Quick Take on “Credibility”

 

TL;DR Credibility is largely based on the difference in knowledge between you and the person you’re talking to. However, the way that you present your knowledge is important too.

People talk about credibility all the time. Whether we’re talking about “Street cred” “Geek Cred” or “Indie Cred”, we’re all discussing the same thing. A certain amount of knowledge of a topic and the ability to be trusted or believed in. The last part is the important part. Being trusted and believed is everything here.

How high the bar is depends on who you’re talking to. I know a decent amount of things about comics. I can readily identify superheroes by sight and can usually identify who’s in DC or Marvel. I’ve watched most of the recent movies. When I talk to someone who can’t tell the difference between Superman and Aquaman, I have lots of credibility. When I went to lunch with someone who writes about comics the way I write about basketball (passionately, often, in-depth), I had virtually none. She discussed the difference between Captain America in different eras and different author’s (illustrator’s?) takes on different heroes and I was lost.

Sometimes the environment that you are in matters. One time, when I was leaving the law school (in scenic Boulder, Colorado), a lady looked at me and then told her companion that “There’s so many thugs here”. (Perhaps it was the baseball cap - hoodie combo or the menacing way I was holding my Torts textbook.) I’ve also heard similar comments about me or about other people. Of course, in my home of Springfield Gardens, there’s zero confusion no matter what I’m wearing. The differences between “thug” and “person in hooded jacket” aren’t exactly nuanced to them.

Faking credibility is problematic. It seems that often the best way to protect ones ego is to pretend to know more than you actually do. You can get away with it (sometimes) if you’re talking to someone who knows less than you. You can’t if they can easily figure out that that you’re making things up. On social media, I’m always surprised by how few questions people ask. The value is in having a strong opinion without supporting that opinion in any way. The discussions are better when people question each other rather than shouting each other down. (I sometimes parody these types of discussions when I see them unfolding as a passive way of pointing out that the discussion is devolving. See every time that I write “TL;DR  X is a Lakers fan, Y is a Heat fan or something along that line.)

I have strong opinions too, but I’m making it a point not to shout down the people who disagree with me. My reasoning behind it is because I think that being a bit tempered helps gives me some credibility. It means that people who disagree with me are more likely to listen, even if after listening they continue to disagree. It also means that I have a better opportunity to talk about incarceration, gun laws and other contentious issues with people who are on the other side. Having discussions that don’t devolve into arguments also makes me better. Talking to the people who believe something I disagree with (Paul George is having a more MVP worthy season than Kevin Durant, for example) helps me to craft better and more useful arguments. It shows me what the weaknesses in my position are and what parts I should at least address.  It means that when I present an opinion I’m going to have more credibility in doing so.