What do you think?
Rate this book
Is Shame Necessary?
Is Shame Necessary
224 pages, Paperback
First published February 17, 2015
29 people are currently reading
1240 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
May 26, 2015
Pretty interesting stuff. The author makes an important distinction between shame (a tactic that can be used to influence corporations, groups, or political groups) and guilt (something that only individuals can feel). She also asks the reader to consider separately the usefulness of shame in enforcing social norms and the possibility that those norms themselves are problematic.
She notes that, by shifting the focus of environmental responsibility from producers to consumers, corporations have cleverly found a way to charge people more money by offering products that alleviate the guilt of the individual shopper while neatly dodging the possibility of any regulations that make a meaningful environmental difference. "Sustainable" and "Organic" labels are often so unregulated as to be essentially meaningless, while customers who assuage their guilt by buying these items are then less likely to take political steps demanding real change.
Definitely worth reading, especially by anyone who is environmentally or socially conscious!
Quotes:
"As the focus shifted from supply to demand, shame on the part of corporations began to be overshadowed by guilt on the part of consumers-- as the vehicle for solving social and environmental problems... But the problems of pesticide use and worker exploitation and bottom trawling cannot be solved with an individual choice. If pesticides are absent from my food, but they are in everybody elses, they still leach into our shared water supply." p 7
"Guilt's power is limited, but it can also be profitable if a niche set of goods and services can capitalize on relieving the ill feeling." p 8
"Sometimes people just don't want to become the person the group wants them to be, and other times they cannot. The volatility and variability of how people react to social disapproval is part of shaming's liability" p 24
"Shaming is a nonviolent form of resistance that anyone can use... But shaming requires the attention of the audience, and attention is a zero-sum game" p 26
"Guilt is the cheapest form of social enforcement, because the norm has been internalized and is self-enforcing" p 31
"Shame often extends to our conception of our whole self-- the type of person we are-- whereas embarrassment is associated with an involuntary, isolated incident." p 40
"[S]mall changes made by big institutions can make a serious difference-- whereas small changes made by individual consumers cannot.... Getting one single company to reduce its emissions by just 10 percent has a greater impact than getting every single American to agree to live in the dark." p 58
"...people tend to calibrate their actions to what they see or hear is common behavior, in the same way they pick up grammar or accents." p 78
"Shame is more powerful than guilt when it comes to establishing new norms." p 82
Quoting Michael Sandel "'A market economy is a tool-- a valuable and effective tool-- for organizing productive activity. A market society is a way of life in which market values seep into every aspect of human endeavor.'Norms have now come up against their market "value, when in fact some might (or should) be priceless." p 89
"Shame's performance is optimized when people reform their behavior in response to its threat and remain part of the group" p 99
Quoting Michael Goldhaber: "'the economy of attention-- not information-- is the natural economy of cyberspace.'" p 137
She notes that, by shifting the focus of environmental responsibility from producers to consumers, corporations have cleverly found a way to charge people more money by offering products that alleviate the guilt of the individual shopper while neatly dodging the possibility of any regulations that make a meaningful environmental difference. "Sustainable" and "Organic" labels are often so unregulated as to be essentially meaningless, while customers who assuage their guilt by buying these items are then less likely to take political steps demanding real change.
Definitely worth reading, especially by anyone who is environmentally or socially conscious!
Quotes:
"As the focus shifted from supply to demand, shame on the part of corporations began to be overshadowed by guilt on the part of consumers-- as the vehicle for solving social and environmental problems... But the problems of pesticide use and worker exploitation and bottom trawling cannot be solved with an individual choice. If pesticides are absent from my food, but they are in everybody elses, they still leach into our shared water supply." p 7
"Guilt's power is limited, but it can also be profitable if a niche set of goods and services can capitalize on relieving the ill feeling." p 8
"Sometimes people just don't want to become the person the group wants them to be, and other times they cannot. The volatility and variability of how people react to social disapproval is part of shaming's liability" p 24
"Shaming is a nonviolent form of resistance that anyone can use... But shaming requires the attention of the audience, and attention is a zero-sum game" p 26
"Guilt is the cheapest form of social enforcement, because the norm has been internalized and is self-enforcing" p 31
"Shame often extends to our conception of our whole self-- the type of person we are-- whereas embarrassment is associated with an involuntary, isolated incident." p 40
"[S]mall changes made by big institutions can make a serious difference-- whereas small changes made by individual consumers cannot.... Getting one single company to reduce its emissions by just 10 percent has a greater impact than getting every single American to agree to live in the dark." p 58
"...people tend to calibrate their actions to what they see or hear is common behavior, in the same way they pick up grammar or accents." p 78
"Shame is more powerful than guilt when it comes to establishing new norms." p 82
Quoting Michael Sandel "'A market economy is a tool-- a valuable and effective tool-- for organizing productive activity. A market society is a way of life in which market values seep into every aspect of human endeavor.'Norms have now come up against their market "value, when in fact some might (or should) be priceless." p 89
"Shame's performance is optimized when people reform their behavior in response to its threat and remain part of the group" p 99
Quoting Michael Goldhaber: "'the economy of attention-- not information-- is the natural economy of cyberspace.'" p 137
July 6, 2017
A thought-provoking book about a topic we seem too ashamed to talk about, at least rationally. Probably the most important part of the book shows the limitations of guilt, which is personal and, therefore, leads us to act as consumers rather than as activists seeking to change the way things are done. Jacquet wants us to engage not just as consumers through buying organic, dolphin-safe, free-range, etc., but as citizens working for legislation and regulation of food, fishing, and animals, etc. This can sometimes be done via shaming, that is, by threatening the reputation of those companies and individuals that are harming animals and the environment, and whose livelihood depends on their products being seen as good. Jacquet rushes through the problems with shame, especially the way it can be used online, but these issues receive a lot more press.
