to nohassle or frustration that may come with handling all the calls from greetingsto thank you note.

Casestudies done for call computerization have shown a significant amount ofreduction in investment when compared against the outsourcing of traditionalcall centers. Outsourcing a call center itself has severe complications. This includesbut is not restricted to limited control of agent monitoring and performanceevaluation.

Ontop of it, with computerized call centers are backed by machine learning andadvanced speech recognition which also boosts the performance of your IVR(interactive voice response).

Thecustomer service paradigm is changing at a faster pace than most companiesimagined. The need to disband human interaction and the fact that most surveysnever saw this coming is exemplary of the new demands.

All of this, when combined with the millennialmentality today makes up for the best of all possible scenarios in handlingcustomers. Millennials dont like talking to a human agent. After all, we aretach-savvy. Nothing suits better to us than getting our problems resolved by aninteractive system that outperforms most humans by a significant margin.

Themost prominent factor for businesses today is adapting to the changing times.Those who dont fall prey to those who do. As a business, it is imminent togauge the requirements of not only the current customer base but also theupcoming customer base. The next generation is going to be even moreself-reliant, and hence the need to adapt to automated customer support wasnever direr.

Organizationscan track and collect customer data from a variety of platforms. This data canthen be processed by Artificial intelligence backed by machine learning, deeplearning together with big data analysis to deliver an outcome not humanlypossible.

Thisrenders personalization redefined. More understanding of human behavior can bederived from automated behavior analysis in minutes than humans can do in evenmonths.

Asimple example of this was in conventional stores. When backed by big data andmachine learning, a weird projection came out. It was to put beer next to babydiapers. This saw increased sales of beer. Upon human inspection, it turned outthat there were a lot more fathers shopping for their new babies than therewere mothers. And consequently, when you put beer next to it, they tend to buyit more often than they would otherwise.

Thisis just one example of how the understanding of human behavior derives thecapital gain of an organization and the role that automation plays in it.

Anothergreat application of automated customer service is that it provides scalabilityoptions that just cannot be matched by human agents. Lets consider a scenariowherein you are escalating your market consequently you need to cater to awider range of audiences with an increased number of customers.

UsingAI chatbots and voice responsive agents an organization can satisfy thesedemands without any significant increase in capital investment. You end up notneeding to hire agents that speak the local language and training those.

Take Away

UsingAI-powered customer service is the primal need for sustainable growth intodays day and age. The dusk of self-service customer support is set to seethe dawn of traditional call centers. Agents are already been backed by AI;they soon will be replaced by AI. This has more significance than just reducingyour expenditure as a business, it is the demand of the current and theupcoming generations.

Read the original post:
10 Reasons Why AI-Powered, Automated Customer Service Is the Future - TechiExpert.com

sourceReuters

The Chinese company that owns the viral video app TikTok is working closely with Chinas government to facilitate human-rights abuses against Uighur Muslims in the western autonomous region of Xinjiang, according to a new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

The report, titled Mapping more of Chinas tech giants: AI and surveillance, looked at the way major Chinese tech companies were involved in state-sanctioned surveillance and censorship using artificial intelligence packaged as popular apps and websites.

ByteDance, the parent company of the viral-video sensation TikTok, was mentioned in the report alongside other major Chinese tech companies including Huawei, Tencent, and Alibaba, many of which ASPI wrote are engaged in deeply unethical behavior in Xinjiang, where their work directly supports and enables mass human rights abuses.

China has been accused of running detention centers and forced labor camps in Xinjiang. Interviews with people who were held in the facilities reveal allegations of beatings and food deprivation, as well as medical experimentation on prisoners.

China has acknowledged the existence of some reeducation camps but has repeatedly denied reports of abuse at its facilities.

In its research, ASPI singled out ByteDance and accused it of acting alongside the Communist Party to enforce the countrys strict censorship laws.

ByteDance collaborates with public security bureaus across China, including in Xinjiang where it plays an active role in disseminating the party-states propaganda on Xinjiang, the report said.

ByteDance operates two versions of its viral video app a China-based app called Douyin and the global app TikTok.

TikTok is one of the most downloaded phone apps in the world and has already entered more than 150 global markets.

Previous reports cited by ASPI indicated that Xinjiang Internet Police had a presence on Douyin in 2018 and created a new public security and internet social governance model.

ASPI also cited recent reporting that said Chinas Ministry of Public Securitys Press and Publicity Bureau signed an agreement with ByteDance that allowed ministry and police officials to have their own Douyin accounts to push ministry propaganda. The report also said ByteDance would increase its offline cooperation with the police department, though it was unclear what that partnership would entail.

A representative from ByteDance told Business Insider that it did not endorse police content on Douyin.

As a user-generated content platform in China, Douyin allows individuals, organizations and institutions, including civic and law-enforcement groups, to set up user accounts, the person said. This practice is comparable to how social-media platforms in other countries allow similar organizations, including law enforcement, to create accounts for purposes such as crime-prevention alerts. Douyin does not endorse the content generated by its users, but rather, similar to Twitter or Facebook, provides a platform to all of its users. The person added that ByteDance does not produce, operate, or disseminate any products or services related to surveillance.

A representative for TikTok told Business Insider it does not remove content based on sensitivities related to China.

We have never been asked by the Chinese government to remove any content and we would not do so if asked. Period, the person said. We are not influenced by any foreign government, including the Chinese government; TikTok does not operate in China, nor do we have any intention of doing so in the future.

The TikTok representative added: In TikToks early days, we took a blunt approach to minimizing conflict on the platform, and a previous version of our moderation guidelines allowed penalties to be given for things like content that promotes conflict between religious sects or ethnic groups, spanning a number of regions around the world. The old guidelines in question are outdated and no longer in use. ASPI added that other tech giants, including Alibaba and Huawei, contributed cloud computing and surveillance technologies in Xijiang.

