I see many promotions of safety events, podcasts and conferences and get astounded by the ego-centrism associated with such marketing.
Rather than focus on critical ideas and methods (https://safetyrisk.net/book-launch-spor-and-semiotics-methods-to-tackle-risk/), the focus is on ego and what one can experience at the event.
Ego-centrism shapes moral judgement (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342360577_Egocentrism_Shapes_Moral_Judgements). Rather than having a focus on the community, relationship and social meaning, the focus is on self. This is risk management founded on individualism. This is the deontological ethic of safety that has a duty to safety not persons. The olde ‘what’s in it for me’ syndrome never serves safety well.
Ego-centrism is one of the strongest forces that creates perception blindness. Ego-centrism changes the way one ‘sees’ the world. This is why most of this ego-centric stuff in safety has little clue about Envisioning Risk (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/envisioning-risk-seeing-vision-and-meaning-in-risk/).
Very little of this ego-centric stuff is actually about safety. It’s about marketing using safety to make money.
Come in suckers, swipe that credit card and let’s do safety, just like we did last time but with brighter lights, bigger pictures of me and FIGJAM videos.
And still people support this stuff?
I look at so many safety podcasts and, so few are centred on critical ideas and methods, but rather it’s all about the podcaster. I know let’s put glitter on the old traditional methods and sell them as something ‘different’ or 1% safer.
How does this ego-centrism survive and thrive in safety? It is because anything promoted in Safety must not be criticised. Any criticism of Safety is deemed anti-safety. What a neat little philosophy to promote ego-centric marketing that makes zero difference to the enactment or improvement of safety. This is how misogyny, discrimination and bullying thrive in an industry blinded by safety (https://safetyrisk.net/wo-men-in-safety/ ).
Our commitment ought not be to the activity of safety but to people tackling risk! The nuance in this statement could not be more profound. Safety crusading helps no one.
Most of the stuff I see on the safety podcast market is just regurgitation of the same old tired stuff. There is nothing different, no new methods or approaches are offered to tackle risk.
Support and sponsorship for this stuff is often justified by having to be ‘’in the system to improve it’. This is of course nonsense. Some of the best change happens from without orthodoxy, not in it. Most often what happens when one stays in the system is that the stench of identity to the system sticks. This is what happens with zero. Zero can never move. Zero can never compromise. Zero is absolute and it’s a delusional to think that an individual staying in the power of a zero ideology system, could move it. (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/).
So, a sponsor of a ‘zero event’ cannot distance from zero without some kind of hypocrisy. A participant that accepts the ego-centrism of the sponsor, presenter or the ideology of the conference, aligns themselves with an ego-centric or zero-centric approach to risk. Any such identity promotes a warped notion of any balanced perception of risk.
For example: One of the worst mantras in the safety world is the saying ‘safety starts with me’. It never does, this is the ego-centrism at work, me first syndrome. It should always be ‘safety starts with us’ (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-starts-with-us/).
So, its really easy. If you see this ego-centric stuff, don’t go to it, don’t support it because its NOT about safety.