What is
Calling Bullshit by Carl T. Bergstrom about?
Calling Bullshit provides tools to identify and combat misleading claims in data, media, and science. Co-authored by biologist Carl Bergstrom and data scientist Jevin West, it teaches critical thinking to navigate misinformation using real-world examples like skewed charts, biased studies, and deceptive correlations. The book emphasizes logical reasoning over technical expertise to debunk modern "bullshit".
Who should read
Calling Bullshit?
Professionals, students, and anyone exposed to data-driven arguments (e.g., journalists, policymakers) will benefit. It’s particularly valuable for social media users, researchers, and educators seeking to recognize flawed statistics, cherry-picked data, or misleading visualizations. The authors avoid jargon, making it accessible to non-experts.
Is
Calling Bullshit worth reading?
Yes—it’s a timely guide for navigating misinformation in the AI and social media era. The blend of academic rigor (Bergstrom’s expertise in evolutionary biology; West’s data science background) and practical examples makes complex concepts like selection bias or data misrepresentation easy to grasp. Readers gain actionable strategies to combat misinformation personally and professionally.
How does
Calling Bullshit define "bullshit"?
The authors define bullshit as claims that persuade through emotional appeal or authority rather than evidence. Unlike lies (intentional falsehoods), bullshit often stems from negligence, such as misinterpreting correlations as causation or using skewed graphs. Examples include viral health myths and politicized data.
What frameworks does
Calling Bullshit teach for detecting misinformation?
Key strategies include:
- Source scrutiny: Assessing conflicts of interest or funding biases.
- Data triangulation: Cross-verifying claims with independent sources.
- Logical consistency: Flagging mismatches between data and conclusions.
- Visual literacy: Identifying misleading axes or cherry-picked timeframes in charts.
How does
Calling Bullshit address flaws in scientific research?
The book critiques "p-hacking" (manipulating data to achieve statistical significance), publication bias, and predatory journals. Bergstrom’s work on the Eigenfactor journal-ranking system informs discussions about incentivizing rigorous research over sensationalism.
What are real-world examples of bullshit debunked in the book?
Case studies include:
- Misleading COVID-19 mortality rate comparisons.
- Corporate greenwashing via selective sustainability metrics.
- Political misuse of crime statistics to fearmonger.
Each example demonstrates how basic logic and fact-checking expose flaws.
How does
Calling Bullshit critique big data and AI?
It warns that large datasets can amplify biases (e.g., racist facial recognition algorithms) and create false patterns. The authors stress that "big data" requires big scrutiny—highlighting how tech firms often prioritize correlation over causation.
What criticisms exist about
Calling Bullshit?
Some reviewers note it focuses more on identifying bullshit than systemic solutions. Others argue its academic tone may limit appeal to general audiences, though the authors counter with humor and pop culture references (e.g., dissecting viral memes).
How does
Calling Bullshit compare to
Factfulness or
Weapons of Math Destruction?
Unlike Factfulness (which focuses on global progress) or Weapons (which critiques algorithms), Calling Bullshit offers a toolkit for everyday skepticism. It overlaps in discussing data ethics but stands out with its academic roots and UW course-tested methods.
Can
Calling Bullshit help improve media literacy?
Yes—it teaches readers to dissect news headlines, social media posts, and scientific claims by asking:
- Who benefits? Follow the money or agenda.
- Is the sample size/data source valid?
- Does the visualization distort proportions?
These skills combat echo chambers and confirmation bias.
Why is
Calling Bullshit relevant in 2025?
With AI-generated deepfakes and algorithmic misinformation rising, the book’s lessons on source verification and logical fallacies remain critical. Bergstrom’s ongoing work on disinformation dynamics (e.g., tracking viral conspiracy theories) reinforces its urgency.