Digital Grifters

Guest Post by The Zman

Like most slang terms, no one is entirely sure how the word “grifter” came into common usage, but it has been fairly common since the start of the last century. Researchers claim it was carnival slang that crossed over into common usage in the late 19th century and early 20th century. It was possibly a corruption of the word “graft”, another slang term that loosely meant financial crime. Either way, a look at Google Ngram shows it took off in the 1920’s and 1930’s.

One interesting fact about that graph is the usage of the word seems to track with the rise and fall of social trust. In the run up to World War Two, social trust began to decline for a number of reasons. One big one was the financial collapse and the subsequent economic depression in the 1930’s. The fact that the word is increasingly common today, starting in the 1980’s with the digital revolution, suggests a correlation. People are more exposed to corruption now than 30 years ago.

Putting that aside, the microprocessor revolution has changed many things in our culture, one of which is the nature of the confidence man. Before the internet, running a con was an intimate affair. The con man had to personally interact with the mark in order to earn his trust. That meant the con man had to be able to read people and control his own emotions and body language. He also had to understand his mark, so he could say and do things that played on the mark’s vanity.

The life of the analog con man was a dangerous one. Having to operate in close proximity with the mark meant physical risk. If the mark got wise, it could mean a beating or maybe worse. The analog con man therefore had to be highly skilled, but also possess some courage. Often, he was operating in a world with other criminals, maybe even targeting criminals. One mistake, knocking on the wrong door or targeting the wrong old lady, could mean physical harm.

That’s the first thing that has changed about grifting in the digital age. The con man can operate from a great distance, often in anonymity. He can put up a false website that lures people in, based on certain known characteristics. Alternatively, he can create a false persona on-line that ticks the boxes needed to appeal to a class of people the con man is targeting. The confidence game and marketing are often indistinguishable from one another on-line. It’s easier to be a con man now.

Unlike the analog con man, the digital con man no longer has to possess the personal skills to work a mark or a group of marks. They also have a much lower risk of being caught and they don’t have to worry about physical harm. The result is a lower barrier to entry, which means many more con men. In the depression of the 1930’s, money was scarcer so people were more aware of swindlers. Today, the number of swindlers is much higher, so the word “grifter” is more common.

Another difference between the analog and digital grifter is the former operated on a small scale. He had to work a small number of marks at any one time. The latter can work in volume. In fact, the digital con game works better when scaled up as it can then rely on social proof to draw in suckers. While analog grifting was a retail operation, often a bespoke business, the digital con man works wholesale. He skims a little from many people, who often do not notice the con.

One main way the digital grifter works is through front running. They find a fad that is building up steam on-line and rush to the front of it. This helps them get attention from the sorts of people who get caught up in fads. These are people that like being led and need social proof. Once the con establishes himself as a prominent person in the fad, he either asks for support or has something to sell. Think about all the Tea Party sites that offered merchandise ten years ago.

A great example of this is Mike Cernovich. He has jumped from one fad to the next, almost exclusively operating on Twitter. He jumped from fad to fad on-line until he struck pay dirt with his goofy self-help book. He then re-titled it for the Trump era and became a leader of the MAGA cult on-line. When Trump got into office, he then started claiming to be a White House insider. His front-running of Trump allowed him to move a lot of merchandise and establish his brand.

That’s the other aspect of the digital grift. In addition to front running, the digital grifter is always looking to free ride. They look for a movement or fad forming up on-line and then come in with something to sell. It may be a book targeted at the vanity of the people in the movement. E-books are a popular item, because they are cheap to produce and don’t require a lot of work. Video is another, as it can monetize the front-running aspect with just the cost of a webcam.

The real pros in this segment were on display when it looked like Trump was contemplating war with Iran. The cable chat shows were littered with people ready to sell a book on their alleged inside knowledge of Trump, the war planning or the Iranian regime. The same people who peddled books for or against Trump three years ago were going to selling war books. Cable news was a grifter’s ball for a few nights, until Trump pulled the plug on the ear machine.