January 3, 2019
This short book was so unnecessarily bloated it felt like a collection of essays strung together in a haphazard fashion. I don't know how many times I read the same premises and conclusions
July 9, 2020
Great book, but I'm torn on her argument.
As someone who was unfairly publicly shamed in 2019, I'm always trying to learn more about the subject. The author does a great job discussing effective shaming, and the core of the book is about getting big corporations to do the right thing, but when it comes to a more personal level is when the water gets mucked up.
Aside from learning more about shaming, I read a lot on moral philosophy and psychology. The authors argument is that shaming helps divert people from moral transgressions by making examples of others. The issue is that many people don't understand the spectrum of morality. What's a moral transgression to one group is completely fine and justified to another, and that's the issue we need to address.
If this is a topic you're interested in, I highly recommend the books The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt and Moral Tribes by Joshua Greene
As someone who was unfairly publicly shamed in 2019, I'm always trying to learn more about the subject. The author does a great job discussing effective shaming, and the core of the book is about getting big corporations to do the right thing, but when it comes to a more personal level is when the water gets mucked up.
Aside from learning more about shaming, I read a lot on moral philosophy and psychology. The authors argument is that shaming helps divert people from moral transgressions by making examples of others. The issue is that many people don't understand the spectrum of morality. What's a moral transgression to one group is completely fine and justified to another, and that's the issue we need to address.
If this is a topic you're interested in, I highly recommend the books The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt and Moral Tribes by Joshua Greene
September 9, 2021
Years ago I had a boyfriend who was appalled when I even tried to discuss the subject of using shame as a means to punish people for doing horrible things when the law fails to do so. I think he, like many people, had an adverse reaction to the concept of implementing shame as a means to changing behavior because he feared being shamed for his own behavior. This book isn't about the fear of being shamed or how to recover from having been shamed, but rather it's an argument for using shame as a "nonviolent form of resistance."
Jennifer Jacquet has done an incredible job of discussing shame as a means to not only create new norms that benefit humanity, but to alter the behavior of people who deviate from those norms. She distinguishes differences among shame, guilt, embarrassment and transparency, arguing that though feeling guilt is more prevalent than feeling shame in western cultures, guilt has limited power and is more about self-regulation than changes that benefit a group. Guilt is also a tool of consumerism, which places the burden of change on individuals rather than on corporations or governments e.g. "green guilt" which leads people to buy expensive products that are supposed to be better for the environment. Shaming a water polluting corporation, for example, can lead to changes that benefit everyone and also creates a new norm for what is acceptable regarding a corporation's environmental responsibility.
Jacquet acknowledges that shame sometimes doesn't work because "people just don't want to become the person the group wants them to be, and other times they cannot" adding that some people "do not conform to to social norms because they cannot afford to care" or "because they can afford not to care" highlighting how shame can be very different depending upon your socio-economic status. Sometimes shaming backfires and what was meant to be a source of shame becomes a source of pride or even humor. Also, some people are incapable of feeling shame.
She provides "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Shaming" which is fascinating and practical. Of course, she discusses how the Internet has altered shame and shaming greatly because of the speed at which a wide audience can be reached, which leads to the problem of proportionality: minor offenses that are recorded and shared can lead to greater shame and punishment than much greater offenses that are not recorded or shared. Jacquet states that optimal shaming doesn't destroy anyone's life and that where there is a formal means of punishment i.e. the law, shaming should not be used.
This book is fascinating and well-written and has really challenged me to think about the concept of and uses for shaming. I tended to equate shame and guilt and saw them both as so personal, but now I am rethinking shame as a means to makes big changes that benefit humanity and this one planet we have to share.
Jennifer Jacquet has done an incredible job of discussing shame as a means to not only create new norms that benefit humanity, but to alter the behavior of people who deviate from those norms. She distinguishes differences among shame, guilt, embarrassment and transparency, arguing that though feeling guilt is more prevalent than feeling shame in western cultures, guilt has limited power and is more about self-regulation than changes that benefit a group. Guilt is also a tool of consumerism, which places the burden of change on individuals rather than on corporations or governments e.g. "green guilt" which leads people to buy expensive products that are supposed to be better for the environment. Shaming a water polluting corporation, for example, can lead to changes that benefit everyone and also creates a new norm for what is acceptable regarding a corporation's environmental responsibility.
