SuggestedSources

This response was generated by Gemini (gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05) using the provided sources.

Want to add more sources or suggest new questions? Contribute on GitHub

Are we living through a crisis of expertise?

Based on the provided sources, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that Western societies are experiencing a profound crisis of expertise. This crisis is not a single phenomenon but a multifaceted problem driven by two interconnected forces: repeated, high-profile failures by experts and their institutions, and a corresponding collapse in public trust, which has been accelerated by the digital information revolution.

1. The Collapse of Public Trust

A foundational element of this crisis is the dramatic and long-term erosion of public trust in the institutions that produce and certify experts.

Empirical Data: Decades of polling show a steep decline in public confidence. According to the Pew Research Center, public trust in the federal government has fallen from a high of 77% in 1964 to just 16% in 2024, hovering near historic lows for the better part of this century [4]. This collapse of faith in governing institutions, which rely on expert advice, creates fertile ground for skepticism toward expertise itself.
The Revolt of the Public: Analyst Martin Gurri argues that the digital revolution has shattered the information monopoly once held by legacy institutions like the government, media, and academia. The public is no longer a passive audience but an active network of critics, newly equipped to scrutinize expert pronouncements and point out their failures in real-time. This has led to a “revolt of the public” against established authorities [3].
Media Institutions: The crisis extends to the media outlets that traditionally served as gatekeepers and interpreters of expert knowledge. An editor with 25 years of experience at NPR described how the organization lost America’s trust by adopting a rigid, progressive worldview and alienating audiences who did not share it [13]. Similarly, The Economist details how The New York Times, once a bastion of objective authority, lost its way by prioritizing internal ideological battles over impartial reporting [15]. When the public can no longer trust the messengers, it becomes difficult to trust the message from the experts they feature [16].

2. Failures of Expertise and Institutions

The decline in trust is not merely a matter of public perception; it is rooted in significant and repeated failures by experts across various domains.

Public Health: The COVID-19 pandemic served as a catalyst for the crisis. Political scientists Frances Lee and Stephen Macedo argue that the failure of institutions like the CDC was not primarily due to political pressure but to internal bureaucratic sclerosis. The CDC’s risk aversion, slow decision-making, and contradictory guidance on issues like masks and school closures squandered public confidence and made the institution appear incompetent [1].
Economics: The field of economics has suffered major blows to its credibility. Economists largely failed to predict the 2008 financial crisis and, more recently, were slow to recognize and understand the inflationary surge that followed the pandemic, with many incorrectly labeling it “transitory” [5, 6]. These failures have led to widespread questioning of the utility of economic forecasting.
Foreign Policy and Intelligence: The disastrous intelligence failure leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, where experts confidently but wrongly asserted the presence of weapons of mass destruction, remains a “primal scene” of elite failure. This event permanently damaged the credibility of the foreign policy and intelligence establishment in the eyes of many [9].
Scientific and Academic Integrity: The crisis has also breached the core of knowledge production itself. Fields like psychology are grappling with a “replication crisis,” where a significant portion of published findings may be false [8]. Compounding this are high-profile cases of academic fraud, such as that of a star professor at Harvard Business School who was found to have fabricated data in her research on honesty, forcing the university to revoke her tenure [12]. Such instances, alongside the broader problem of research fraud, undermine the very foundation of scientific authority [7]. Ted Gioia, a cultural critic, has even developed “Ten Warning Signs” to help the public spot “fake expertise,” suggesting the problem is pervasive enough to require a field guide [14].

3. The Public Response and Rise of Alternatives

In the vacuum left by failing experts and declining trust, the public has turned to alternative sources of information and authority, with mixed results.

Populist Backlash: The populist movements of recent years are not simply a result of economic anxiety but are a direct backlash against perceived elite failures and condescension. When established experts fail, the public becomes more receptive to populist leaders who challenge the consensus [2].
The Role of Non-Experts: Some argue that this shift has an upside. In an environment where credentialed experts can be captured by groupthink or institutional dogma, non-experts may offer valuable, independent perspectives. They are often unconstrained by the need to protect a professional reputation and may be more willing to challenge a flawed consensus [10].
The “Podcast Bro” Phenomenon: However, the decline of legacy gatekeepers has also created an opening for new, often unreliable, authorities. Figures like “podcast bros” have amassed huge followings by discussing topics that mainstream outlets ignore. While they can sometimes host substantive conversations, they also risk spreading misinformation and “brain rot” without the rigorous fact-checking of traditional institutions, thereby filling the trust vacuum with potentially worse alternatives [11].

