We all know someone that occasionally makes us think, “wow, how could someone so smart be so dumb?” Unfortunately, we’ve all been that person too.
Our explanation for smart-people-doing-dumb-things is the finite brain volume (FBV) theory. It’s very scientific, probably accurate, and goes something like this: human brains can store a finite amount of information.
Some people know a little about a lot and others a lot about a little.
little * lot = lot * little
(FBV transitive property)
Because of FBV, street smart people often aren’t book smart and book smart people often aren’t street smart. Both sides know the same amount of things, but the things they know are very different.
Because of FBV, branding is critical. Companies know that you don’t and can’t know everything… but they do know that you can react to anything. It’s amazing how much emotion can be induced from a strong brand.
A name is a drawer where you stuff those emotions. Think about how much you can stuff into random drawers. It’s no different here. For example:
Trump
Clinton
Jordan
Bud light
Nike
Google
Apple
Elon
Hitler
Isn’t it crazy how much emotion can be induced from a simple name?
We tend to think of branding exclusively in the context of products and services. However, anything can have a brand. Once that brand grows, it can, for better or worse, be difficult to change.
If you change the name can you change the brand?
Maybeee.
If you changed Karen’s name would she still be a Karen? Yes. She’s not a Karen because her name is Karen, she’s a Karen because she wants to speak to the manager. Calling her Olivia might distract you for a bit, but you’d ultimately figure out that she’s just a Karen in Olivia clothes.
There are plenty of branding problems in the energy and climate space. The general public has finite neurons and energy “names” induce emotionally-charged thinking.
Oil = evil, greedy, bad, dirty, unsustainable
Nuclear = waste, weapons, radiation, danger
Solar = sustainable, cheap, technology
Fracking = earthquakes, water pollution
Hurricane = climate crisis, global warming
So… should we just rename them?
Hurricanes = swirly storms?!
Fracking = ground fireworks?!
There have been many recent calls to rename energy sources. For instance, in his congressional testimony earlier this year, Josh Wolfe referred to nuclear power as “elemental energy.”
However, if we change names and then start winning hearts and minds, it’ll be correlation not causation. Renaming energy sources makes it seem like we’re hiding something.
We’re all for accuracy and being precise with language. For instance, we never refer to solar and wind as “renewables.” We could go down the energy list but creating more precise names would be like putting bandaids on shotgun wounds at this moment in time.
Unless you’re taught the basics of energy, you’re screwed. The branding today is too strong and propaganda makes it worse by the day.
This is one reason why we think Substack is gaining so much steam. When you read traditional media, it feels like you’re being marketed to, not taught or challenged as an independent thinker. This feeling, that the news really isn’t the news anymore, is what drives Elon to tweet (X?) out something like this:
From an amazing Michael Crichton talk:
“Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues.
Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read.
You turn the page, and forget what you know.
That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper.”
The news isn’t the news anymore. It’s marketing. Bad for people, good for Pfizer.
If we get into the business of renaming, we’re getting into a marketing battle. However, if we get into the business of educating or re-educating, we’re creating more durable change.
Education is the crux of the issue. But who the heck cares? Do people really want to learn about energy? Trying to educate the masses sounds like a giant waste of time, right?
We don’t think so. We believe that people are hungry for better thinking, better information, and better logic. Substack, and other forms of “new” media, gives it to them.
So on this, the first day of the new year, we cheers to those content creators working hard with genuine intentions to educate others. From those with 50 followers to those with 500k.
New Years is a time of resolution and change. We can feel change coming.
Happy New Year ya filthy animals!