LogicalMANIPULATIVE

Appeal to Novelty

What it is

Arguing that something is better, truer, or more reliable because it is new, modern, or the latest — the mirror image of the appeal to tradition, with the same missing premise.

How it works

The form is: X is newer than Y; therefore X is better than Y. Newness can be evidence — a newer study may use better methods, a newer drug may have been tested against the old one — but only through a premise the appeal never states. Rogers (2003), in the standard account of how innovations spread, named the pro-innovation bias: the assumption in diffusion research and practice that an innovation should be adopted by everyone, as fast as possible, and never rejected. Taleb (2012) offered the opposite heuristic, the Lindy effect: for non-perishable things such as ideas and technologies, expected remaining lifespan grows with age, so the old has survived a selection the new has not yet faced. The persuasive lever is a status signal — early adoption marks the adopter as sophisticated — plus the fear of being left behind that novelty marketing cultivates. The honest version is optimism about progress applied without checking. The knowing version is the “new formula,” the “next generation,” the “new economy” of 1999 and the “new paradigm” of every bubble, sold precisely so that the comparison with the old will not be made. The tell is “new” offered as the reason rather than as the occasion for a comparison.

Real-world examples

  • •In the late 1990s the phrase “new economy” was used to argue that traditional valuation no longer applied to internet companies; Reinhart and Rogoff (2009) found that “this time is different” has preceded most financial crises for eight centuries.
  • •Vioxx (rofecoxib) was marketed from 1999 as a modern alternative to older anti-inflammatory drugs; it was withdrawn in 2004 after cardiovascular risks emerged that the older drugs did not carry.
  • •Software teams periodically rewrite working systems in the newest framework on the strength of its novelty, a pattern well enough known in the industry to have its own cautionary literature.
  • •Political candidates of every party campaign on “new ideas” and “a new generation of leadership,” which are claims about age, not about the ideas; the audiences that reward novelty in one election reward experience in the next.
  • •Consumer packaging cycles through “new and improved” without stating what improved; the word has been doing the work for a century.

Ethical guidelines

  • ●When you claim something is better because it is new, state the comparison: what does it do that the old did not, and what evidence shows it?
  • ●Do not use novelty to avoid a head-to-head test; the claim that the old rules no longer apply needs more evidence, not less.
  • ●Distinguish new evidence (which may be better) from new products (which have not yet been tested by time).
  • ●When selling, say what is unchanged as well as what is new; the customer is entitled to know which parts have a track record.

How to defend against it

  • ►Ask “better at what, compared with what?” and insist on the comparison the word “new” is standing in for.
  • ►Apply the Lindy question: what has the old version survived that the new one has not yet faced? Age is evidence of survival, not only of obsolescence.
  • ►Ask for the head-to-head: has the new thing been tested against the best existing alternative, or only against nothing?
  • ►Notice the status pull: if adopting would make you feel sophisticated, treat that as a cue to slow the decision and check the evidence.
  • ►Use the 24-hour rule on novelty purchases and the “this time is different” check on novelty investments: what specifically makes the old rule inapplicable?

References

  1. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press
    The pro-innovation bias as a named assumption in diffusion research and practice.
  2. Taleb, N. N. (2012). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. Random House
    The Lindy effect as the counter-heuristic: for non-perishables, age predicts remaining lifespan.
  3. Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2009). This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton University Press
    The historical record that “this time is different” novelty claims precede financial crises.
Last reviewed
Suggest a correction

Detect Appeal to Novelty in any text

Paste any message, email, or article into our free Manipulation Detector to see if Appeal to Novelty or other techniques are being used on you.

Try the Detector FreeCreate Free Account