Figmentations

Aside from blatant attempts to defraud and deceive, there exists a whole separate realm of gray areas where the truth and accuracy of reported information is questionable or, at best, concerning. 

Misinformation, which probably exists to a greater degree than we even realize, has consequences.  It affects the quality of the conclusions we draw and the solutions we consider. 

Sifting through the staggering amount of information that exists these days is not always a simple task.  Yet, fancy degrees or genius IQs aren’t necessary either.  It just takes effort, interest, and vigilance to take a closer look at information that is provided to us (e.g., by the media, marketers, politicians, etc.) and not always accept things at face value. 

This isn’t about being cynical.  It’s just a reality that we can’t afford to ignore.

I often consider the following eight questions when I evaluate information (about a product, service, or idea).  See if you agree that taking these into consideration will make a difference in how you and/or others look at information: 

Consider What Role Profits Might Play to Information Providers? 
There is nothing wrong with making a profit off of a good idea, invention, or discovery.  Actually, it is a smart thing to do. However, when hitting profit goals are the sole or primary goal of a project, then it can be expected that the quality of information provided around the “product being sold” will most definitely suffer.

Is there a Desire to Correct Misinformation?
If an initially apparent truth/claim gets dis-proven, is equal effort put into communicating the new information?  Clearly, there is a huge cost to being wrong, e.g., loss of future income streams; loss of customers; loss of initial investments; the need to issue refunds or compensation for damages; and the equally heavy cost to credibility.  Thus it is important to consider that there are huge incentives to not only cover up, but also to not even look for, conflicting information.

Is Trust Being Correctly Placed?
Personal responsibility and “caveat emptor” (a.k.a., “buyer beware”) puts the onus of a transaction on the consumer.  Sure there is a reasonable expectation that the Seller is showing good faith.  However, I would suggest that being a little cynical may serve you better than being a little too trusting.  Trust yourself more than you trust someone else.

Is Social Proof the Best Proof?
Social proof (i.e., doing something because others are doing it) may or may not be a reliable indicator to the veracity of a group’s beliefs.  Consider that people that don’t support something aren’t going to stick around with those that do. Instead of avoiding groups with opposing opinions, consider the potential benefit that the intersection of differing opinions can provide in regards to potentially seeing a more complete picture of the facts at hand.

How are Soundbites Being Used?
Soundbites are often used by politicians, the media, marketers, etc., to convey an easily memorable and repeatable idea. However, just like home remedies, they have their purpose and they have their limitations.  By nature, they can’t possibly be all-encompassing.  Information that is partly true can be as dangerous as information that is false.

The Obvious Might Not Always Be Obvious at First.
What is obvious to some (about truths as well as deceptions) isn’t always obvious to all, especially at first.  If we don’t see or understand something the way someone else does, that doesn’t mean they are wrong and you are right, and vice versa.  Consider all points of view, and not just that of the majority.

What Applies To Some May Not Apply To All.
A theory or strategy might work perfectly well for some people, yet not for others.  That doesn’t necessarily make it a scam, but being aware of when or if something is conditional or situational is important to know, too, so that generalizations aren’t incorrectly assumed about it.

Is An Accurate Methodology Being Employed?
Conclusions need to be based on sound and relevant facts. Oversimplifying studies into direct cause-and-effect relationships might make them easier to understand but that doesn’t make them correct.  Accurate and representative sample sizes are basic statistical metrics that are often easily overlooked, too. Make sure the entire rationale is sound even if the conclusion and the facts alone seem strong.

I don’t want to suggest that everyone is going to try to be deceptive about everything. Nor do I want to suggest that we become overly cynical or paranoid either.   I just want to point out that we need to stay aware of our sources of information and the potential limitations and/or biases (conscious or not) to the facts and figures presented to us.

 Questioning, thinking, and discussing are vitally important.  Blind faith and apathy are dangerous. Conventional wisdom and human nature include important learnings and guidelines that we should keep in mind and also be willing to adjust as we adapt to changing times.

 So, what do you think?  Am I being too cynical?  Am I missing other important factors worth considering?  Please share any and all thoughts below.  I look forward to further discussion!