🧪 This platform is in early beta. Features may change and you might encounter bugs. We appreciate your patience!
whataboutism
Whataboutism is a diversionary tactic where someone responds to an accusation or criticism by pointing to a different, often unrelated issue rather than addressing the original point. It creates a false equivalence between two situations to neutralize criticism without ever engaging with its substance. The technique was heavily used during the Cold War by Soviet officials deflecting Western criticism by pointing to racial segregation in the United States.
When a journalist asks a government spokesperson about rising civilian casualties from drone strikes, the spokesperson replies: 'What about the thousands killed by terrorist organizations? Why don't you cover that with the same intensity?'
When a parent confronts their teenager about failing grades, the teen replies: 'Why are you always on my case? What about the fact that you were late to my last three school events?'
A tech CEO is questioned by a reporter about his company's data privacy violations, and responds: 'What about the government? They collect far more data on citizens than we ever have. Why isn't anyone investigating them?'
Binary (yes/no) questions an LLM must answer to identify this aspect:
Is the response to a criticism a deflection to a different issue?
Type: binaryDoes it use the pattern 'But what about X?' to redirect?
Type: binaryDoes it fail to address the original criticism?
Type: binaryWhataboutism is a diversionary tactic where someone responds to an accusation or criticism by pointing to a different, often unrelated issue rather than addressing the original point. It creates a false equivalence between two situations to neutralize criticism without ever engaging with its substance. The technique was heavily used during the Cold War by Soviet officials deflecting Western criticism by pointing to racial segregation in the United States.
It exploits the audience's sense of fairness and consistency, making them feel that criticizing one side without equally criticizing the other is hypocritical. This shifts the emotional burden from the accused back onto the accuser.
Acknowledge the deflection explicitly: 'That may be worth discussing separately, but right now we are addressing X. Can you respond to the specific issue raised?' Insist on addressing topics sequentially rather than in parallel.
Extremely common in political debates and press conferences, where officials deflect scandal questions by pointing to opponents' past behavior. Also widespread in online discourse and social media arguments.
Use these tools to detect, analyze, or train this aspect.