Jacquet acknowledges that shame sometimes doesn't work because "people just don't want to become the person the group wants them to be, and other times they cannot" adding that some people "do not conform to to social norms because they cannot afford to care" or "because they can afford not to care" highlighting how shame can be very different depending upon your socio-economic status. Sometimes shaming backfires and what was meant to be a source of shame becomes a source of pride or even humor. Also, some people are incapable of feeling shame.
She provides "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Shaming" which is fascinating and practical. Of course, she discusses how the Internet has altered shame and shaming greatly because of the speed at which a wide audience can be reached, which leads to the problem of proportionality: minor offenses that are recorded and shared can lead to greater shame and punishment than much greater offenses that are not recorded or shared. Jacquet states that optimal shaming doesn't destroy anyone's life and that where there is a formal means of punishment i.e. the law, shaming should not be used.
This book is fascinating and well-written and has really challenged me to think about the concept of and uses for shaming. I tended to equate shame and guilt and saw them both as so personal, but now I am rethinking shame as a means to makes big changes that benefit humanity and this one planet we have to share.
November 22, 2023
A really important reflection. Often we hear about shame being a hindering individual emotion in those with mental health issues. Whilst this might be true, this book focuses on shame as an important interpersonal emotion to establish societal shame. Exploring the distinction between shame and guilt, unhealthy and useful shaming, Jacquet gives us a theoretical groundwork for understanding the benefits and limitations of shame.
April 8, 2020
По названию ожидал психологии или философии морали. Оказалось, книга ближе всего к поведенческой экономике. В книге много фактуры, но мало идей. Понравилась только глава 3 с критикой зелёного потребления.
Много критики современных корпораций с левых позиций. Есть глава с рекондациями по воздействию на нарушителей норм. На мой взгляд, критика уместна, но привлечение морали (стыда и пр.) как и в других вопросах не оправдано.
Много критики современных корпораций с левых позиций. Есть глава с рекондациями по воздействию на нарушителей норм. На мой взгляд, критика уместна, но привлечение морали (стыда и пр.) как и в других вопросах не оправдано.
November 11, 2017
Full of liberal propaganda. Almost every page contains some reaffirmation that this author is obviously liberal and could never write a book without banging us over the heads with her leftist ideals. "Green," climate change, Al Gore, electric vehicles, environmental guilt, ad nauseum. This is what publishing has come to!
October 3, 2020
Following a public boycott of canned tuna, the tuna industry reformed its fishing methods to stop killing dolphins. What are the uses and limits of shaming? That’s what Jennifer Jacquet discusses in this book.
Shame is defined as “exposing a transgressor to public disapproval.” It is used to hold people to group standards with the goal of deterring the violation of norms. When the targets are remorseful, they can reintegrate into the group. Research suggest that avoiding shame is a stronger incentive for cooperation than achieving honor.
There is a risk, however, that shaming a person to conform to group norms may encourage him to leave the group, perhaps to join the competition. For example, I changed political parties in the Illinois House after being shamed by my old party for my independence. The shaming method was to vote down an innocuous bill I had picked up from a GOP senator, a bill that had passed unanimously in the Senate and had no known opposition. Its defeat in the House by more than 100 votes qualified me for a dubious honor -- membership in the Century Club. A few weeks later, I walked across the aisle.
Jacquet provides guidelines that help make shaming effective. She offers examples of where it works, such as in California and twenty other states that use the threat of shaming to collect back taxes. The names of the biggest tax delinquents are published, after the targets have been duly warned. California alone has collected several hundred million dollars from persons who want to stay off the list.
Education alone does not change behavior much. Instead, we are influenced by what we perceive as the common behavior of others. Where litter is common, people are more likely to litter. Telling college freshman not to drink excessively has less effect than informing them that most of their peers do not drink as much as they think.
Punishment reinforces norms. Where enforcement does not exist, norms are less likely to be strictly followed. Even a pair of eyes posted in a prominent place influences behavior.
Shaming can be abused, Jacquet recognizes, especially on social media, where it can be done anonymously and to an audience of millions. When the purported transgression is false, then an innocent party suffers, such as the D.C. pizza parlor in 2016 that bogus rumors on Facebook claimed was the site of a pedophilia ring.
Shaming alone also has its limits when it comes to broad reforms. The hole in the ozone layer caused by chlorofluorcarbon was documented in 1974. The hole was not reduced when consumers started to buy products labeled CFC free. Instead, it took an international ban on CFOs to get the job done. Likewise, fuel economy in motor vehicles does not improve due to consumer demand, but in response to federal efficiency standards.
Readers of this short book will have a better idea of the uses, abuses and limits of public shame. ###
Shame is defined as “exposing a transgressor to public disapproval.” It is used to hold people to group standards with the goal of deterring the violation of norms. When the targets are remorseful, they can reintegrate into the group. Research suggest that avoiding shame is a stronger incentive for cooperation than achieving honor.
