THE QUESTION
Why do false claims spread faster than corrections?
The causes, deepest first. Disagreements stay on the map.
closed · back to Actions
Viewing as guest. Enter a handle to join and take part.
This room’s map
What this room certified, on its own — the numbers below count these. Left to right: deepest causes first; outlined green boxes are the roots. Only direct links are drawn — a link implied by a path is on the record, not in the picture. Dashed red is contested. Hover for full text.
How this dialogue measures
why
The indicators the method's own practitioners use to judge a dialogue's quality (Laouris & Metcalf 2024, Table 7), computed from this record so it can be compared with the hundreds of face-to-face and virtual dialogues behind their baselines. Spreadthink is the share of ideas that got at least one vote: 100% means everyone voted only for their own, and it usually settles to 25–45% once meaning has been shared. Situational complexity falls as more ideas are structured.
ideas (N)
39 usual: 50–100
39 usual: 50–100
with 1+ vote / 2+ votes
19 / 17
19 / 17
spreadthink
41.2% within the usual range
41.2% within the usual range
demosensus
58.8%
58.8%
clusters (dimensions)
4
4
cards in a cluster
20.5%
20.5%
structured / levels / links
20 / 4 / 14
20 / 4 / 14
situational complexity
0.49
0.49
minds moved
—
—
cards hidden by the steward
0
0
pairs contested
0
0
The merged map
Every room on this question is a walkthrough: this is a demonstration of the merge, not a finding.
Folded from 3 rooms on this question — 3 are walkthroughs, with stand-ins rather than people.
why
Every group built its own map from its own wall; these are folded into one. The same claim raised in two groups is one item, and each connection shows how many groups found it. Where groups found opposite things, that is published as a conflict.
Every room’s map folded into one. Dark, thick lines were certified by two or more rooms; grey dashed by one; dotted grey only by rooms that do not count; dashed red is a dispute. A green card with ×N is a claim N rooms raised on their own; the caption says so. Hover a link or a claim for the rooms behind it. — 1 link certified by two or more rooms · 2 contested · 51 links in all.
counted Why do false claims spread f · steward trusted by this instance
counted Why are corrections never as · steward trusted by this instance
counted Why does a lie travel furthe · steward trusted by this instance
Dotted grey: a link certified only by rooms that do not count — shown, never a verdict. Hover a link for which rooms certified it and which said no; hover a claim for where it was raised and any evidence attached.
As a list — 51 links, graded by how many rooms found each; and 4 claims raised in more than one room
RAISED IN MORE THAN ONE ROOM
◆ A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed 3 rooms
◆ Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 3 rooms
◆ The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it 3 rooms
◆ Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported 3 rooms
EVERY LINK · solid and thicker: found by more rooms · dashed grey: one room
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed 2 rooms
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed → Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all 1 room
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance → So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of 1 room
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field → We label the claim and cannot label the confidence 1 room
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field → By the time we could confirm it, it was old 1 room
A quiet revision looks like concealment even when it is not → The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it 1 room
Anyone with relevant expertise has funding from someone with an intere → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Anyone with relevant expertise has funding from someone with an intere → There is no routine moment at which guidance is re-examined 1 room
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow → There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said' 1 room
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow → So the incentive is to revise quietly rather than loudly 1 room
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow → The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news 1 room
By the time we could confirm it, it was old → Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim 1 room
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along → The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public 1 room
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along → A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance 1 room
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along → A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder 1 room
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it → By the time we could confirm it, it was old 1 room
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it → Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim 1 room
Emergency powers suspend the checks that would have caught it → There is no routine moment at which guidance is re-examined 1 room
Emergency powers suspend the checks that would have caught it → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Emergency powers suspend the checks that would have caught it → So the incentive is to revise quietly rather than loudly 1 room
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported → A quiet revision looks like concealment even when it is not 1 room
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported → The first statement sets the frame and every revision fights it 1 room
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported → Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical 1 room
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported → The metric is claims processed 1 room
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing → There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early 1 room
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing → A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance 1 room
Nobody has ever measured what a late correction costs → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revis → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported 1 room
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the c → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed 1 room
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the c → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence cha → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline → A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder 1 room
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline → The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public 1 room
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline → A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance 1 room
Retracting a paper takes years and the claim travels in days → So the incentive is to revise quietly rather than loudly 1 room
Retracting a paper takes years and the claim travels in days → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it → Nuance is stripped between the briefing and the headline 1 room
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association → The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it 1 room
The metric is claims processed → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported 1 room
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news → There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said' 1 room
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public → Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing 1 room
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early → So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of 1 room
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said' → We cover the row about the change, never the change 1 room
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them → The metric is claims processed 1 room
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported 1 room
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them → Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim 1 room
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them → We label the claim and cannot label the confidence 1 room
We cover the row about the change, never the change → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow 1 room
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported 1 room
Connections several groups found (1 of 51)
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | 2 groups |
Rooms disagree (2)
Judged in opposite directions by different rooms, with no side reaching 75% of the rooms that judged it. It stays on the record and has been referred onward to further rooms.
⚑ Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed 1 room yes · 1 no
⚑ The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed 1 room yes · 2 no