Brandolini's law
Imagine trying to empty a flood with a teacup, while someone else keeps turning on the taps. That's essentially the uphill battle described by Brandolini's Law, a stark observation about the effort required to combat misinformation. Coined in the digital age, this principle reveals a fundamental asymmetry in the spread of truth versus falsehood, leaving us to wonder how we can ever catch up. Brandolini's Law highlights that it takes significantly more time and energy to debunk misinformation than it does to create and spread it. This 'bullshit asymmetry principle' isn't new, with similar ideas echoed by thinkers centuries before the internet era. Combating misinformation effectively requires strategic, multi-faceted approaches, acknowledging the psychological and social factors at play.
AI Summary
Imagine trying to empty a flood with a teacup, while someone else keeps turning on the taps. That's essentially the uphill battle described by Brandolini's Law, a stark observation about the effort required to combat misinformation. Coined in the digital age, this principle reveals a fundamental asymmetry in the spread of truth versus falsehood, leaving us to wonder how we can ever catch up.
- Brandolini's Law highlights that it takes significantly more time and energy to debunk misinformation than it does to create and spread it.
- This 'bullshit asymmetry principle' isn't new, with similar ideas echoed by thinkers centuries before the internet era.
- Combating misinformation effectively requires strategic, multi-faceted approaches, acknowledging the psychological and social factors at play.
The 'Bullshit Asymmetry Principle'
In 2013, an Italian programmer named Alberto Brandolini articulated a truth that many have intuitively felt: refuting falsehoods is far harder than inventing them. He captured this profound imbalance in what is now known as Brandolini's Law—or, more colloquially, the 'bullshit asymmetry principle'.
The law states, quite simply, that 'The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.' Think about it: a sensational, baseless claim can be cooked up in minutes, but disassembling it with facts, evidence, and nuance can take days, weeks, or even years.
A Spark of Frustration and Insight
Brandolini wasn't just idly musing when he formulated this law. He was inspired after reading Daniel Kahneman's seminal work, 'Thinking, Fast and Slow,' and then watching a particularly contentious Italian political talk show. The effortless spread of questionable claims during the debate, contrasted with the laborious attempts to correct them, solidified his observation.
Real-World Impact: The Cost of Deception
One of the most devastating illustrations of Brandolini's Law is the persistent myth that vaccines cause autism. Despite a fraudulent 1998 research paper being retracted and its author, Andrew Wakefield, losing his medical license, this false assertion continues to fuel vaccine hesitancy worldwide.
Decades of extensive scientific investigation have definitively shown no link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Yet, the initial, easily digestible lie, crafted in minutes, continues to undermine public health efforts and spread fear, demonstrating just how sticky misinformation can be.
Another poignant example emerged after the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. A false claim quickly spread online that a student who survived the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting had also been killed in the bombing. Despite immediate debunking efforts by fact-checkers like Snopes, this emotional, baseless story was shared over 92,000 times.
The rapid dissemination capabilities of social media amplify this law's effects, making people susceptible to pseudoscientific trends. Remember Dr. Mehmet Oz's weight loss supplements or Dr. Joseph Mercola's tanning beds claiming to reduce cancer risk? Millions of dollars were spent before government agencies could intervene.
Even seemingly innocuous claims can take root. After Iceland's football team famously eliminated England in 2016, an Icelandic doctor jokingly tweeted about a resulting baby boom. This humorous, fictional claim gained wide media coverage, highlighting how easily even a jest can be mistaken for truth.
The COVID-19 Era
The COVID-19 pandemic offered a stark, real-time display of Brandolini's Law in action. Disinformation journalist Jeff Yates recounted debunking a popular YouTube video filled with medical misinformation about the virus.
Yates described the incredible disparity: 'He makes all kinds of different claims. It took this guy 15 minutes to make his video and it took me three days to fact-check.' This personal account powerfully illustrates the 'order of magnitude' difference in effort.
Similarly, claims about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment continued to spread rapidly, even after a promising early trial was prominently refuted. Scientists Jevin West and Carl Bergstrom noted that high anxiety and uncertainty created fertile ground for such misinformation to flourish, making it incredibly hard to counter.