There is a risk, however, that shaming a person to conform to group norms may encourage him to leave the group, perhaps to join the competition. For example, I changed political parties in the Illinois House after being shamed by my old party for my independence. The shaming method was to vote down an innocuous bill I had picked up from a GOP senator, a bill that had passed unanimously in the Senate and had no known opposition. Its defeat in the House by more than 100 votes qualified me for a dubious honor -- membership in the Century Club. A few weeks later, I walked across the aisle.
Jacquet provides guidelines that help make shaming effective. She offers examples of where it works, such as in California and twenty other states that use the threat of shaming to collect back taxes. The names of the biggest tax delinquents are published, after the targets have been duly warned. California alone has collected several hundred million dollars from persons who want to stay off the list.
Education alone does not change behavior much. Instead, we are influenced by what we perceive as the common behavior of others. Where litter is common, people are more likely to litter. Telling college freshman not to drink excessively has less effect than informing them that most of their peers do not drink as much as they think.
Punishment reinforces norms. Where enforcement does not exist, norms are less likely to be strictly followed. Even a pair of eyes posted in a prominent place influences behavior.
Shaming can be abused, Jacquet recognizes, especially on social media, where it can be done anonymously and to an audience of millions. When the purported transgression is false, then an innocent party suffers, such as the D.C. pizza parlor in 2016 that bogus rumors on Facebook claimed was the site of a pedophilia ring.
Shaming alone also has its limits when it comes to broad reforms. The hole in the ozone layer caused by chlorofluorcarbon was documented in 1974. The hole was not reduced when consumers started to buy products labeled CFC free. Instead, it took an international ban on CFOs to get the job done. Likewise, fuel economy in motor vehicles does not improve due to consumer demand, but in response to federal efficiency standards.
Readers of this short book will have a better idea of the uses, abuses and limits of public shame. ###
March 11, 2022
Shame is unavoidable, but whether it is ‘necessary’ is less clear. The book includes a lot of interesting material but it does not always press the hard questions.
The author distinguishes between a ‘guilt’ which is a private failure with regard to personal standards, and a ‘shame’ which is a public failure to meet community standards. Is one notion ‘better’ than the other? That is not addressed. Instead we hear about an East (shame) West (guilt) split, and a historical evolution from shame to guilt in individualistic societies. For example, ‘Guilt’ does not appear in the Old Testament and Shakespeare uses the word 33 times, whilst he uses ‘shame’ 344 times.
Yet the development of (individualistic) human rights, and the occurrence of collectivised atrocities against populations, raises interesting questions about the ethics of collectivised concepts like ‘shame.’ But those questions are not pursued.
Instead, there are a significant number of anecdotes which show that consumer shaming can be useful, but it is ultimately not enough without government action. For example, dolphin-safe tuna saved a few dolphins, but many people continued to buy dolphin-unsafe tuna. And the ozone layer was not saved by (some) consumers refusing to buy products with CFC. It was saved by international treaties.
We hear that ‘shaming’ seems to have a well developed evolutionary role in societies as diverse as indigenous tribes to Californian cafes. Generally, around 2/3 of gossip is about other people, with around 90% of it being negative shaming. So shaming has a degree of practical unavoidability.
But shame also has a limited effectiveness. It has raised (missing) taxes in California, and it has reduced traffic offences in Bogota, but each of these ‘wins’ are examples of reducing a problem, rather than solving it.
The limited effectiveness of shame is a problem, yet it is the core strategy for international politics, as there is often no other way of enforcing a standard. For example Amnesty International ‘shamed’ the US into ending the execution of Juveniles in 2005.
The book explores examples of how ‘shame’ is misused to bully people (ie internet trolling). But it doesn’t press the issue of how shame (and/or guilt) creates false and misleading standards for people, as perhaps in cases of body shaming.
What was missing from the book was an evaluation, or judgement, of the issues. Should people engage in ‘shaming’ gossip, or is that an undesirable behaviour that they should try to change? Should governments ‘shame’ their poplations? Should international politics be waged through shaming, or should the world try to do it differently (with trade embargos, etc)?
Overall, the book is accessible and readable, and it contains interesting information. But it became a repetitive catalogue of examples, rather than carefully martialled case studies, driving an argument towards a conclusion.
The author distinguishes between a ‘guilt’ which is a private failure with regard to personal standards, and a ‘shame’ which is a public failure to meet community standards. Is one notion ‘better’ than the other? That is not addressed. Instead we hear about an East (shame) West (guilt) split, and a historical evolution from shame to guilt in individualistic societies. For example, ‘Guilt’ does not appear in the Old Testament and Shakespeare uses the word 33 times, whilst he uses ‘shame’ 344 times.
Yet the development of (individualistic) human rights, and the occurrence of collectivised atrocities against populations, raises interesting questions about the ethics of collectivised concepts like ‘shame.’ But those questions are not pursued.
Instead, there are a significant number of anecdotes which show that consumer shaming can be useful, but it is ultimately not enough without government action. For example, dolphin-safe tuna saved a few dolphins, but many people continued to buy dolphin-unsafe tuna. And the ozone layer was not saved by (some) consumers refusing to buy products with CFC. It was saved by international treaties.
