Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a manipulative propaganda tactic used in technology sales, marketing, public relations, politics, polling, and cults. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and is a manifestation of the appeal to fear.
In public policy, a similar concept has been referred to as manufactured uncertainty, which involves casting doubt on academic findings, exaggerating their claimed imperfections.[1] A manufactured controversy is a contrived disagreement, typically motivated by profit or ideology, designed to create public confusion concerning an issue about which there is no substantial academic dispute.[2][3]
Etymology
The similar formulation "doubts, fears, and uncertainties" first appeared in 1693. The phrase "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" first appeared in the 1920s. It is also sometimes rendered as "fear, uncertainty, and disinformation".
By 1975, "FUD" was appearing in contexts of marketing, sales, and in public relations:
"One of the messages dealt with is FUD—the fear, uncertainty and doubt on the part of customer and sales person alike that stifles the approach and greeting."
FUD was first used with its common current technology-related meaning by Gene Amdahl in 1975, after he left IBM to found Amdahl Corp.
"FUD is the fear, uncertainty and doubt that IBM sales people instill in the minds of potential customers who might be considering Amdahl products."
This usage of FUD to describe disinformation in the computer hardware industry is said to have led to subsequent popularization of the term.
As Eric S. Raymond wrote:
"The idea, of course, was to persuade buyers to go with safe IBM gear rather than with competitors' equipment. This implicit coercion was traditionally accomplished by promising that Good Things would happen to people who stuck with IBM, but Dark Shadows loomed over the future of competitors' equipment or software. After 1991, the term has become generalized to refer to any kind of disinformation used as a competitive weapon."
By spreading questionable information about the drawbacks of less well-known products, an established company can discourage decision-makers from choosing those products over its own, regardless of the relative technical merits.
Examples
Public policy
Manufacturing controversy has been a tactic used by ideological and corporate groups to "neutralize the influence of academic scientists" in public policy debates. Cherry picking of favorable data and sympathetic experts, aggrandizement of uncertainties within theoretical models, and false balance in media reporting contribute to the generation of FUD. Alan D. Attie describes its process as "to amplify uncertainties, cherry-pick experts, attack individual scientists, marginalize the traditional role of distinguished scientific bodies and get the media to report "both sides" of a manufactured controversy."[4]
Those manufacturing uncertainty may label academic research as "junk science" and use a variety of tactics designed to stall and increase the expense of the distribution of sound scientific information.[1][5] Delay tactics are also used to slow the implementation of regulations and public warnings in response to previously undiscovered health risks (e.g., the increased risk of Reye's syndrome in children who take aspirin
See also
•
•
•
•
•
•
• (book)
•
• (EEE)
•
•
•
•
•
• Iago – Character in Othello
• (film)
• (book)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Further reading
External links
References
- Michaels D. Scientific evidence and public policy Am J Public Health, 2005^
- Manufactroversy : "A contrived or non-existent controversy, manufactured by political ideologues or interest groups who use deception and specious arguments to make their case", Paul McFedries, Wordspy.com, December 16, 2009^
- Leah Ceccarelli. Manufactroversy: The Art of Creating Controversy Where None Existed Science Progress, Center for American Progress, April 11, 2008