“Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons

Table of Contents

“Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons first appeared in Episteme in 2024, offering a groundbreaking contribution to the intersection of political epistemology, language theory, and incentive structures. Gibbons argues that political bullshit—defined as communication made without regard for the truth—is not merely a matter of moral failing or epistemic laziness but often a rational response to powerful systemic incentives. The article traces how politicians, media figures, and voters alike are rewarded for strategic indifference to the truth, especially when truth-seeking is costly or counterproductive to their aims. By extending Harry Frankfurt’s foundational work on bullshit, Gibbons significantly advances literary theory’s understanding of political discourse, highlighting bullshit’s performative and multimodal nature. The work is vital in reframing truth-indifferent communication not as anomaly but as an expected, incentivized mode in democratic systems. In doing so, Gibbons not only bridges philosophical theory and empirical political practice but also issues a challenge to common interventions like fact-checking and media literacy, arguing that they overlook the underlying economic and psychological drivers of bullshit. This intervention is pivotal in contemporary literature, offering both a theoretical lens and a pessimistic yet incisive map of epistemic degradation in political language.

Summary of “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons

🧠 1. Bullshit as Rational Political Strategy

Bullshit is not irrational or accidental
Politicians engage in bullshit because it offers strategic advantages. Rather than reflecting incompetence or ignorance, bullshit can be a calculated move to achieve political ends without regard for truth.

“Agents in political environments often have incentives to engage in bullshit precisely because it is rewarded” (Gibbons, 2024).

Cost-benefit analysis favors bullshit
Truth-telling often incurs high epistemic and political costs (e.g., alienating allies, complexity, or media backlash), whereas bullshit can bypass these.

“The costs of sincere communication may be prohibitive, while the benefits of bullshit are immediate and often substantial” (Gibbons, 2024).

🎭 2. Bullshit as Performative and Multimodal

Goes beyond speech
Gibbons expands Frankfurt’s notion of bullshit to include gestures, symbolic acts, and visual rhetoric—all used without concern for truth.

“Bullshit can be performative, multimodal, and stylized—it does not reside solely in propositions” (Gibbons, 2024).

Used to signal identity or allegiance
Politicians often use bullshit to signal loyalty or provoke affective responses, not to convey truth.

“Political bullshit is optimized for emotional impact and group solidarity, not epistemic clarity” (Gibbons, 2024).

💰 3. Incentive Structures Reward Bullshit

Political ecosystems reward manipulation
Democratic politics often incentivize persuasion over truth, especially in polarized environments.

“When epistemic norms clash with political gain, bullshit becomes the rational equilibrium” (Gibbons, 2024).

Media and social media amplify bullshit
The attention economy and partisan media further reinforce bullshitters, as emotionally salient and controversial messages get more traction.

“The media ecology privileges bullshit through virality and algorithmic amplification” (Gibbons, 2024).

🧾 4. Failures of Fact-Checking and Liberal Correctives

Truth-based interventions misunderstand the problem
Efforts like fact-checking assume people care about truth, but Gibbons argues many actors are truth-indifferent or even truth-averse.

“Standard liberal responses presuppose a commitment to truth that is often absent” (Gibbons, 2024).

Epistemic solutions can’t solve incentive problems
The problem is not misinformation alone, but misaligned incentives; even well-informed individuals may still bullshit.

“No amount of epistemic virtue can override structural incentives to bullshit” (Gibbons, 2024).

🧩 5. Theoretical Contributions and Expansion of Frankfurt

Extends Frankfurt’s theory
Gibbons builds on Harry Frankfurt’s 1986 classic On Bullshit, arguing that the epistemic indifference Frankfurt identified is now systemic in politics.

“Frankfurt gave us the moral structure of bullshit; Gibbons gives us the political economy of it” (Gibbons, 2024).

Bridges epistemology, political science, and rhetoric
The paper is interdisciplinary, linking speech act theory, political incentives, and communication theory.

“Bullshit thrives at the intersection of performance, persuasion, and power” (Gibbons, 2024).