We hear that ‘shaming’ seems to have a well developed evolutionary role in societies as diverse as indigenous tribes to Californian cafes. Generally, around 2/3 of gossip is about other people, with around 90% of it being negative shaming. So shaming has a degree of practical unavoidability.
But shame also has a limited effectiveness. It has raised (missing) taxes in California, and it has reduced traffic offences in Bogota, but each of these ‘wins’ are examples of reducing a problem, rather than solving it.
The limited effectiveness of shame is a problem, yet it is the core strategy for international politics, as there is often no other way of enforcing a standard. For example Amnesty International ‘shamed’ the US into ending the execution of Juveniles in 2005.
The book explores examples of how ‘shame’ is misused to bully people (ie internet trolling). But it doesn’t press the issue of how shame (and/or guilt) creates false and misleading standards for people, as perhaps in cases of body shaming.
What was missing from the book was an evaluation, or judgement, of the issues. Should people engage in ‘shaming’ gossip, or is that an undesirable behaviour that they should try to change? Should governments ‘shame’ their poplations? Should international politics be waged through shaming, or should the world try to do it differently (with trade embargos, etc)?
Overall, the book is accessible and readable, and it contains interesting information. But it became a repetitive catalogue of examples, rather than carefully martialled case studies, driving an argument towards a conclusion.
October 31, 2019
(Review first published in Shelf Awareness)
In Is Shame Necessary, Jennifer Jacquet argues that shame can be an effective tool to change harmful social, economic and environmental practices. Shame's effectiveness, she posits, relies on a number of factors, including audience, focus and implementation. But not everyone has the ability to wield this old tool; used poorly, it can be counter-productive.
Jacquet--a professor of environmental studies at New York University--provides many examples, among them a public shaming campaign against the tuna-fishing industry for the mass killings of dolphins in tuna nets. The voluntary "dolphin-safe" practices (better nets that reduced the number of dolphins caught and killed) put the focus of fixing the problem on individuals who could boycott tuna and only roundaboutly on the groups engaged in the damaging practice. Because the standards were voluntary, the impact was small until the later enactment of federal regulations mandating dolphin-friendly fishing.
When it comes to large-scale problems, Jacquet says, shame needs to come from a source of influence. A successful example was the state of California's threat to publish a list of the top 500 business tax delinquents. Those who paid their outstanding taxes were taken off the list before publication. The state has recovered approximately $301 million in unpaid taxes since 2007 as a result.
Jacquet offers guidelines to use shame as an instrument for good, and provides concrete examples for how American society can use public shaming to ensure it remains an effective tool.
In Is Shame Necessary, Jennifer Jacquet argues that shame can be an effective tool to change harmful social, economic and environmental practices. Shame's effectiveness, she posits, relies on a number of factors, including audience, focus and implementation. But not everyone has the ability to wield this old tool; used poorly, it can be counter-productive.
Jacquet--a professor of environmental studies at New York University--provides many examples, among them a public shaming campaign against the tuna-fishing industry for the mass killings of dolphins in tuna nets. The voluntary "dolphin-safe" practices (better nets that reduced the number of dolphins caught and killed) put the focus of fixing the problem on individuals who could boycott tuna and only roundaboutly on the groups engaged in the damaging practice. Because the standards were voluntary, the impact was small until the later enactment of federal regulations mandating dolphin-friendly fishing.
When it comes to large-scale problems, Jacquet says, shame needs to come from a source of influence. A successful example was the state of California's threat to publish a list of the top 500 business tax delinquents. Those who paid their outstanding taxes were taken off the list before publication. The state has recovered approximately $301 million in unpaid taxes since 2007 as a result.
Jacquet offers guidelines to use shame as an instrument for good, and provides concrete examples for how American society can use public shaming to ensure it remains an effective tool.
November 29, 2024
Very interesting insight.
I really appreciated the author's clear distinction between shame and guilt and the use of accessible language to highlight the "bad apples" we should be concerned about—especially within the context of her expertise in environmental issues. Her knowledge and research on this topic really adds credibility and impact to the book.
However, I found myself more skeptical about the practical application of shame.
Contrary to the book's description of an 'optimistic' outlook, I was left with a more pessimistic view of shame's effectiveness, especially today.
In an era where ragebait thrives and shamelessness is often celebrated—or even seen as essential for success—I'm uncertain if shame (or the the application described in the book) still holds any meaningful influence.
(For context this book was published in 2015, before events like the Trump presidency normalized certain values and behaviors. So perhaps, this book was meant for that time and it's a bit unfair to judge it now...).
Overall, I learned a lot of great things from reading this book.
However, I fear that this work is somewhat outdated.
I come away a bit wiser, yet still feeling hopeless and somewhat defeated lol.
But I still feel like people need to read this though...It's a great catch-up to what we need to focus on.
I may need to explore the author's more recent works to understand her current perspective and stance on shame. Perhaps, an updated version or a new edition of this book could better address the complexities of our reality today.
