40 | New Scientist | 30 November 2019“ It’s rational to
be outraged by
things that are
outrageous”
Naomi Oreskes has long defended science
against the forces of misinformation. But it’s
time scientists stopped being so arrogant,
she tells Graham Lawton
Features Interview
A
HISTORIAN of science at Harvard
University, Naomi Oreskes is best
known for exposing the tactics of
science deniers. Her first book Merchants of
Doubt, co-authored with Erik Conway,
chronicled how industry-funded scientists
spread misinformation and doubt about
tobacco smoke, climate change, acid rain and
more. She has since exposed how the “tobacco
playbook” has become the standard corporate
strategy to delay regulatory action and protect
bottom lines. In her new book Why Trust
Science?, she sets out what scientists must do
to stem the tide of denialism.Graham Lawton: We live in troubled times.
Have you ever known science denial and
misinformation to be so rampant and
widespread?
Naomi Oreskes: I don’t like to overstate the
situation because we’ve had denial for a long
time. However, two things have happened to
make things worse. One is the blatant, overt,
unapologetic and completely shameless
rejection of science by the president of the
United States.
The other is that people’s lives are really at
stake. Climate change is here, it’s unequivocal.
People are being killed by floods andparticular scientific conclusions that people
think threaten or conflict with their self-
interest: that could be economic self-interest,
it could be religious beliefs or it could be some
kind of political position like commitment
to free-market capitalism. Denial is quite
specific, not the broad-brush thing that people
sometimes make it out to be. And I think that
distinction is important, because the solution
is different.It seems that we have gone from science
denial to denial of facts and evidence in
general. Would you agree with that?
Yes. What we’re seeing is the “manufactured
doubt” strategy being universalised as
a political tactic, because once you can
undermine people’s beliefs in facts and
credible authority, then you can say almost
anything.
Normally in politics, one of the tools that
we use to fight back against things we don’t
agree with is to point out when they’re
factually incorrect. Now, because there’s so
much cynicism and distrust, that’s become
extremely difficult.Social media cops a lot of the blame.
Is that fair?
I think it’s an oversimplification. We know
from history that you don’t need social
media to spread disinformation, you can
do it with old-fashioned media. However,
I do think social media has made it
worse because it’s now possible to get
disinformation out to incredibly large
audiences rapidly at very low cost. A bunch
of guys in a basement can now do a lot of
damage and do it pretty quickly.When corporate interests spread
misinformation, it is clear why they are doing
it. What motivates the guys in the basement?
People do things for all kinds of reasons.
It isn’t just about money. They are often driven
by free-market ideology, the idea that if the
government intervenes into the marketplace,
we’re on the road to socialism. Lots of people
buy into this myth – and it is a myth – that
government is bad, that any regulation, even
to protect your health and safety, is bad. There’s
a well-funded and very smart campaign to
persuade ordinary people that their self-
interest is the same as that of the captains
of industry.Is ideology the only motivation?
Attention-seeking behaviour is part of it too.
There are a lot of people who would not beNaomi Oreskes is Professor
of the History of Science at
Harvard UniversityPR
INCET
ONUNIVERS
ITYPRES
Shurricanes. To deny it in the face of human
suffering – there’s a moral dimension to that.
I can’t think of a word other than “shocking”.Why do so many people reject and
mistrust science?
I would push back on “so many people”. When
we look at opinion polls in the US, UK and
around the world, the vast majority of people
do accept science. But we see resistance to