"Whataboutism" or the attention-diversion effect is a communication tactic in which the interlocutor does not respond directly to criticism, but diverts the topic elsewhere - most often with a counter-accusation. It is an evasive strategy where the key thesis becomes irrelevant, as the discussion shifts to the question: "What about them, when they did the same thing?"
What is whataboutism?? If a journalist asks a minister at a press conference about the poor state of healthcare, they often hear a response that goes something like this: “Why didn't you say anything when they closed several clinics ten years ago?” Instead of a concrete answer, we get a return to the past and a discussion of old affairs. The effect of this is simple but effective – the audience loses focus, and the conversation becomes an emotional discussion of old grievances that offers no solutions to the current situation.
A master tool of political conflict
Political discourse is a breeding ground for “whataboutism.” When the current government is criticized for an affair or mistakes, we can almost expect a response that resembles: “The previous government did even worse!“ By doing so, political elites avoid direct responsibility and shift the debate to a “competition” about who has the longest list of mistakes.
This phenomenon is not limited to politics. It is also present in social discussions on networks, where users often write when criticizing current events: “Remember in 2010 when the same thing happened?” Instead of confronting today's problems, we are bringing up the past and diluting the debate. Suddenly, it is less important how to solve the problems and more important who made the first mistake.
Why does “whataboutism” work so well?
The reason this tactic works so often is simple: people have an innate need for fairness and comparisonsIf someone mentions that he once another group did something similar, this creates the feeling that it may not be fair for only one side to be held accountable for its mistakes. Such excuses distract us with a strong emotional charge – they remind us of injustices from the past, of resentments that are still fresh. As a result, the public is divided into camps, which instead of arguments for solving the problem, dig up old stories.
How to avoid the “What about them?” game
The first step in overcoming "whataboutism” is to recognize that it is a trick that leads away from the point. When the interlocutor changes the subject, the key is to remain calm and return the question to the original problem: “This is all interesting, but how will you solve the current problem?” It is important not to fall for emotional comparisons, but to stick to the facts.
People often think, to defeat “whataboutism” with strong counterattacks, but in reality we are playing its game. A calm and focused response is more important than an emotional response. By using verified information and clear questions, we can stay on topic and prevent the discussion from slipping into confusion.
For better public discourse
The attentional bias effect teaches us important lessons about how easily we can lose the thread of a conversation. In a society where debates are increasingly heated and polarized, we need to recognize communication tricks and learn to think critically. Only in this way can we prevent important questions from going unanswered. Instead of returning to the question again and again “What about them?”, we must look for solutions to the question “What can we do now?”
When we learn to silence the voices of the past and focus on the present, discussions will become constructive and change-oriented. Then the political space will also become less like a duel and more like a platform for finding solutions.
