Agreement on unrelated topics buys trust that propagandists exploit

Evidence

These models suggest that one way to influence the opinions of members of a group is to find someone who already agrees with them on other topics and have that person share evidence that supports your preferred position. The idea is that people are relying on scientists’ success on other problems to judge their general reliability. In other words, a scientist might think: “I am not so sure about actions A and B, but I am certain that action Z is better than Y. If another scientist shares my opinion on action Z, I will also trust that person’s evidence on actions A and B.” — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age, 465

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Bridging echo chambers fails without cross-partisan trust — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age: How False…, 62; Deferring to authoritative sources makes one vulnerable to their weaponization — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age: How False…, 449; Trust is a result rather than a precondition of cooperation — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 2781

Broader Connections

• Trust is a result rather than a precondition of cooperation #complicates (0.75) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 2781