The Demand for Bullshit and Its Improbable Legal Solutions

<p><span>Americans consume a lot of bullshit. Verifiable falsehoods and intentional disinformation are in the mix, but the biggest contributors to the pile are sloppy, vague, and cherrypicked content that reinforces preexisting beliefs. Policymakers typically blame supply: new media outlets that fail to meet journalistic standards or social media platforms that amplify clickbait and extreme content. As a result, legal responses have attempted to reduce bullshit by managing supply through competition policy, must-carry rules, and consumer protection laws. These interventions are flawed because they stem from a misdiagnosis. Bullshit is primarily a problem of consumer demand. News consumers prioritize social belonging, stability, and intellectual ease over truth-seeking, and media organizations must oblige if they want to survive.</span></p> <p><span>This Article reorients the policy discussion of misinformation around audience capture and demand-side factors. It distinguishes bullshit from misinformation, critiques supply-side theories, and advances a demand-side account that better explains our democratic and epistemic predicament. It then evaluates legal reforms, showing why many are ineffective, counterproductive, or unconstitutional, and concludes by sketching three alternative approaches that the government could take: (1) treating media as a widely-shared vice, (2) helping to make truth-seeking more financially or socially rewarding, and (3) fostering a culture of critical thinking.<i></i></span></p>