Beyond Simple Lies: The Psychology of Belief
Research into Brandolini's Law shows that people are often more receptive to 'bullshit,' and less adept at detecting it, when their self-regulatory resources are low. This suggests that factors like stress, fatigue, or information overload can make us more vulnerable.
Sometimes, the 'bullshitter' becomes more apparent than the 'bullshit' itself. When an individual repeatedly spreads false claims, their credibility erodes, making it easier for their audience to identify subsequent falsehoods. However, challenging misinformation can also mean confronting one's own community, adding another layer of difficulty.
The U.S. Department of State even defines 'gendered disinformation'—a specific type of 'bullshit' that uses false or misleading narratives to deter women from public participation. This shows how misinformation can be weaponized, often with coordinated efforts, making it even harder to refute.
Fighting Back: Strategies for Truth
Despite the daunting challenge, many are calling for active engagement in the fight against misinformation. Environmental researcher Phil Williamson urged scientists to get online and correct falsehoods, emphasizing that the scientific process includes ensuring information is understood and errors are corrected.
Researchers Carl T. Bergstrom and Jevin West, specialists in combating 'bullshit,' outline a strategic approach to refutation. This complex process must consider the audience, the refuter's available energy, and the communication medium used.
Their advice for effectively refuting misinformation is grounded in clarity and integrity:
Principle Description Be Correct Include all necessary, double-checked facts. Be Charitable Acknowledge potential confusion, avoid assuming malice or stupidity. Be Clear Ensure your argument is coherent and easily understood. Admit Mistakes Be open about your own errors or faults if they occur.
Beyond these principles, other techniques can boost the effectiveness of corrections. These include providing pre-exposure warnings, offering repeated retractions, and—crucially—presenting a clear, credible alternative narrative to replace the false one.
Echoes Through Time: An Ancient Truth
Brandolini's Law might be a modern adage, but the sentiment behind it is centuries old. The saying, 'A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on,' has appeared in various forms since at least the early 18th century.
Jonathan Swift, the famed satirist, captured this perfectly in 1710: 'Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it; so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late, the jest is over, and the tale has had its effect.' His words resonate profoundly even today, highlighting the timeless nature of this challenge.
In 1845, economist Frédéric Bastiat articulated a similar thought: 'In very few words they can announce a half-truth; and in order to demonstrate that it is incomplete, we are obliged to have recourse to long and dry dissertations.' The struggle for brevity and clarity in debunking is not new.
Even before Brandolini, others like Italian blogger Uriel Fanelli and researcher Jonathan Koomey expressed similar frustrations. Koomey, known for Koomey's Law, observed that 'refutations lag nonsense production to a greater degree' in fast-changing fields like information technology. It seems the more complex the topic, the greater the asymmetry.
Article
Brandolini's law
Brandolini's law (or the bullshit asymmetry principle) is an Internet adage coined in 2013 by Italian programmer Alberto Brandolini. It compares the considerable effort of debunking misinformation to the relative ease of creating it in the first place. The adage states:
The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
The challenge of refuting bullshit does not come just from its time-consuming nature, but also from the challenge of defying and confronting one's community.
Origins
Brandolini's law
The adage was publicly formulated in January 2013 by Alberto Brandolini, an Italian programmer. Brandolini stated that he was inspired by reading Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow, right before watching an Italian political talk show involving former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and journalist Marco Travaglio.
Examples
Brandolini's law
The persistent false claim that vaccines cause autism is sometimes cited as an example of Brandolini's law. In 1998, British anti-vaccine activist Andrew Wakefield wrote a fraudulent research paper which claimed to find a relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. The article was retracted, and Wakefield's medical license was revoked. Despite extensive investigation showing no such relationship, the false assertion has had a disastrous effect on public health, contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Decades of research, and attempts to educate the public, have failed to eradicate the misinformation.
In 2013, shortly after the Boston Marathon bombing, the claim that a student who had survived the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting had been killed by the bombing began to spread across social media. Despite many attempts to debunk the rumor, including an investigation by Snopes, the false story was shared by more than 92,000 people and was covered by major news agencies.