I really appreciated the author's clear distinction between shame and guilt and the use of accessible language to highlight the "bad apples" we should be concerned about—especially within the context of her expertise in environmental issues. Her knowledge and research on this topic really adds credibility and impact to the book.
However, I found myself more skeptical about the practical application of shame.
Contrary to the book's description of an 'optimistic' outlook, I was left with a more pessimistic view of shame's effectiveness, especially today.
In an era where ragebait thrives and shamelessness is often celebrated—or even seen as essential for success—I'm uncertain if shame (or the the application described in the book) still holds any meaningful influence.
(For context this book was published in 2015, before events like the Trump presidency normalized certain values and behaviors. So perhaps, this book was meant for that time and it's a bit unfair to judge it now...).
Overall, I learned a lot of great things from reading this book.
However, I fear that this work is somewhat outdated.
I come away a bit wiser, yet still feeling hopeless and somewhat defeated lol.
But I still feel like people need to read this though...It's a great catch-up to what we need to focus on.
I may need to explore the author's more recent works to understand her current perspective and stance on shame. Perhaps, an updated version or a new edition of this book could better address the complexities of our reality today.
April 24, 2021
I have a complicated relationship with shame, so I got this book partly to challenge myself and put shame in the context of its uses. I think that it was partially successful: it did help me better appreciate shaming as a technology, and I think the framework of shaming as a tool specifically to help solve collective problems is a good one. That said, I think the final summation was weak.
1. The author has a throwaway line about the need for due process to make shaming effective and acceptable, but she doesn't elaborate on what that means. Given that many examples in the book don't involve any kind of *formal* due process, it felt to me like a concession, and a frustrating one.
2. Not unrelated, I found myself continually asking where shaming like that of the #MeToo movement fit in to her framework. Even in the discussion of online shaming, I didn't feel like she offered much that would contextualize it.
3. The author is an environmental academic and activist, so unsurprisingly her best examples come from this realm. Though she had one or two good examples from organized labor, I felt like she didn't do the best job of addressing the role shaming can play in social issues, generally.
So, this was interesting, but I feel like the book as a whole didn't quite live up to the radical expectations it set early on.
1. The author has a throwaway line about the need for due process to make shaming effective and acceptable, but she doesn't elaborate on what that means. Given that many examples in the book don't involve any kind of *formal* due process, it felt to me like a concession, and a frustrating one.
2. Not unrelated, I found myself continually asking where shaming like that of the #MeToo movement fit in to her framework. Even in the discussion of online shaming, I didn't feel like she offered much that would contextualize it.
3. The author is an environmental academic and activist, so unsurprisingly her best examples come from this realm. Though she had one or two good examples from organized labor, I felt like she didn't do the best job of addressing the role shaming can play in social issues, generally.
So, this was interesting, but I feel like the book as a whole didn't quite live up to the radical expectations it set early on.
July 3, 2025
An interesting look at how shame can be used to catalyze social change. Contrasted with guilt, shame is a public phenomenon and Jacquet argues it can be a useful tool in achieving desired social outcomes.
One of the most important themes is that social change should focus on our systems, rather than on individual consumers. For those who feel guilt or sadness about harm caused by certain products (e.g. dolphin being killed as bycatch in tuna fishing), it is tempting to use our consumption habits to try to make change. But those willing to change their consumption will only ever be a small percentage of total consumers, so real change can only be brought about by going after the corporations, systems, and laws themselves.
Jacquet's '7 habits of highly effective shaming' provide an important framework for how shame should be implemented as an effective tool. Jacquet outlines the extent of the modern human predicament- an expansive global civilization that has created myriad problems we've failed to address- and calls for the use of shame as an important tool to use in the fight for our only home.
One of the most important themes is that social change should focus on our systems, rather than on individual consumers. For those who feel guilt or sadness about harm caused by certain products (e.g. dolphin being killed as bycatch in tuna fishing), it is tempting to use our consumption habits to try to make change. But those willing to change their consumption will only ever be a small percentage of total consumers, so real change can only be brought about by going after the corporations, systems, and laws themselves.
Jacquet's '7 habits of highly effective shaming' provide an important framework for how shame should be implemented as an effective tool. Jacquet outlines the extent of the modern human predicament- an expansive global civilization that has created myriad problems we've failed to address- and calls for the use of shame as an important tool to use in the fight for our only home.
June 28, 2021
An interesting read on the possibilities of shame as a tool for institutional/systemic change. The author does a good job of distinguishing between guilt and shame. Guilt being individualized while shame is public. Guilt will not work in the face of global corporations that are legally considered people but don't have people feelings, like guilt. Shame, on the other hand, can be considered a non-violent form of protest that can persuade faceless organizations to comply to society's standards. The author is an environmentalist so her examples and her use of shame comes from that point of view. Can we save the world from environmental collapse using shame? Maybe. One of the chapters outlines the 7 habits of successful shaming. Could that be a road map to successful environmentalism? I think it is possible but it will still have to jump the hurdle of people caring first. And it has to be a whole bunch of people that care, just like any other movement. Still, a good book on the possibilities.