One similarity between the analog and digital grifter is that the mark builds what he thinks is a strong personal bond with the con man. In an atomized world of deracinated bugmen, there are tens of millions of people willing to follow a guy on-line. Just as lonely old shut-ins were easy marks for the analog grifter, the intensely on-line, who lack the normal personal connections in the physical world, are easy targets for the digital confidence man.

The low barrier to entry means we are Carny Town. The question that remains unanswered is that of cause and effect. Is the proliferation of con men on-line driving down social trust? Is the decline in social trust opening the flood gates for the con men to pour into our lives? Another possibility is that both are driven by the breakdown of white community. A world of atomized strangers is a fertile hunting ground for sociopaths, serial killers and confidence men.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
8 Comments
flash
flash
January 10, 2020 9:49 am

Never could understand what Vox Day, an otherwise discerning and super intelligent individual saw in the creepy charlatan Mike Cernovich . Some things just have no explanation.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
  flash
January 10, 2020 11:19 am

I think Cernovich was behind the FOIA lawsuit that disgorged sealed info about Epstein and ultimately necessitated his murder by Mossad. So I think he’s more consequential than most Internet personalities.

M G
M G
January 10, 2020 10:22 am

Most likely, it is the communications revolution that has caused the news media to commit suicide. In the old days, when the audience was fixed, the focus was on maintaining the facade of objectivity. No one was under any illusions about growing the audience, so they focused on keeping the audience.

***
The internet promised a global market and unlimited market share.
***
A relentless drive for eyeballs gave rise to the clickbait journalists turning the media into fake news.

Where there are triple asterisks I see a jump to a next step. Not saying it isn’t plauseable, but I’m not sure what altered media’s perspective from being objective purveyor of the facts to advisor and interpreter of events. During the “empowerment” era is about the time the internet revolution began, making information available in forms to people who’d never seen that sort of information before. It must have been somewhat like the handling of tracts printed by Gutenberg or the delivery of bundles of letters from England in the Colonies or the printing of books and letters hurriedly sent on horseback to settlers Westering their way to the Pacific Ocean or the telegraph communications of the Civil War.

But, for some reason, the examples I use seemed to make civilization advance intellectually, physically and even, to a point, morally.

Digital communication provides more information more rapidly but is shattering us into so many niche groups that cannot speak the same lingo because the words do not mean what they are supposed to mean.

I do not always reply on your posts, Zman, but I do try to at least scan for content to make sure it isn’t something I need to know.

I made the comment that your stuff makes us think but not chatter so much.

This one is worth some chatter, I hope.

In fact, i tried to link via my community page on facebook and need some sort of access code. If you want me to have one [email protected] is the way to go for starters.

Who is Sophia?

c1ue
c1ue
  M G
January 10, 2020 12:56 pm

What drove the news services to change to what they are today isn’t the communications revolution per se. It was Ebay, Craigslist and other companies killing the classified ad.
That’s what forced the newspapers to become clickbait farms as opposed to … newspapers.
The equivalent for TV is cable. CNN and Fox both, with FB and Youtube channels coming on fast.

M G
M G
  c1ue
January 10, 2020 1:55 pm

It wasn’t always about the Advertising $, was it?

Or are the stories about every communications revolution always about WHO ends up in control of the market share?

I do think technology plays a role because now the advertising capability is much more sophisticated, able to pinpoint markets down to a single consumer in many cases. I mentioned technical writing here the other day and got three emails in my seemobooty account about tech writing tips and programs available for $$$. Technical Writing Industry. Everything is a potential industry in a world where everyone is entitled to something.

I used to download entire technical data manuals into programs which looked for certain strings of words and digitally marked them for me for later rapid comparison. Was an easy way to verify data that was supposed to be in place was indeed in that place.

Now? Entire libraries of data can be searched in the same amount of time in less time.

I think there is enough information now to keep most of humanity occupied and entertained until the show ends.

e.d. ott
e.d. ott
January 10, 2020 10:35 am

DNC and RNC cold calls would ring us once in awhile but have come more often lately. There’s nothing they have to sell me in trade for a donation. Same with the NRA of late, and it’s especially true of the useless government that transfers our earnings to those who didn’t earn them.
DACA kids need books? Druggies need a hit or two of free Narcan on my dime?
F*ck them. Starve the beast.