“No one can lie to you without your approval. The liar and the recipient participate in a fabric of mythmaking together. A lie does not have power by its utterance—its power lies in someone agreeing to believe the lie.”
Could it be that victims are, on some level, willing actors in their own victimization?
The Netflix documentary, The Tinder Swindler, has sparked discussion on this very point. The documentary follows the exploits of Simon Leviev (one alias among many) who used the popular dating app Tinder to trick multiple women out of millions of dollars. His “swindle” was built on an elaborate story of being a billionaire’s son who needed access to fast cash while his financial accounts were frozen.
Astonishment is one of the most common reactions to the film. Viewers want to know how these women could be so gullible that they would take out multiple loans in their own names and just hand it over to someone they’d met online. Are they truly victims, or do they have some responsibility for not exercising what many would consider to be common sense in protecting themselves? The film raises these questions and more. One of the most disturbing questions being, could any of us be manipulated the way the Tinder Swindler’s victims were? And if so, is it because on some level – as Meyer says – we gave our approval?
The Tinder Swindler has a lot to teach us about human nature and the vulnerability that comes from living in a society where we need to interact with and trust others. While we may choose to opt in or out of dating, one aspect of modern life where participation is pretty much mandatory is in our role as consumers. In this post, I’ll look at what the lessons of The Tinder Swindler mean for customers and the trust they place in businesses and corporations.
Everyone is vulnerable to a scam
If the reactions on social media are any indication of public sentiment, it’s clear that most people think that Leviev’s scam worked because it tapped into his victims’ inherent greed. The women were so willing to believe in his lies because they were blinded by the promise of a lavish lifestyle, if they just did what he asked.
While greed may play some role, there’s a bigger, and more nuanced, picture to consider. After all, if greed were the sole factor at play, then consumers wouldn’t be vulnerable to deceptive marketing practices (which don’t hold the promise of future riches) the way Leviev’s victims were.
But we are indeed vulnerable. Studies show that scams are one of the most common crimes globally, with an annual cost to the world economy of over $5 trillion dollars.
How does this happen? It’s not because marketers are criminal masterminds who have devised foolproof tricks. It’s also not because the average customer lacks intelligence. What it really comes down to is trust.
When marketing scams exploit our psychological weak spots
Humans have an inherent tendency to trust, for multiple reasons and this innate vulnerability is amplified in the context of business. Because of their success, wealth, and power, we tend to assume that business leaders are people we can rely on for good decision-making, strong ethics, and appropriate conduct. In the absence of evidence as to why they shouldn’t be trusted, we put our faith in them and their good intentions. They are the Simon Leviev to our naive woman looking for love on a dating app.
Take the case of disgraced Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes. She bamboozled investors out of millions by claiming to have developed a portable blood analyzer that could run comprehensive blood tests with just a finger prick. John Carreyrou, the investigative reporter who exposed the scam, had this to say about why she was able to trick even seasoned investors:
“[T]here is a willingness to worship geniuses in Silicon Valley [...] Americans are eternally optimistic, eternally willing to worship new heroes. That is especially true in Silicon Valley, where there’s this magical thinking that some people are geniuses and just can’t be wrong.”
But it goes further than just trust and people “wanting to believe.” Scammers also have some very powerful tools in their arsenal that help nudge (or outright push) people into a position where they have to make decisions based on faith. TV presenter and actor Alex Conran provides an overview of the scammer’s toolbox in his TED Talk “The Superpower of the Conman.” Whether it’s roping vulnerable women into loaning money, getting people to give up their personal information, or convincing consumers to buy faulty products, successful scams (close to 60% of them, according to statistics) typically rely on tried-and-true tactics, such as misdirection, time pressure, social compliance, social proof, and the “good deal” syndrome.
No matter how old these tricks are, they still work. In the US, one out of every ten adults is scammed each year, and this number is actually on the rise.
Key takeaways on The Tinder Swindler and what it means for consumers
So, are we, to some extent, willful actors in being scammed? Given the powerful examples of Simon Leviev, Elizabeth Holmes, and the thousands of other successful scams that are carried out every year, perhaps we are.
But that doesn’t mean we have to be. Embedded in Meyer’s statement about deception being a cooperative act is a powerful truth about personal agency. If our approval is required in order for a lie to stand, then we have the power to withdraw that approval at any time and protect ourselves.
As important as it is to know our individual psychological weak spots, and ask the right questions, business leadership also need to employ values and principles that steer unfair marketing tactics in the right direction.
Comments