←back to thread

Learning not to trust the All-In podcast

(passingtime.substack.com)
460 points paulpauper | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.217s | source
Show context
tacitusarc ◴[] No.42073834[source]
“ In my first and only 15 minutes of watching, Chamath’s confidence in making this false claim, coupled with his co-hosts’ complete lack of critical pushback, suggests to me that these kinds of mistakes happen often enough to where these guys’ content isn’t worth consuming.”

This is what I call “anti-credibility.” Where credibility increases the likelihood of belief in subsequent claims, anti-credibility increases the belief that subsequent claims are false. This is subtly distinct from decreasing the likelihood of belief, which would merely result in more skepticism: You say “A is true”, so folks think “A might not be true.” Anti-credibility means if you state “A is true” people think, “oh, A is false.”

This phenomenon has played a large role in politics and social movements over the past several years.

replies(1): >>42074126 #
1. nerdponx ◴[] No.42074126[source]
It makes more sense if you notice that the direction of wrongness is consistent, in which case an adjustment across the board in the other direction makes sense. Works great for politicians of all kinds, and their supporters, as we see here.