July 18, 2017
An important book for anyone interested in making a world a better place. Jacquet does a wonderful job getting at the heart of how essential shame is at regulating behavior and how necessary it is to target shame in an effective and responsible manner. It's an easy read too--not because it's fluff, but, rather, because she efficiently and directly gets her point across. Jacquet is respectful of the readers time and she doesn't waste words or build unnecessarily long stories. The book loses a little bit of steam towards the end (a very common theme among pop-science), but not enough to feel disappointed by it. You are left thinking there's a lot more to the picture of managing shame (particularly w/r/t Trump and partisan politics). Still, this is highly recommended.
October 5, 2022
Jennifer Jacquet writes a very needed book on how we coerce and shift companies and people when laws aren't - with the tool of shame.
One point I loved was how our individual loving society tends to focus more on guilt (you feeling bad about yourself) and less about shame (you feeling bad because of how others see you) and how that turn changes into a question of "conscious consumption," which of course only affects a tiny part of the market and also reaps more profits for the companies.
The book has many tips and tricks on how to use shaming effectively and efficently.
We should put shame back in the toolbox when looking at how to address the climate crisis!
One point I loved was how our individual loving society tends to focus more on guilt (you feeling bad about yourself) and less about shame (you feeling bad because of how others see you) and how that turn changes into a question of "conscious consumption," which of course only affects a tiny part of the market and also reaps more profits for the companies.
The book has many tips and tricks on how to use shaming effectively and efficently.
We should put shame back in the toolbox when looking at how to address the climate crisis!
April 14, 2020
I was really excited to read this book as I agree that public shaming can be beneficial for environmentalist/ animal rights causes. That being said, I think I was expecting a bit more in-detail look into why shaming can be effective. There were interesting bits about the difference of guilt and shame but the majority of the book reads like a list of cases where shaming worked/ didn't work and why (It's possible that this is a consequence of a trade publishing house's (Vintage) editorial demands for keeping it simple). It is still a necessary read for a general audience but if you are already interested in activism or are in the academia, I would suggest skipping the book and just reading Jennifer Jacquet's articles on the subject.
February 21, 2021
Musing on the specificity of shame to cultural norms, author Jennifer Jacquet recalls a joke circulating among Russians at the time revelations were rocking Washington over Bill Clinton’s sexual liaisons with Monica Lewinsky. If such thing happened with their alcoholic artery-hardened President Boris Yeltsin Russian workers would stop in their tracks, lay down their tools, and declare a national holiday.
Read
February 6, 2021In a time of 'cancel culture' Jennifer Jacquet hones in the role of shame in society and how its a positive force but also could be negative. She lays down a compelling argument on how it can be best used to drive society forwards. She lays her biases in the application (on what topics) bare however, the mechanisms of use of shame still provide value to take forward for the reader
Read
February 25, 2025Offers seven habits for effective shaming. Like Malcom Gladwell books there is a mix of anecdotes and research. Focused on American context.
Left wondering how to overcome the bad apple phenomenon when individuals behaving badly becomes contagious. Also more aware of the challenge that scale introduces like living in big cities or the Internet.
Left wondering how to overcome the bad apple phenomenon when individuals behaving badly becomes contagious. Also more aware of the challenge that scale introduces like living in big cities or the Internet.
September 12, 2018
I liked this book. It was a very interesting take on how shame has been used in modern culture and the examples were modern and relatable. Turns out we use shame to create social order very often. After reading an awful book on the same subject, I found this one refreshing.
October 7, 2018
When I think of shaming someone, I think of cyber-bullying and ostracization, not as a tool for environmentalists or policy-makers. This book quite changes that a lot. Interesting read, even the writing styles does not to my taste, but the ideas are good and well-explored
February 9, 2021
Should be must read for all nascent organizers; has several interesting point for long-timers as well. The age of the book makes some of the references less impactful, but the material is still strong - in particular the beginning and last chapters.
October 27, 2021
It’s an interesting read. Nothing very original yet it gives lots of cases to support the book’s argument.
I also consider the language quite dry, except on certain (limited) parts.
It delivers what it said it will. Nothing less, nothing more. Not bad.
I also consider the language quite dry, except on certain (limited) parts.
It delivers what it said it will. Nothing less, nothing more. Not bad.
June 8, 2018
The book is data heavy which is nice but lacks passion and reads like a textbook.
January 28, 2020
Interesting book that looks at the power of shame, guilt, and social emotions in enacting social change. Focuses heavily on the environmentalist movement. Definitely an interesting read.
June 21, 2020
must read book.
May 2, 2025
3.5 I actually found this really interesting! Also interesting how dated sections about the internet feel, since it was published 10 years ago.
Read
August 15, 2015Easy-to-read, well-organized, and teeming with interesting examples, Jacquet's book was more than worth my time. It is too bad that it was overshadowed by more-famous Jon Ronson's similar book published at the same time...but maybe it got more attention for being part of a movement. Who knows -- but I recommend this book heartily.
