Peasant with Red Headscarf, painting by Filipp Malyavin / WikiArt

The Problem When Cynicism Proliferates: Everything Is B.S.

“Political cynicism is rising in many democracies throughout the world.” Explaining this, Ariel Hasell, Audrey Halversen, and Brian Weeks ascribe it to the influence of social media and demonstrate it with data from the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The trouble is that when cynicism proliferates, everything seems like B.S.

So this week when Education Secretary Linda McMahon botched a reference to artificial intelligence by calling it “A.1.” (like the steak sauce), it was good for a cynical laugh. And after all, laughter is the best medicine – right? Marketers for the brand jumped right on the opportunity for a good laugh on social media. News outlets followed.

But no, she was not talking about making sure that every school has A.1. steak sauce in the cafeteria.

Laughter and Derision

We have misgivings about political discourse that prioritizes mocking people with whom we disagree. It is a sign that we are crossing an important line between healthy skepticism and destructive cynicism. The risk is that we are no longer listening to people with whom we disagree. We only use their words for laughter and derision.

Social Media, Anger, and Cynicism

Based on their research, Hasell, Halversen, and Weeks suspect that social media, which is a primary news source for many people, is the fuel for rising anger and cynicism:

“Data indicate that people who were exposed to more political attacks on social media were more politically cynical. Further, perceived exposure to political attacks on social media was associated with more anger about the state of the United States, which was subsequently related to greater levels of political cynicism. The results provide evidence that exposure to political attacks on social media might contribute to both negative emotions about the country and political cynicism.”

Clarity and Engagement

So here’s the rub. We hear a lot of nonsense. And truth matters. Cod liver oil does not cure or prevent measles. Beef tallow will not make french fries healthy again. Science has brought progress in metabolic health that is changing the lives of many, many people. We need to be clear about all of this.

But when we relentlessly call B.S. on people who are mistaken, cynicism proliferates. Progress grinds to a halt. Along with clarity about what is right, readiness to listen when people have questions and concerns is important. Questions and concerns require answers and engagement.

Click here for the research of Hasell, Halversen, and Weeks, here for further perspective. For more on the A.1./AI confusion and laughter, click here.

Peasant with Red Headscarf, painting by Filipp Malyavin / WikiArt

Subscribe by email to follow the accumulating evidence and observations that shape our view of health, obesity, and policy.


 

April 13, 2025

6 Responses to “The Problem When Cynicism Proliferates: Everything Is B.S.”

  1. April 13, 2025 at 7:09 am, Christine Rosenbloom said:

    It is so hard not to be cynical these days. Maybe it is only natural to be cynical when so much of the news is hard to believe.

    Reply

  2. April 13, 2025 at 9:05 am, John DiTraglia said:

    Yeah everybody is stupid about some things and it’s a slippery slope to make fun of people you don’t agree with and to generalize but it’s hard to control myself.

    Reply

  3. April 13, 2025 at 9:49 am, Allen Browne said:

    Actually, I would suggest questions and concerns require engagement and then answers. Engagement needs to come first and that is tricky. It is too easy to spit out the answer in an ineffective way.

    Allen

    Reply

  4. April 14, 2025 at 8:27 am, Skip Murray said:

    In a world where you can be anything, #BeKind. Attacking, mocking, and scorning those we disagree with will never lead to solutions but will readily breed more problems.

    Thank you for the important reminder!

    Reply

  5. April 14, 2025 at 8:57 pm, Patrick M. O'Neil said:

    Ted, you make a very valid, if discomfiting, point.

    And may I raise a question for USAToday (in your first link; https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/12/linda-mcmahon-a1-instead-of-ai/83059797007/):

    Why was it necessary to provide Ms.McMahon’s age (76) in that story?

    Patrick M. O’Neil, PhD (77)

    Reply

    • April 15, 2025 at 4:06 am, Ted said:

      Good question regarding the inclusion of age. Maybe it was to express implicit age-related bias?

      Implicit bias is sneaky.

Leave a Reply