Assertion Partly supported AI assessment confidence: 95% certainty 4/5 debate potential 3/5

Johnson: Famous political experts predict the future worse than random chance

Steven B. Johnson · a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories · Jan 2, 2019 · at 20:40

Author Steven B. Johnson discusses Philip Tetlock's landmark research on superforecasting and expert judgment during an a16z Podcast episode on decision-making.

0:00 / 0:06exact quote · 6.8s

▶ Watch the full episode on YouTube → 720p mp4 · rendered on demand · StarZero watermark

“All the experts are like worse than a dart throwing chimp at predicting the future. And the more famous you got, the worse you were at”

quote is from the automated transcript, cleaned for reading: filler sounds and stutters are removed, nothing is rephrased. names can be misheard (the analysis reads context, assessments check outside sources). how →

The claim, plainly

Philip Tetlock's study on long-term forecasting demonstrated that political experts performed worse than random chance, with higher public fame correlating with worse predictive accuracy.

a quote alone can be ambiguous, so this restates it with the references and context of the conversation around it resolved. AI-written; the tape below the player is the source.

Assessment

The claim is partially true. Philip Tetlock's research ('Expert Political Judgment') confirmed a consistent inverse correlation between public fame/media prominence and predictive accuracy, as media outlets favored confident 'hedgehogs' who made dramatic predictions. However, the claim that political experts overall performed 'worse than random chance' is a common exaggeration; across the entire dataset, experts on average performed slightly better than or roughly equivalent to random chance ('dart-throwing chimps'), though specific subsets (such as 'hedgehogs' and high-profile pundits) did perform worse than random guessing.

Tetlock found a consistent inverse correlation between public fame/media prominence and predictive accuracy.
Aggregate expert forecasting accuracy across the whole study was slightly better than or roughly equivalent to random guessing, though specific subsets (like 'hedgehogs' and famous pundits) performed worse than random guessing.

Checked against

[1] emilkirkegaard.dk [2] wikipedia.org [3] businessinsider.com [4] medium.com [5] superbook.ai [6] marquette.edu [7] researchgate.net [8] upenn.edu

Philip Tetlock Expert Political Judgment worse than random chance dart throwing chimp Philip Tetlock Expert Political Judgment media fame predictive accuracy correlation

assessed as of 2026-07-28

This assessment is an AI reading of a public statement, made against the cited references with the confidence shown. It can be wrong. The quote, the tape and the references are all on this page; if something is off, use report an error below. full disclaimer →

Mentioned

Philip Tetlock Steven B. Johnson

⚑ Spot an error? Report it

More from Steven B. Johnson

Insight

Johnson: Diverse, lower-IQ groups outperform homogeneous, high-IQ groups in complex decisions

“You take groups of high IQ individuals who are all from the same, say academic background or economic background and have them make a complicated group decision. And then you take a group of actually lower IQ people, but who come from diverse fields, professio…”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 17:21 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Insight

Johnson: Diverse members make insider groups more creative without even speaking

“The presence of difference in a group makes the kind of initial kind of insiders more open to new ideas. If you have kind of an insider group, a homogeneous group, and you bring in folks who bring some kind of difference, even if they don't say anything, the i…”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 18:28 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Assertion Not checkable as stated

Johnson: Sci-fi predicts the future more accurately than official forecasters

“I mean, I certainly think that you would find more things that ended up happening in fictional accounts than, you know, official people making predictions about the future outside of a fictional context.”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 7:57 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Assertion Not checkable as stated

Steven Johnson: Extraterrestrial civilizations contacted by Earth will be more advanced

“By definition, they are going to be more advanced than we are, which is a whole complicated reason why that is, but they will be.”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 25:13 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Opinion

Johnson: Blockchain Models Are Needed for Sustainable Open Internet Protocols

“Some of the blockchain Models and some of the token economy stuff that, that you've written about as a way of creating sustainable business models for open protocols, basically, which is what we really kind of need.”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 32:47 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Insight

Steven B. Johnson: The most consequential decisions are slow decisions

“The decisions that really matter the most are slow decisions, are decisions that have a much longer both time span in terms of how much time you spend deliberating them, and then also the time span of their consequences.”

Steven B. Johnson Jan 2, 2019 ▶ 0:59 a16z Podcast | Seeing into the Future -- Making Decisions, Telling Stories

Johnson: Famous political experts predict the future worse than random chance

More from Steven B. Johnson

Turn any episode into a week of clips.