LinguisticMANIPULATIVE

Whataboutism

What it is

Deflecting criticism by pointing to someone else's wrongdoing instead of addressing the original issue.

How it works

When confronted with a valid criticism, the person responds by asking "what about X?" — redirecting attention to a different issue or a perceived hypocrisy. This avoids engaging with the original point while creating the impression that the criticism is unfair or selective.

Real-world examples

  • •A company responding to pollution criticism by saying "What about our competitors who are worse?"
  • •Political debates where each side deflects by pointing to the other's scandals.
  • •An employee confronted about missed deadlines responding with "What about all the times I stayed late?"

Ethical guidelines

  • ●Address criticism directly before raising other issues.
  • ●Acknowledge valid points even when they are inconvenient.
  • ●If raising parallel issues, make clear you are not using them to dodge the original concern.

How to defend against it

  • ►Redirect the conversation: "That may be worth discussing too, but let's address the current issue first."
  • ►Recognize whataboutism as a deflection tactic, not a counterargument.
  • ►Insist on addressing one issue at a time.

From the Defense Playbook

DEAR MANtakes practice

A structured way of asking for something or saying no, taken from dialectical behavior therapy: Describe, Express, Assert, Reinforce, while staying Mindful, Appearing confident, and Negotiating.

Flow the Argumenttakes practice

Borrow the competitive debater's note-taking method: write each of the other side's points in a column as they are made, put the responses beside them, and look at what is left unanswered, so that volume and speed cannot substitute for substance.

Note and Returnseconds

When a new topic is introduced in the middle of an unresolved one, acknowledge it, write it down as something to come back to, and return to the original point, so that diversions neither derail the discussion nor go unanswered.

Every playbook entry states how strong its evidence is and when not to use it. Browse the full playbook.

DISARM framework

How analysts would file this in the open DISARM framework (v1.6.1, CC BY-SA 4.0). Closest matches, mapped by Persuasion Lab.

T0077Distract

References

  1. Walton, D. (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments. University of Alabama Press
    Analyses the tu quoque and 'two wrongs' forms of ad hominem: answering a criticism by pointing to the critic's (or a third party's) wrongdoing, which shifts the topic without addressing the original charge — the entry's 'what about X?' deflection.
  2. Aikin, S. F. (2008). Tu quoque arguments and the significance of hypocrisy. Informal Logic, 28(2), 155–169
    Argues that a charge of hypocrisy, even when accurate, does not bear on whether the original criticism is correct — the entry's point that the counter-accusation avoids engaging with the original point.
Last reviewed
Suggest a correction

Detect Whataboutism in any text

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

Try the Detector FreeCreate Free Account