Jacquet, an NYU professor, starts her examination of the use of moral conscience with important definitions/distinctions that would satisfy a philosopher: shame ("exposing a transgressor to public disapproval" [9]) vs. guilt (more about the conscience and the "internal voice nagging its owner", so less group-focused; described by Jacquet as more suitable "for cultures that champion the individual" [11]), another distinction from embarrassment (described mainly through its external markers, which may sound like a cop-out but which struck me as thoroughly respectful of the slimness of the distinction, on 37-39), East vs. West, norming, etc. Her emphasis on clarifying her terms was very satisfying.
The anecdotes are essential. She starts the book with the story of the shaming of the tuna industry for the slaughter of dolphins and wrings useful stories out of a tremendous range of research (some of the best details, which include her Dan Ariely-like explication of various social science experiments) and historical events (Bhopal, Haiti, various tribes, Occupy Wall Street, Martin Luther King Jr., California tax dodgers, Alan Sokal, Bogota mayor Antanas Mockus, inflatable rats, Ted Haggard, Bruce Ismay, the list goes on and on). There are philosophers like Martha Nussbaum, politicians, religious figures, activists like "Jude Finisterra", literary figures like Hawthorne's Hester Prynne. The examination of various aspects of shaming incorporates lucid, fascinating data and words, such as Theodore Roosevelt's 1913 comment about the importance of unimpeachability for the prestigious person whose moral weight can be leveraged to move people: "No man can lead a public career really worth leading, no man can act with rugged independence in serious crises, nor strike at great abuses, nor afford to make powerful and unscrupulous foes, if he is himself vulnerable in his private character" (112). Such erudition -- illuminating topics far beyond "Shame" -- serves this book very well: it is always aggressively, concisely sparking thought and connection.
The book is more than simply entertaining or informative. It wants us to know how to get shaming to work and avoid ways that it undermines its best prospects. Jacquet gives (and repeats) a set of 7 "Habits of Highly Effective Shaming":
Jacquet introduces enough exceptions to undermine this apparently comprehensive list somewhat, but the point is still made. "The more social the transgression," she writes in summing up, "the sweeter the shame, because the audience is inherently interested in the bad behavior. Ultimately, shaming might not be enough to solve the problem, but the greater fallacy, particularly for collective-action problems like climate change and overfishing, is the idea that we can individualize them." This is a clear-eyed, respectful, and ultimately practical book.
Long live shaming!
Jacquet, an NYU professor, starts her examination of the use of moral conscience with important definitions/distinctions that would satisfy a philosopher: shame ("exposing a transgressor to public disapproval" [9]) vs. guilt (more about the conscience and the "internal voice nagging its owner", so less group-focused; described by Jacquet as more suitable "for cultures that champion the individual" [11]), another distinction from embarrassment (described mainly through its external markers, which may sound like a cop-out but which struck me as thoroughly respectful of the slimness of the distinction, on 37-39), East vs. West, norming, etc. Her emphasis on clarifying her terms was very satisfying.
The anecdotes are essential. She starts the book with the story of the shaming of the tuna industry for the slaughter of dolphins and wrings useful stories out of a tremendous range of research (some of the best details, which include her Dan Ariely-like explication of various social science experiments) and historical events (Bhopal, Haiti, various tribes, Occupy Wall Street, Martin Luther King Jr., California tax dodgers, Alan Sokal, Bogota mayor Antanas Mockus, inflatable rats, Ted Haggard, Bruce Ismay, the list goes on and on). There are philosophers like Martha Nussbaum, politicians, religious figures, activists like "Jude Finisterra", literary figures like Hawthorne's Hester Prynne. The examination of various aspects of shaming incorporates lucid, fascinating data and words, such as Theodore Roosevelt's 1913 comment about the importance of unimpeachability for the prestigious person whose moral weight can be leveraged to move people: "No man can lead a public career really worth leading, no man can act with rugged independence in serious crises, nor strike at great abuses, nor afford to make powerful and unscrupulous foes, if he is himself vulnerable in his private character" (112). Such erudition -- illuminating topics far beyond "Shame" -- serves this book very well: it is always aggressively, concisely sparking thought and connection.
The book is more than simply entertaining or informative. It wants us to know how to get shaming to work and avoid ways that it undermines its best prospects. Jacquet gives (and repeats) a set of 7 "Habits of Highly Effective Shaming":
the transgression should...
1. concern the audience
2. deviate widely from desired behavior
3. not be expected to be formally punished
the transgressor should...
4. be sensitive to the group doing the shaming
and the shaming should...
5. come from a respected source
6. be directed where possible benefits are highest
7. be implemented conscientiously (100, 173)
Jacquet introduces enough exceptions to undermine this apparently comprehensive list somewhat, but the point is still made. "The more social the transgression," she writes in summing up, "the sweeter the shame, because the audience is inherently interested in the bad behavior. Ultimately, shaming might not be enough to solve the problem, but the greater fallacy, particularly for collective-action problems like climate change and overfishing, is the idea that we can individualize them." This is a clear-eyed, respectful, and ultimately practical book.
Long live shaming!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews