The End of Expertise:
Politics and Society in a Post-Truth World
IN the 90s and early 2000s, I worked on political campaigns, including the Iowa presidential caucus, a big city Mayor’s race in Philly, and a few statewide campaigns. By the time I landed a job in government with Ed Rendell (the original “America’s Mayor”), I had a legitimate understanding of the political game. With a Master’s in Government from the University of Pennsylvania, I had the credentials to back it up…if you’re into that sort of thing.
Conversations with friends, family, or even strangers on a plane or at a bar were always interesting because earning a living in politics was just different. I could share stories about real-world campaigns and candidates, and even offer a little gossip. I also empathized with what a political life is like for candidates and staff on both sides of the aisle.
These conversations rarely, if ever, became heated. People were curious about life on the campaign trail and took the time to listen, mostly because I had been on the ground and seen it up close. I may not have been James Carville, but I could credibly explain how and why Bill Clinton won Pennsylvania because, well, I was actually there.
CUT to 2007, and the world was introduced to Facebook and Twitter. In an instant, the ‘democratization’ of information drew open curtains that had remained shut for decades and helped to tear down barriers that had long separated political elites from the public.
With the onset of social media, everything from journalism to politics to healthcare changed. Maybe your aunt would ask a friend of a friend on Facebook about a rash or a cough, and — boom — she’s suddenly an expert. That high school guy you remember mostly from drinking beer at the park after Friday night football or snoozing in math class? He’s now spinning all kinds of conspiracy theories on your social feed and being taken seriously by his social media “friends.”
The algorithms got wise quickly, and soon enough, these social media startups were “unicorns” driving global debate and delivering (mis)information at lightning speed.
VOLUMES have been written about the impact of social media and technology on society. Researchers at the University of Southern California (where I teach advertising and communications) this year released an excellent study on why fake news spreads on social media. It’s worth a read.
Less has been written about what these changes have meant for people that spent years trying to become experts in their field — only to be eclipsed by those who earned reputations (and followers) via social media by claiming expertise and insight on issues big and small.
In 2022, Michael Lewis, bestselling author of books like Liar’s Poker and Moneyball, explored the subject of expertise and the fundamental impediments to disseminating knowledge in his podcast “Against the Rules.” He interviewed dozens of experts, including meteorologists, nurses, and scientists, to understand the effect of this “post-truth” world on our lives and the lives of experts themselves.
What he learned wasn’t a surprise.
We hear the heartbreaking story of a nurse in Aurora, Illinois (33:55) who watched as an otherwise healthy, but unvaccinated, 45-year-old police officer with a severe case of Covid refused to be intubated because, in his view, hospitals were trying to kill people in the ICU. Despite the medical staff’s pleas, the officer died a week later leaving behind a wife and two young children.
WHEN I read the January 6th indictment, the first thing that struck me was the number of senior Trump team members, from the Vice President on down, who were cited in the filing.
The list includes the Speaker of the House in Arizona; the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader in Michigan; the Philadelphia City Commissioner; the Secretary of State in Georgia; leaders of the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, Acting Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General; the Director of National Intelligence; the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; White House attorneys; and senior staff on Trump’s reelection campaign.
These are experts. They were actually there…of course, we all know what happened next.
Faced with this avalanche of evidence, millions of Americans still refuse to believe the facts of the case. A poll taken last week by CBS News/YouGov showed that just under a third of the country thinks Trump was trying to stay in office through legal, constitutional means — legal, in part because most of them believe Trump’s claim that the election was illegitimate in the first place.
WHAT do really smart people like Michael Lewis have to say about this? On a podcast last year, Lewis was asked what it would take to restore faith in authority and institutions. He said, “It’s not until people realize that they’re in an existential threat, an environment where their very existence is threatened — that they will regenerate trust, because they have to.”
Democracy on the verge. Massive wildfires and weather disruptions causing death and destruction across the globe. A global pandemic that cost millions of lives? Sure sounds like an existential crisis.
Sidenote: we may be using the term “existential” to the point of it losing power. Ironically, Sartre’s theories on the nature of existence and “bad faith” may offer an explanation for our current predicament. According to Sartre, we tell ourselves a story that we want to hear so that we don’t have to have difficult conversations with ourselves. But that’s a conversation for another time.
WHAT can be done to rebuild trust and expertise? Lewis offers some ideas:
- National service (not mandatory but incentivized) to get people from different communities and lived experiences to work together and try to achieve things jointly.
- Requirement that all students take a course in data or statistics.
- Elevate storytelling about what experts and professionals are doing to make our world more safe.
Other ideas? How about politicians, on both sides of the aisle, take fewer trips to gobble up campaign contributions and chow on hors d’oeuvres and white wine and invite real experts in the room, including a few philosophers and historians, to provide their hard-earned insights on issues that matter to all of us.
They could even ask their donors to fly in and listen up — it may just shake them out of their own bubble and lead to real investments in things that matter.
We should also try to elevate those in our social circles who have earned the right to be considered experts. I’m not referring to a former hack like myself (the political “expert” introduction was true, but also a cheap literary device). I’m talking about a real, honest-to-goodness expert. It could be your entomologist friend who knows all about bees and butterflies, or perhaps that engineer from your college years who may not be particularly “media-savvy,” but has a genuine understanding of ways to create cleaner, smarter extraction of natural resources or alternative energy sources.
You never know where their expertise could lead, and we should do more than just network and post status updates with our thousands of online connections. After all, as Lao Tzu said, “The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.”
At this point, what do we have to lose?
