Deceptive design patterns ("Dark Patterns") are everywhere.
Recently (2023 and 2024), the consumer protections and advertising standards organisations in India have issued guidelines which will theoretically force publishers to adhere to more ethical practices, backed up with potential penalties.
Of course, it's a shame that for-profit organisations need, "do this or we'll punish you" to stop their bad behaviour, but capitalism gonna capitalise.
What do you think? Do you think this is the sort of thing that should be regulated? Can it be regulated, or is it so vague as to be unenforcable?
Further reading:
https://bootcamp.uxdesign.cc/dark-patterns-are-now-illegal-in-india-6b3c35c5ce50
Top comments (7)
I think it's complicated,
Some UX patterns meant to 'in good will' promote specific better choices could, in different circumstances be considered dark patterns when used to benefit the designer at the expense of the end user.
Legislation should be a last resort and must be carefully considered. Also it must err on the side of permissiveness and risk some bad actors to escape consequences rather than incorrectly punish those not acting in bad faith. (allow for false negatives and not false positives in identifying breaches.) If and When the uncaught breaches are beyond what is socially allowable, then small revisions to the statute can be made to account for those while still attempting to prevent casting too wide a net.
Because this is related to each person's subjective experience, the amount of grey area is very wide. "I know a dark pattern when I see it" level wide. Thus it should be treated with a similarly nuanced approach.
As others have said, Name & Shame is good, education to the users to identify and avoid the patterns and the organizations that insist on them.
I guess the efforts to standardise Unsubscribes has worked pretty well, so perhaps other techniques could be similarly regulated, perhaps by codes of practice rather than legislation, if that were too hard? Legislation allowing for refunds could be a thing I suppose.
One thing I don't like is that often when a website asks for permission to send you updates, it has options for "Yes" and "Maybe Later" instead of Yes and No!
Or, "yes", and "No, I don't want to learn new things"!
I think it's nearly impossible to change consumers minds to 'psychologically' avoid these so called 'dark patterns'. So, some legislation is a good thing. But as @miketalbot pointed out, it could be simply having more access to refunds or maybe intermediate "review what your signing up for" pages, before the consumer commits to it
Thanks. I've been wise to these tricks for a while - just didn't know there was a word for them.
I think the answer is "name and shame". The name that first come to mind is McAfee. But Microsoft isn't far behind.
The tricks that the latter uses to discourage installation of Chrome on a new PC are almost hilarious.
Regulating 'dark patterns' could be crucial in safeguarding consumer rights and promoting ethical practices. While it's disappointing that enforcement is necessary to join the car lift dubai, it may be a necessary step to curb exploitative behavior. However, ensuring effective regulation without stifling innovation and creativity poses a challenge.