Want to learn the ideas in Weaponized Lies better than ever? Read the world’s #1 book summary of Weaponized Lies by Daniel J. Levitin here.

Read a brief 1-Page Summary or watch video summaries curated by our expert team. Note: this book guide is not affiliated with or endorsed by the publisher or author, and we always encourage you to purchase and read the full book.

Video Summaries of Weaponized Lies

We’ve scoured the Internet for the very best videos on Weaponized Lies, from high-quality videos summaries to interviews or commentary by Daniel J. Levitin.

1-Page Summary of Weaponized Lies

Overview

We are all inundated with content in today’s world. But how many of us verify the truth behind that information? How often do we accept surprising statistics without questioning their accuracy, and then use them later to persuade others?

Even if you think you’re getting verified information from a source, there are still ways to get it wrong. So we should all be more rigorous about questioning the veracity of what we read in the news and these key points will tell us how to do that.

In this passage, you’ll learn why it’s important to double-check all the links in your paper; how averages aren’t always what they seem; and why you should trust experts less than you think.

Big Idea #1: Separating fact from fiction is no easy task.

We have access to more information than ever before, but it’s becoming harder and harder to distinguish between fact and fiction. People can easily spread misinformation on the internet because there are no regulations in that space.

However, most of us don’t have time to fact-check everything we read online. We’re happy that links exist so we can verify the information on our own, but it’s rare that anyone actually clicks them. Authors know they won’t be challenged about their sources or what they write, and therefore they often don’t back up their statements with legitimate sources.

The worst sites are those that claim to be honest. For example, martinlutherking.org pretends to be a site about the civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., but it’s actually full of neo-Nazi propaganda and misquotes his words in order to further its agenda. It’s important to avoid websites like this one, because they’re deliberately trying to mislead you. Instead, go with respected publications like the New York Times or Wall Street Journal, which have been around for long enough that their facts can’t easily be disputed by other sources. However, even these reputable publications make mistakes sometimes; for instance, Washington Post reporter Jonathan Capehart was tricked into writing an article about a fake congressman based on information from a Twitter account pretending to belong to that congressman. This happens when journalists don’t check their sources carefully enough or simply aren’t knowledgeable enough about certain subjects (for example statistics) and therefore fall victim to lies told by biased sources.

So, the lesson is that we shouldn’t take what we read on trust.

Big Idea #2: Don’t take graphs and statistics at face value.

It’s easy to gloss over a graph or statistic without thinking about it. But, we should avoid this because there are three different types of averages: mean, mode and median. Mean is the sum total divided by the number of values; mode is the value that occurs most frequently; and median is what lies in the middle when all numbers are lined up from smallest to largest.

When you have a list of numbers, the middle number is called the median average.

The average is often used to support a point but it can be unclear which one is being referred to. It’s especially important to note when the mean average is used because that number is most affected by extreme anomalies. For example, in 2004 Democratic candidate John Kerry was said to have won nine out of 11 wealthiest states, yet common knowledge holds that wealthy voters tend vote Republican.

However, the statistic was skewed because a few of the wealthiest people lived in those states. It didn’t mean that more wealthy voters actually lived there.

Graphs can be manipulated to change their meaning. For example, if you measured time in five-year increments for two thirds of a graph and then used two-year increments the last third, people would think that the values were higher at the end than they actually were.