Christian Gilbert
Drain Your Brain: Lumosity’s Breach of
Persuasive Ethics
I found
an example of breach in persuasive ethics in the form of the Lumos Labs’
Lumosity, the brain-training game developed to enhance a person’s brain
function and performance. The issue at hand came in the form of false
advertising. The program is said to improve mental performance in work and
school, and work to prevent cognitive deficits that are typically found within
diseases such as Alzheimer’s or traumatic brain injuries. The implied mental
acuity and improvement that is being advertised is apparently not accurate
(Underwood).
The FTC
has cited a number of complaints about the brain-game for some time, claiming
they haven’t noticed any improvement. Their assessment found that Lumosity did
not “have adequate science for the claims that they’re making” (Underwood). The
only thing found to happen after periods of “brain-training” is an improvement
in the games themselves. There was no actual, real-world benefit that people
could see. This led to the claims of false advertising (Underwood).
The
breach of ethics here was that Lumos Labs had been claiming that paying for
these games improve your mental prowess when that simply wasn’t true. They
convinced people that they could become smarter by doing this when the science
does not back up that assertion. There is a blatant disrespect for its
consumers in the form of false promises and lost money on something that
doesn’t do as is stated. People paid for this service, and if they purchased a
year subscription, they paid upwards of $200 for essentially boring games
(Underwood). I believe this was a deliberate tactic to convince people to join.
Lumosity is not the only culprit out there, and many are accused of doing the
same thing. It’s a plan of advertising designed to make people want to improve
their minds and become smarter. Without the pull of “being smarter”, there
would be virtually no reason play these games.
The
“argument” so to speak here is already clearly defined at this point. As of the
beginning of January, 2016, this issue has been handled by the FTC on behalf of
numerous people citing this violation against Lumos Labs (Underwood). The context
of the argument was directed at Limos Labs, the creators, in the form of a
lawsuit by the FTC on behalf of scorned consumers. There was a clear violation
of ethical standards; truth in advertising. They put out a product deliberately
making false claims and enticing people to purchase the program on the bases of
a fabricated outcome. It was simple and blatant lying to the public, possibly
because they assumed people wouldn’t be able to prove they weren’t learning.
Or, perhaps they thought it would have a placebo effect and people would assume
it would work. In this situation, the result of this breach of ethics had a
fairly just outcome, in that Lumos Labs was fine for false advertising and the
wronged consumers were reimbursed.
Works Cited
Underwood, Emily. "Brain Game-maker Fined $2 Million for Lumosity
False Advertising." Science. N.p., 5 Jan. 2016. Web. 27 Jan. 2016.