In October, the US blacklisted 28 Chinese organizations and companies accused of facilitating human-rights abuses in Xinjiang. And earlier this month, sources told Reuters that the US opened a national security investigation into ByteDance after its $1 billion acquisition of the US social-media app Musical.ly in 2017.

TikTok has been in the spotlight after suspending the account of a US teenager named Feroza Aziz who posted a viral video on the app that was disguised as a makeup tutorial but criticized the Chinese governments treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang.

The company apologized in a statement published to its website on Wednesday, saying that it stood behind its initial decision to suspend Azizs account but that its moderation process will not be perfect.

Xinjiang has a population of about 10 million, many of whom are Uighur or other ethnic minorities. In May, US Assistant Secretary of Defense Randall Schriver said at least a million but likely closer to 3 million citizens were detained detention camps.

Satellite images reviewed by the Washington-based East Turkistan National Awakening Movement earlier this month identified at least 465 detention centers, labor camps, and suspected prisons in Xinjiang.

And a recent leak of classified Chinese government documents known as the China Cables laid out a manual for exactly how the detention centers were to operate, preventing escape by double locking all the doors and using a points system based on behavior that is linked directly to rewards, punishments, and family visits.

See original here:
Report claims TikTok parent company ByteDance is working with Chinas Communist Party to spread propaganda on Xinjiang - Business Insider

Ethan Hunter wants you to know about SafeMode, an Israeli company that helps trucking companies improve driver safety.

Mr. Hunter grew up in Tenafly, and he graduated from the Dwight-Englewood School in Englewood. Now, hes a sophomore at Washington University in St. Louis, where he is majoring in history and management.

And he is a student leader of the Tamid Group, a student organization that has more than 50 chapters across the country with some 8,000 participating students. Tamid was founded by students at the University of Michigan as an Israeli investment club in 2007.

Get The Jewish Standard Newsletter by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

Now, Tamids investment track is complemented by a consulting track, in which students work with Israeli companies.

Im a project manager on the consulting track, Mr. Hunter explained. That has him overseeing a team of three Washington University students working with SafeMode. And it has him speaking regularly with Ido Levy, SafeModes founder and CEO.

Mr. Hunters team was paired with SafeMode through a process in which he applied to several companies that seemed interesting. They posted a description, and I applied with my expertise, he said. Personally, I wanted a mentorship. I wanted broader connections between me as an undergraduate and Israels startup culture.

Mr. Hunter spent last summer in Israel at Israel Summer Business Academy, a six-week Washington University program in Herzliya. He took classes on venture capital and venture creation and the Israeli business ecosystem and met with many Israeli entrepreneurs.

Mr. Hunter and his fellow students work on various tasks for SafeMode, including market research, branding, and search engine optimization. It doesnt have a marketing department, he said. Were working to create social media posts for them to gain them more exposure. Were getting hands-on experience. They dont treat you like an intern. Interns dont exist in Israel its called a job.

Its a very open and inviting environment, which is very different from the U.S. I see it more as a mentorship than an internship. I have no problem sending the CEO a WhatsApp message any time I have a question, he said.

As a project manager, Mr. Hunter comes up with certain metrics and tasks to keep the team on track. A lot of it revolves around reaching out and doing interviews, establishing what SafeMode is, he said. That included his outreach to the Jewish Standard, which led to this story.

Mr. Hunter is using the skills hes learning in his Organizational Behavior 360 course. The business school stresses collaboration; he appreciates the chance Tamid offers him to lead a team. Thats not how we are taught, he said.

So heres the SafeMode story.

It starts, Mr. Hunter said, with $70 billion annually in avoidable costs in the trucking industry. That includes the costs of accidents.

Its a large market, Mr. Hunter said.

SafeMode is a software company that automates the job of a fleet manager. It helps firms monitor their drivers with the goal of improving safety. It accesses the cameras and sensors of different trucks, and drivers can access their driver data through the app. A lot of companies incentivize their drivers for safe driving, but its not always followed up on.

SafeMode claims that by monitoring drivers and rewarding them for safe practices, its been able cut fuel consumption by 4 percent and increase safety by 30 percent.

Thats a lot of money for fleets, Mr. Hunter said. It saves millions of dollars annually in repairs and in lawsuits.

Mr. Levy, SafeModes CEO, said the origins of the company came three months before he finished his IDF service, when a friends mother was killed by a drunk driver.

How could he make the world safer?

Mr. Levy connected with Dr. Erez Shmueli, a researcher in behavioral economics connected to the MIT Media Lab. He researched how we can change human behavior to shift drivers to drive more safely and more efficiently, Mr. Levy said. He joined me, and this is where we started to build the project.

These days, truck drivers are monitored remotely. Every heavy duty must have a connected device that sends data about the hours the driver drives, Mr. Levy said. Thats the most basic component of the monitoring. But trucking companies have installed monitors that detect speeding, acceleration, the distance the driver is keeping from other vehicles, and even cameras to track the drivers alertness.

Thats a lot of data. Fleet managers are overwhelmed, Mr. Levi said. We take all the data and bring it to the driver. We provide an app for the driver to open after every shift and see how they drove, and what they earned as a result of their behavior. They drove more efficiently, or had fewer breaking or speeding events.

The driver gets actual rewards based on their improvement, so they want to improve. For the first time, a driver gets positive engagement from their manager.

SafeMode recently partnered with Volvo.

Volvo makes a lot of 18 wheelers, Mr. Hunter said. Theyre starting to make SafeMode standard on a lot of their trucks.

Continue reading here:
'It's called a job' - The Jewish Standard