Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network
Host: Michael Johnson
Guest: Dr. Joel Best
Book Discussed: Just the Facts: Untangling Contradictory Claims (University of California Press, 2025)
Date: September 20, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode centers on sociologist Dr. Joel Best’s latest book, Just the Facts: Untangling Contradictory Claims. The conversation explores the nature of facts, how they’re created, revised, disputed, and weaponized within modern society. Dr. Best unpacks the sociological underpinnings of “facticity”—how facts emerge from social agreements and institutional processes, why contradictory claims persist, and how our relationship to evidence has evolved. Listeners will gain frameworks for understanding not just what facts are—but why ‘just the facts’ is more complicated than it seems.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Origins and Motivation for the Book

• Why write about facts?
  Dr. Best noticed increased public irritation and debate about “the facts.” Sensing a gap in sociological literature, he dove into the topic, aiming to clarify how facts are made and why consensus breaks down.
• Quote:

  “Facts are clearly social, and there’s something that a sociologist should study.” (02:17, Dr. Joel Best)

2. The Social Construction of Facts (03:40–07:08)

• Facts as Social Agreements:
  • People “don’t like to hear that facts are socially constructed,” preferring to see them as absolute truths discovered in nature.
  • Dr. Best illustrates with calendars and clocks: time and dates are facts reliant on widespread agreement—nothing in nature insists it’s “September 17th,” but we all agree it is.
  • All facts have a conventional, agreed-upon basis—be it time zones or scientific findings.
• Quote:

  “I believe it’s a fact, but it’s a fact because we’ve all agreed to agree that this is what makes a fact. And all facts are like that, okay?” (05:36, Dr. Joel Best)

3. Institutions of Fact-Making (09:09–13:19)

• Various Institutional Processes:
  • Science: Factual claims are continually tested, replicated, and sometimes revised (e.g., tectonic plates).
  • Government: Produces facts like census numbers, inflation rates, crime statistics—best available efforts, but always under revision and potentially flawed.
  • Law: Facts are established by evidence presented and agreed upon in court.
  • Journalism: Creates facts through reporting and verification.
• All these institutions strive for accuracy but work with imperfect data and methodologies.
• Quote:

  “They aren’t some genuinely true bit of information. They are the best information that we have using the best methods that we have.” (12:14, Dr. Joel Best)

4. Alternative “Little Social Worlds”: Competing Facticities (13:19–14:56)

• Beyond Institutions:
  • Groups outside mainstream authority construct their own facts (e.g., flat earthers, religious fundamentalists).
  • Within those “social worlds,” belief in their own facts is reasonable and cohesive, even if contested outside the group.

5. The Limits and Complexities of Fact-Checking (15:06–19:19)

• Origin and Proliferation of Fact Checking:
  • Grew from magazine journalism to online media (e.g., Snopes, PolitiFact), now ubiquitous from all political spectrums.
  • Each “social world” can create its own fact checks, leading to an ever-expanding landscape of contradictory verifications.
• Effectiveness:
  • Intended to resolve disputes, but often fails as people tend not to accept the standards of fact-checkers they disagree with.
• Quote:

  “There is no way to simply declare that this is a real fact and your facts are wrong… the only opportunity to persuade one another is to get to the point where we’re saying, ‘look… let's inspect how you know what you know and how I know what I know and compare them and see what we think.’” (18:07 and 36:59, Dr. Joel Best)

6. The Revision and Longevity of Facts (19:54–24:43)

• Facts Constantly Revised:
  • Macroeconomic figures, like employment stats, are released, then revised as more data arrives.
  • Revisions are transparent and expected, yet initial headlines often overshadow more accurate, later data.
• Illustrative Example:
  • Political interference (referencing President Trump’s complaint about Bureau of Labor Statistics job reports) runs up against methodological rigor—loyalists cannot simply change “the facts.”

7. Dissent, Redefinitions & Apples-to-Oranges Dilemmas (24:43–31:01)

• Case Study: Maternal Mortality
  • Definitions shift (death within 6 weeks, 1 year, or even 8 years of childbirth; direct vs. indirect causes), changing “the fact” across time.
  • Redefinitions can undermine comparability and historical tracking—a problem especially acute in political transitions.
• Quote:

  “It is necessary that you talk about it carefully, that you speak about it in clear terms so people can understand that you're changing, you're revising the definition.” (27:35, Dr. Joel Best)

8. Denial & Disbelief as Group Practice (31:03–37:21)

• Rejecting Facts as Identity:
  • Complete denial of facts often cements group identity (“table pounding”) rather than misinformed ignorance.
  • Examples: Debates over gender binaries, election legitimacy—each side asserts “the facts,” often to bolster in-group boundaries.
• From Authority to Evidence:
  • Dr. Best points to the cultural turn from belief in authority (e.g., Galileo v. the Church) toward evaluating claims by evidence.
  • Popular culture valorizes evidence: detective stories, legal dramas, diagnostic medicine, even romance plotlines.
• Quote:

  “One of the products of the Enlightenment is that we've all come to believe in evidence… modern Americans believe in evidence. And so...the secret to resolving debates about facts is to say, 'look, let me show you my evidence and...you show me your evidence and tell me how your evidence is produced.'” (34:32–36:59, Dr. Joel Best)

9. Education, Debate, and Evidence-Based Reasoning (37:21–38:36)

• Importance of Teaching Debate Skills:
  • Dr. Best laments the decline in “persuasion” in debate—now more about scoring points than weighing evidence.
• Practical Takeaway:
  • Focus cultural and educational energy on comparing how knowledge claims are produced, not just which side scores rhetorical victories.

10. Dr. Best’s Future Directions (39:10–42:23)

• New Project: The Language of Social Problems
  • He’s researching metaphors and terms used in policy and media (e.g., “mission creep,” “grade inflation,” the weaponization of certain words).
  • Interested in how language shapes what gets defined as a problem and how it’s perceived.

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On definitions:

  “All facts are at bottom social agreements where little social worlds come together and they make sense of facts.” (06:32, Dr. Joel Best)

• On fact-checking’s challenge:

  “It was intended to be a sort of way to resolve disputes. But it turns out that it’s very difficult to convince everyone.” (18:07, Dr. Joel Best)

• On opposing 'facts':

  “People weaponize the word ‘fact.’ They say, this is a fact. You can't argue with this. And we need to get past that... our calling something a fact is not a magical tool that makes it true.” (32:03, Dr. Joel Best)

Timeline — Key Segments

• 01:33–02:17 — Introducing Dr. Joel Best and the book’s inspiration
• 03:40–07:08 — Facts as social constructions, conventions, and agreements
• 09:09–13:19 — How science, government, law, and journalism make facts
• 13:19–14:56 — Alternative factual universes: flat earthers, religious groups
• 15:06–19:19 — The rise and fragmentation of fact-checking
• 19:54–24:43 — Revision of facts (macroeconomics, politics)
• 24:43–31:01 — Redefinition dilemmas (maternal mortality example)
• 31:03–37:21 — Denial, identity, and the cultural role of evidence
• 39:10–42:23 — Dr. Best’s ongoing research on the language of social problems

Takeaway

Just the Facts challenges listeners and readers to confront the messy, negotiated, and contingent foundations of what society considers “factual.” By unveiling the social workings behind claims, Dr. Best invites us to focus less on defending “our facts” and more on scrutinizing the evidence and reasoning that underpins them. The ability to untangle contradictory claims lies in understanding fact-making as a collective, ongoing, and inherently social process.