In conclusion, the combination of systemic institutional decay, repeated expert failures in critical fields, and a digitally empowered public has created a genuine crisis of expertise. The public’s trust has been broken, not just by ideological polarization, but by tangible incompetence and a lack of accountability from the very institutions and individuals who claim the mantle of authority [1].

Sources

Yascha Mounk (Substack) - “Frances Lee & Stephen Macedo on Why Institutions Failed During COVID”: Lee and Macedo argue that institutions like the CDC failed during the pandemic not primarily due to political polarization, but because of their own internal rigidities, risk aversion, and inability to adapt to a fast-moving crisis. This self-inflicted damage severely eroded public trust. (link)
Conspicuous Cognition (Substack) - “Elite failures and populist backlash”: This source posits that populist backlash is a rational response to demonstrable failures by elite experts in fields like foreign policy and economics. It argues that the public’s loss of faith is a direct consequence of poor performance by those in charge. (link)
Martin Gurri - “The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium”: Gurri’s central thesis is that the internet and social media have destroyed the information monopoly of 20th-century institutions. This has empowered the public to challenge elite narratives, leading to a collapse of authority and a perpetual state of public “revolt” against established expertise. (link)
Pew Research Center - “Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024”: This report provides long-term polling data showing a dramatic and sustained decline in the American public’s trust in the federal government, from over 75% in the 1960s to near-record lows of 16% today. (link)
Not On Your Team (Substack) - “The failure of economists…“: This essay argues that economists have fundamentally failed in their core task by being unable to forecast or explain major economic events, such as the post-pandemic inflation, thereby undermining their claim to expertise. (link)
The Economist - “Economists don’t know what’s going on”: This article details the confusion within the economics profession as established models fail to explain current economic phenomena, such as persistent inflation and strong labor markets, leading to an admission of uncertainty and a crisis of confidence within the field. (link)
Vox - “Scientific research fraud and criminal prosecution”: This piece discusses the growing problem of scientific fraud and the debate over whether it should be treated as a crime, highlighting how misconduct at the research level can corrupt the entire body of expert knowledge. (link)
NCBI/PMC - “Are most published research findings false? Trends in statistical power, publication selection bias, and the false discovery rate in psychology (1975-2017)”: This academic paper analyzes the “replication crisis” in psychology, suggesting that a large portion of published research findings in the field may be false due to methodological issues, contributing to a crisis of confidence in social sciences. (link)
The Last Psychiatrist - “The Wrong Lessons Of Iraq”: This essay frames the intelligence failure leading to the Iraq War as a pivotal moment of expert failure, arguing that the true lesson was not about a specific political party but about the unreliability of the entire expert-driven national security apparatus. (link)
Aporia Magazine - “In Defence of Non-Experts”: This article argues that non-experts can sometimes have more accurate judgments than credentialed experts, who may be susceptible to institutional groupthink, political bias, and dogmatic thinking. It defends the value of outside perspectives in challenging a flawed expert consensus. (link)
Nathan Cofnas (Substack) - “Podcast Bros and Brain Rot”: Cofnas critiques the rise of alternative media figures (“podcast bros”) who fill the vacuum of trust left by legacy institutions. He argues that while they address legitimate intellectual gaps, they often do so irresponsibly, spreading misinformation and “brain rot.” (link)
WGBH News - “In extremely rare move, Harvard revokes tenure and cuts ties with star business professor”: This news report details the case of Harvard professor Francesca Gino, who was found to have committed research fraud. The case is presented as a high-profile example of a breach of academic integrity at the most elite level, damaging the credibility of the institution and the research it produces. (link)
The Free Press - “I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.”: Veteran NPR editor Uri Berliner provides an insider account of how the public radio network lost trust by abandoning viewpoint diversity and embracing a narrow, progressive worldview, thus alienating a large portion of its potential audience. (link)
The Honest Broker (Substack) - “The Ten Warning Signs”: Author Ted Gioia outlines ten signs of “fake expertise,” such as a focus on credentials over results and an inability to critique peers. The piece serves as a guide for the public to navigate a world where true expertise is hard to distinguish from performative or corrupt versions. (link)
The Economist - “When the New York Times lost its way”: This article critiques the New York Times for shifting from a model of objective, dispassionate news reporting to one that is more activist and ideologically driven, arguing that this change has damaged its authority and credibility. (link)
The Wall Street Journal - “Can You Trust Anybody?”: This opinion piece reflects on the pervasive atmosphere of distrust, questioning the reliability of everyone from the president and the media to influencers and AI, pointing to a broad societal crisis of credibility. (link)