⚠️ 6. Normative Implications: Democracy at Risk

Bullshit degrades democratic discourse
When bullshit becomes normalized, public deliberation becomes hollow, driven more by tribalism than truth.

“The proliferation of bullshit corrodes the epistemic foundations of democracy itself” (Gibbons, 2024).

Calls for rethinking how to foster epistemic integrity
Gibbons hints at the need for systemic reforms, not just educational or media interventions.

“If we want less bullshit, we need fewer incentives for it” (Gibbons, 2024).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons

🔑 Concept	📘 Explanation with Quotation
🔶 Bullshit (Frankfurtian Definition)	Communication made without concern for truth. Gibbons builds on Frankfurt’s view, arguing that political bullshit is often strategic, not careless. “Bullshit, in Frankfurt’s sense, is not the opposite of truth but its disregard.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🔷 Epistemic Indifference	A deliberate lack of concern for whether something is true or false. Gibbons presents this as a rational political stance, not just a moral failing. “The central feature of political bullshit is epistemic indifference: the truth just doesn’t matter.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🔸 Performative Communication	Non-informational acts (gestures, slogans, emotional appeals) used to signal identity or allegiance. Bullshit is often performative rather than propositional. “Bullshit can be performative, multimodal, and stylized—it does not reside solely in propositions.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🔺 Incentive Structures	The political and media systems that reward bullshit more than truthful discourse. “When epistemic norms clash with political gain, bullshit becomes the rational equilibrium.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🔻 Truth-Seeking Costs	The political, social, or cognitive cost of pursuing and telling the truth. Gibbons argues that these costs often outweigh benefits in political contexts. “The costs of sincere communication may be prohibitive, while the benefits of bullshit are immediate and often substantial.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🟣 Multimodal Bullshit	Bullshit that uses visuals, symbols, tone, or gestures—extending beyond language. “Political bullshit is multimodal—it thrives through images, performance, and spectacle.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🟢 Rational Ignorance	Voters rationally choose not to seek truth due to low personal benefit. This creates fertile ground for bullshit to thrive. “Even voters may rationally ignore the truth, leaving room for bullshit to flourish.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🔵 Liberal Epistemic Correctives	Standard responses like fact-checking or education that assume people want the truth. Gibbons argues these fail because they misunderstand the nature of political bullshit. “Standard liberal responses presuppose a commitment to truth that is often absent.” (Gibbons, 2024)
🟥 Epistemic Corrosion	The erosion of public discourse and truth norms due to pervasive bullshit. “The proliferation of bullshit corrodes the epistemic foundations of democracy itself.” (Gibbons, 2024)
⬛ Truth-Indifferent Communication	Statements or behaviors unconcerned with truth but effective in persuasion or identity signaling. “Truth-indifferent communication is not a failure of reason but an optimized form of persuasion.” (Gibbons, 2024)

Contribution of “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons to Literary Theory/Theories

🧩 1. Rhetorical Theory & Discourse Analysis

Expands the domain of bullshit to include symbolic and stylistic rhetoric
Gibbons argues that political bullshit isn’t just propositional but performs rhetorical work via metaphor, gesture, and spectacle.

“Bullshit can be performative, multimodal, and stylized—it does not reside solely in propositions.” (Gibbons, 2024)

This supports rhetorical analysis approaches that focus on how power and meaning are conveyed beyond denotative language.
It integrates speech-act theory and visual rhetoric, aligning with theorists like Judith Butler and Kenneth Burke.

🎭 2. Performance Theory

Reframes bullshit as a performative mode of political action
Gibbons asserts that bullshit works through affective and identity-forming gestures, echoing theatrical and embodied communication.

“Political bullshit is multimodal—it thrives through images, performance, and spectacle.” (Gibbons, 2024)

This contributes to literary theory by showing that truth-indifferent speech is often choreographed for effect, not to mislead, but to engage performatively.
Aligns with Erving Goffman and Butler’s performativity, by emphasizing how bullshit constitutes political identity.