Due to the rapid dissemination of information on social media, people are much more susceptible to becoming victims of pseudoscientific trends, such as Mehmet Oz's weight loss supplements and Joseph Mercola's tanning beds that were meant to reduce one's risk of developing cancer. Although government agencies were able to prevent further sales of those products, millions of dollars had already been spent by consumers and fans.
Another example dates to 2016, when Iceland's football team eliminated England from the UEFA European Championship. Nine months after the victory, the Icelandic doctor Ásgeir Pétur Thorvaldsson jokingly tweeted that a baby boom in Iceland had occurred due to the victory. Wide media coverage repeated this claim, but statistical analysis proved it false.
COVID-19 pandemic
In an example of Brandolini's law during the COVID-19 pandemic, Jeff Yates, a disinformation journalist at Radio-Canada, described the experience of debunking a popular YouTube video spreading COVID-19 medical misinformation presented by a pineapple importer: "He makes all kinds of different claims. I had to check every single one of them. I had to call relevant experts and talk to them. I had to transcribe those interviews. I had to write a text that is legible and interesting to read. It's madness. It took this guy 15 minutes to make his video and it took me three days to fact-check."
Analyzing disinformation about the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 prevention, scientists Jevin West and Carl Bergstrom noted that, even though a promising early clinical trial had since been prominently refuted, the claim that hydroxychloroquine could effectively treat COVID-19 continued to spread rapidly due to a combination of widespread social media coverage, high anxiety, and high uncertainty.
Further applications
Brandolini's law
In 2020, researchers studied the sensitivity to bullshit and found that "people are more receptive to bullshit, and less sensitive to detecting bullshit, under conditions in which they possess relatively few self-regulatory resources".
Within the context of scientific analysis, Brandolini's law can be put to use not just on the bullshit being presented, but can also bring the bullshitter under scrutiny as well. When the lying becomes apparent on multiple occasions throughout a stretch of scientific research, the bullshitter becomes more obvious than the bullshit itself, and because the bullshitter loses credibility, the ensuing bullshit is easier to identify.
Mitigation
Brandolini's law
Environmental researcher Phil Williamson of University of East Anglia implored other scientists in 2016 to get online and refute falsehoods to their work whenever possible, despite the difficulty as described by Brandolini's law. He wrote: "The scientific process doesn't stop when results are published in a peer-reviewed journal. Wider communication is also involved, and that includes ensuring not only that information (including uncertainties) is understood, but also that misinformation and errors are corrected where necessary." Combating the spreading of misinformation requires scientists to establish the validity and quality of research, stories, and claims with a rating system.
Carl T. Bergstrom and Jevin West, researchers on the topic of bullshit, study how to refute the bullshit that takes a large amount of energy to discover. This complicated process depends on the audience the bullshit is intended to influence, the time and energy a person is willing to invest in this process, and the medium used to do the refuting. In order to refute misinformation, one needs to do the following:
• Be correct by including all necessary information that was run by a friend and double checking facts. • Be charitable by acknowledging the possibility of your own confusion, not attributing malice, and not assigning stupidity. • Be clear and coherent about the argument you are making. • Admit mistakes and faults.
Other techniques for increasing the effectiveness of retracting misinformation include: preexposure warnings, repeated retractions, and providing an alternative narrative.
Similar concepts
Brandolini's law
The adage, "A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on", has taken various forms since as early as 1710.
Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it; so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late, the jest is over, and the tale has had its effect: like a man who has thought of a good repartee, when the discourse is changed, or the company parted; or, like a physician, who has found out an infallible medicine, after the patient is dead.
In 1845, economist Frédéric Bastiat expressed an early notion of the adage:
We must confess that our adversaries have a marked advantage over us in the discussion. In very few words they can announce a half-truth; and in order to demonstrate that it is incomplete, we are obliged to have recourse to long and dry dissertations.
Prior to Brandolini's definition, Italian blogger Uriel Fanelli and researcher Jonathan Koomey, creator of Koomey's law, also shared thoughts aligning with the adage: "An idiot can create more bullshit than you could ever hope to refute", when generally translated in Calling Bullshit: The Art of Skepticism in a Data-Driven World. Koomey stated: "In fast-changing fields, like information technology, refutations lag nonsense production to a greater degree than in fields with less rapid change."