Check out this article proving we are really in charge of our digital health. We are consumers of technology so we really do drive what is…
Consumer culture reigns in safety naturally. Seatbelts became a competitive selling hook for car manufacturers years ago. Now we’re seeing big tech companies address addiction- they don’t want us to abandon our phones forever…
No phone operating system wants to be seen as dangerous. So what’s required is at least a certain perception of safety and trust, in the interest of sales as the article mentions.
For Google, it’s about driving more people to their unethical and brutally competitive advertising by cunningly dominating as much of tech as possible. For Apple it’s about selling more hardware. Apple phones are much safer than Google’s by the way.
Appearing “safe” is also about trying to persuade their own employees and potential employees that they are doing “good”, helping to recruit willing workers - they target the young and naive for just this reason. How many smart people would want to work for Oppressive and Addictive Surveillance Corporation?
I wouldn’t say it has anything to do with users’ interests. Corporations are required by law to try to maximise the amount of profits that they pass on to their wealthy shareholders. The executives and many employees of these companies are paid in shares of company stock which rises in price whenever then can extract greater profits from the masses.
Thanks for sharing this, @healthyswimmer! I think this is a great example of a post to put in our “News Digest” category… I’m going to move it there.
Could you add a 1-3 sentence summary of the article so that it is easy for us to remember the main take-aways from this piece in the future?
Thanks @Mamie- does that look right?
Looks great! Thanks for adding that summary, @healthyswimmer. I also wonder if a more descriptive topic title would be helpful for forum observers / readers… something that better signals what the article is about? Just a suggestion.
Great article… good points!
I think these aspects is where CHT can play a big role. Not only regarding digital health and smartphone addiction / limiting time-spent on the device, but also in other humane tech fields.
While the companies involved do not really change because they suddenly have our best interests at heart, and in some ways they cut themselves by e.g. making their product less addictive, they can also gain new unique selling points (USP’s) by incorporating these changes. Thing that lead to greater trust in their products and… uttimately increased sales.
Volvo - while spending huge amounts of research money on it - has a rock-solid brand image of being the safest car manufacturer on the planet.
Similar USP’s are to be had for tech companies:
Positioning yourself as a Humane Tech company (humane tech as a philosophy engrained in your mission) - and acting accordingly - is becoming a truly attractive USP to develop. If the big tech companies do not move into these areas, there are significant niches for smaller competitors in this field.
Interesting developments 
Does USP mean selling point? I’m not in the field…
Yes, it does 
Thanks @Mamie this specific type of feedback is helpful.