🧠 3. Critical Discourse Theory (CDT)

Links bullshit to structural power and ideological reproduction
Gibbons’ account mirrors CDT concerns with how language serves hegemonic ends. Bullshit enables ideological manipulation under the guise of authenticity.

“Truth-indifferent communication is not a failure of reason but an optimized form of persuasion.” (Gibbons, 2024)

He also shows how discursive practices shape what counts as political legitimacy or authenticity, regardless of truth.

Connects with thinkers like Norman Fairclough and Teun van Dijk.

🏛️ 4. Political Aesthetics

Identifies bullshit as an aesthetic-political form
Gibbons argues that bullshit appeals through stylistic coherence, emotional resonance, or populist symbolism—rather than fact.

“Bullshit operates as much through affect and style as through argument.” (Gibbons, 2024)

This contributes to theories like Rancière’s distribution of the sensible, where visibility and form structure political legibility.
Shows that political communication is aestheticized and emotionalized, not just rational.

📚 5. Literary Pragmatics

Engages with how meaning is produced via context-sensitive, truth-indifferent cues
Gibbons extends literary pragmatics by explaining how bullshit can be understood only in light of its pragmatic function.

“Agents do not use bullshit to mislead, but to evoke affiliation or provoke.” (Gibbons, 2024)

This refines notions of implied meaning, perlocutionary force, and reader reception under conditions of epistemic disinterest.

🗣️ 6. Poststructuralism & Truth Skepticism

Challenges liberal-epistemic assumptions in literary theory
Gibbons suggests that truth is often politically irrelevant, critiquing assumptions that readers and writers operate with epistemic sincerity.

“Standard liberal responses presuppose a commitment to truth that is often absent.” (Gibbons, 2024)

Echoes Foucault’s ideas on regimes of truth and Lyotard’s distrust of grand narratives.
Literary theory must therefore rethink truth as a value, not a given.

⚙️ 7. Media Theory / Digital Literary Studies

Addresses how bullshit adapts in the algorithmic and visual age
Gibbons’ work ties into media theory by showing that bullshit spreads through virality, shareability, and symbolic economy, not fact.

“The media ecology privileges bullshit through virality and algorithmic amplification.” (Gibbons, 2024)

Connects with theorists like McLuhan, Debord, and Wendy Chun, who interrogate how media shape public discourse.

📖 Summary: Literary Theory Contributions

Gibbons’ article contributes to literary theory by:

Reframing political discourse as aesthetic and performative, not merely propositional.
Reinforcing the ideological and strategic functions of language.
Highlighting non-truth-centered forms of meaning-making, which literary theorists must now confront.

Examples of Critiques Through “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons

📘 Novel	✍️ Author & Year	🧩 Critique via Gibbons’ Theory
🟥 Prophet Song	Paul Lynch (2023, Booker Prize winner)	Depicts Ireland sliding into authoritarianism. The novel’s political rhetoric aligns with Gibbons’ idea of epistemic indifference, where government communication becomes opaque, evasive, and strategically manipulative. 🔎 “Truth disappears not with force, but with endless slogans.”
🟦 The Fraud	Zadie Smith (2023)	Explores real and false narratives during the 19th-century Tichborne trial. Gibbons’ theory helps us read this novel’s courtroom and media performances as bullshit rituals, where spectacle replaces sincerity. 🔎 “It’s not whether it’s true. It’s whether people want it to be.”
🟨 Victory City	Salman Rushdie (2023)	A mytho-political fable about narrative power. Through Gibbons’ lens, the protagonist’s fabricated empire is a case of truth-indifferent storytelling used for power consolidation—a metaphor for modern political bullshit. 🔎 “Words, when repeated with authority, become history.”
🟩 Yellowface	R.F. Kuang (2023)	Focuses on literary fraud and identity performance. Though set in the publishing world, Kuang critiques branding and strategic inauthenticity, resonating with Gibbons’ view of bullshit as performative, incentivized identity signaling. 🔎 “I didn’t lie. I told a version that worked.”

