Where are the real experts when you need them?

Every manager dealing with a high-profile public issue knows it’s PR 101 to recruit third party endorsement by experts.?But the deliberate undermining of authoritative expertise makes real experts increasingly reluctant to step forward.

Who wants to risk the vicious personal attacks and accusations of bias aimed at Dr Anthony Fauci by anti-vaxx politicians and activists??Or become sandwiched between competing advocates on climate change and subjected to online harassment?

As a result, the media often rely on anyone who seems to know what they are talking about. Long-retired generals who claim special insight into what is happening on the battlefields of Ukraine. Or?“royal experts” who are really just commentators who write regularly about the British royal family and rely on supposed “palace insiders”. Or even “body language experts” who want us to believe they have a unique understanding of the troubled relationship between William and Harry.

However, the problem is not just “What Catherine REALLY thinks about Meghan.” It’s about how unsupported opinion goes unchallenged and can become accepted fact.?

Such as last year when journalists reported that an offhand comment at a press conference by soccer great Cristiano Ronaldo favouring water over Coke “caused a $4 billion?loss for Coca-Cola” as the company’s share price fell 1.6%.

Real experts soon pointed out that the shares dropped?before Ronaldo’s comments,?because they had just gone ex-dividend. And?the price?recovered $US 1.3 billion by the end of the day. Meanwhile the false story had already made headlines in unquestioning media around the world and fewer readers would have seen the true explanation.

Financial writer?Jeanne Elizabeth Daniel?called it “The Ronaldo Effect: When a lie becomes so big, it turns into the truth”. Or as fictional newspaper editor Maxwell Scott said in John Ford’s western The Man who Shot Liberty Valance:?"when the legend becomes fact, print the legend".?

Even when experts do intervene to combat “the legend”, a falsehood can still become fact. As famously?happened at the turn of the 20th Century,?when authorities everywhere were unanimous that the new millennium began on January 1, 2001. Yet?pundits and the public insisted it was on January 1, 2000, so?governments and communities around the world ignored the facts and celebrated the new century on the “wrong day”.

Of course, ignoring experts can have much more serious consequences. For example, on the environmental impact of climate change, or the public health value of vaccination, or the true?risks of vaping, or how to combat youth suicide, or if sugary drinks cause obesity, or how to reduce the cost of living,?or whether snack food really is?bad for you.?

For governments, not-for-profits and commercial organisations, such questions and many more represent core issues which need to be managed, and which require genuine expert opinion. Yet managers are regularly faced with hostile opponents and a growing public suspicion of experts, often promoted by deliberate misinformation and rejection of institutions and authority. Add to that lazy news media bothsideism?which might, for instance, falsely balance a world class medical expert against an activist whose knowledge relies mainly on Google.

Self-appointed experts tend to proliferate as quickly as anyone who frequently posts?on social media becomes a “YouTube Celebrity” and?anyone with an opinion and a keyboard can call themself a citizen journalist.

This is not to suggest there is no legitimate place for dissenting viewpoints. Nor to suggest that ordinary people don’t have a right to be heard.?But true experts don’t just know more than they average person. They know a lot more than the average person . . .??and rely on actual evidence.

People managing important public issues need to consistently support and protect the real experts and boldly stand up for objective reality. Without that we might as well give up and go home for lunch.