We are rewarding speed over depth, confidence over competence, and attention over understanding. That may work for social media. It does not work for serious decisions. Writes Ahmad Salim, Managing Partner at Disruptive Media.
We are living in a time where opinion is becoming louder than expertise.
That is what concerns me.
Not because people should not have opinions. Everyone should think, react, question and contribute. That is healthy. That is part of good work and good conversation. But somewhere along the way, we started confusing having an opinion with having expertise. Being pro max. And those are not the same thing.
Today, the person with the loudest voice, the biggest audience, or the most confidence in the room is often treated like the smartest person in the room. That is a dangerous shift.
I have seen this happen too often in creative work, in media and in boardrooms. A decision gets made not because it is informed, not because it is strategically right, not because it is backed by experience, but because someone likes a color, prefers a certain tone, feels a headline is “too serious,” or simply wants something that matches their taste. That personal preference then becomes direction. And from there, a campaign changes, a brand shifts, a message weakens and the work suffers.
The strange part is not that they have views. The strange part is that those views are sometimes given the same weight or more weight than the people who have actually studied, practiced and built careers around that craft.
That is where the problem begins.
In many industries today, expertise is being pushed aside by visibility. If someone has an audience online, people assume they must know what they are talking about. If someone is popular, available, or speaks with enough certainty, they are suddenly treated like an authority. But popularity is not proof. Reach is not skill. Visibility is not depth.
And yet, many decisions are now being influenced by exactly that.
In my field, I have watched people who are not journalists speak with total certainty about how journalism should be done. I have seen people who are not writers decide how stories should be written. I have seen people with no editorial training decide what headlines should look like, what tone newspapers should use and how information should be framed. The strange part is not that they have views. The strange part is that those views are sometimes given the same weight or more weight than the people who have actually studied, practiced and built careers around that craft.
That should worry all of us.
Because once we stop respecting expertise, we start normalizing amateur authority. And when that becomes normal, the standard drops everywhere.
We would never fully trust that logic in other parts of life. You do not walk into a doctor’s office, diagnose yourself, choose your own prescription and then tell the doctor how medicine should work. You may ask questions. You may seek a second opinion. You may want options explained clearly. All of that is fair. But at the end of the day, you still respect the years of training, the skill and the responsibility that come with that profession.
So why are we so comfortable doing the opposite in business, media, branding and communication?
Why do we keep treating expertise like it is optional?
I am not saying experts should never be challenged. They should be. Good experts are not fragile. They can defend their thinking. They can explain their process. They can be questioned. And they should also listen. Expertise should not become arrogance.
But there has to be a line.
There has to be a difference between input and interference.
There has to be a difference between healthy collaboration and people casually overruling professionals in areas they do not understand deeply.
Experts should be allowed to be experts.
And maybe more importantly, experts should be the ones responding to expert work. If a journalist’s work is being questioned, let that criticism come from people who understand journalism. If a strategist presents a brand direction, let the strongest challenge come from people who understand strategy. If a writer builds a story, let the discussion be shaped by people who understand language, audience, rhythm, and purpose.
That does not mean other voices do not matter.
It means not every voice carries the same weight on every subject.
That is not elitism. That is structure. That is respect. That is how good work is protected.
Right now, we are rewarding speed over depth, confidence over competence, and attention over understanding. That may work for social media. It does not work for serious decisions. It does not build strong brands. It does not strengthen journalism. And it definitely does not help industries grow in a healthy way.
If we continue down this road, we will keep uploading opinions and slowly forgetting the people who actually know what they are doing.
That is the bigger loss.
Because once expertise becomes negotiable, quality becomes unstable.
And when quality becomes unstable, trust disappears.
I think it is time we restored some balance.
Let people have opinions, yes.
Let rooms stay collaborative, yes.
Let leaders ask questions, yes.
But let expertise mean something again.
Let trained people lead in trained spaces.
Let experience count.
Let craft matter.
And let us stop pretending that being visible is the same as being qualified.
Because it is not. An opinion can join the conversation. Expertise should still lead it.