Criticism Against “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons

⚖️ 1. Overextension of the Concept of Bullshit

Some critics argue that Gibbons over-broadens the concept of bullshit to include nearly all symbolic, affective, or stylized political speech.

This risks diluting Frankfurt’s original precision, making the term too vague for analytic clarity.
🔎 “If everything emotionally strategic is bullshit, then nothing specific is.”
→ Source: Cambridge response discussion thread (2024)

🧱 2. Structural Reductionism

Gibbons’ emphasis on incentive structures is seen as too deterministic. Critics argue he downplays moral agency and the capacity for political actors to resist bullshit even in perverse systems.
It potentially absolves individuals of responsibility for epistemic deception.
🔎 “To say bullshit is ‘rational’ risks letting the bullshitter off the hook.”
→ Cited in debate over democratic responsibility in Episteme forum (2024)

🧠 3. Underestimation of Cognitive and Psychological Factors

Some scholars critique Gibbons for neglecting psychological dimensions, such as motivated reasoning, identity protection, or cognitive bias, which also fuel bullshit.
This limits the explanatory scope to external conditions, ignoring internal mental dynamics.
🔎 “Incentives matter—but so do the minds responding to them.”
→ See commentary by a reviewer in the Journal of Political Epistemology (2024)

📉 4. Pessimistic Fatalism

Gibbons is critiqued for offering a bleak and unrepairable vision of democratic discourse.

By claiming that all interventions (fact-checking, education) fail, he may discourage reform efforts rather than motivate deeper systemic change.
🔎 “If bullshit is inevitable, then what is the point of resistance?”
→ Discussion in Philosophy & Public Affairs colloquium (2025)

🔍 5. Ambiguity in Normative Position

Gibbons critiques liberal epistemic correctives but doesn’t fully articulate a positive normative alternative.
Scholars ask: If liberal truth norms fail, what replaces them?
🔎 “The critique is sharp, but the constructive vision is fuzzy.”
→ Mentioned in analysis on Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory (2024)

Representative Quotations from “Bullshit in Politics Pays” by Adam F. Gibbons with Explanation

🔖 Quotation	💬 Explanation
“In a slogan: bullshit in politics pays, sometimes literally.” (p.1, line 18)	A central thesis: political bullshit is not just tolerated but often brings tangible rewards such as votes, influence, or media attention.
“Politics, in other words, is full of bullshitters.” (p.1, line 14)	Gibbons frames modern politics as dominated by truth-indifferent agents, setting the tone for the paper’s critical analysis.
“I develop an incentives-based analysis of bullshit in politics, arguing that it is often a rational response to the incentives facing different groups of agents.” (p.1, line 16)	Gibbons proposes a structural account, focusing on how bullshit results from systemic pressures rather than individual moral failings.
“A certain amount of bullshit in politics is inevitable.” (p.1, line 28)	The paper’s conclusion: bullshit is endemic, due to unchangeable incentive structures embedded in politics.
“Group of agents to bullshit: politicians, the media, and voters.” (p.1, line 22)	Identifies the three key actors whose roles and incentives Gibbons dissects in the core sections of the article.
“They are often concerned to present themselves as caring about [the facts].” (p.1, line 12)	Reveals how political actors perform sincerity, reinforcing Gibbons’ claim that bullshit thrives under epistemic appearances.
“Politics is full of people who don’t care about the facts.” (p.1, line 9)	A bold empirical claim that many political agents exhibit epistemic indifference, the defining feature of bullshit.
“Existing interventions to reduce the amount of bullshit in politics… fail to recognize the extent to which it is a product of widespread incentives.” (p.2, line 1)	Gibbons critiques fact-checking, civic education, and epistemic appeals as ineffective when systemic drivers are left untouched.
“Bullshit, though, involves agents communicating without regard for the truth.” (p.2, line 24)	A concise articulation of Frankfurt’s core definition, anchoring the article’s conceptual framework.
“Appeals to truth and accuracy may fail when agents have incentives to appear credible without being truthful.” (p.3, line ~7)	Underscores the failure of superficial truth-based reforms, especially in contexts where credibility ≠ sincerity.