For that reason, there has been an exponential increase in mechanisms to hold experts to account as more decisions require technical input. Michael Power describes the proliferation of such activity – not just financial audits but audits and reviews of boards, research quality, process reviews, environmental impact, independent evaluation offices, parliamentary inquiries, etc. 39  Critics argue that such “bean counting”  is costly, results in risk aversion, and diverts resources from important work. Having been on the receiving end of a great deal of this “checking,” I think it is a small price to pay to legitimize expert input to democratic decision making. Conclusion  So what have the experts ever done for us? The application of knowledge and the cumulation of that through education and dissemination through various media and institutions are integral to human progress. So the question is not how to manage without experts, but how to ensure that there are mechanisms in place to ensure they are trustworthy. More humility and candour about the limits of expertise is a starting point, as is clearer communication. More rigorous assessment of ideas will generate better solutions. Better tools to allow the public to differentiate among ideas are also needed, as is the need to encourage more genuine listening to others’ views. Managing the boundaries and accountabilities between experts and politicians better will help maintain the balance between technocracy and democracy. Getting this right is vital for determining whether our futures are shaped by ignorance and narrow-mindedness, or by knowledge and informed debate.

17  Young people are particularly reliant on social  media, with 28% of 18-24 year olds saying it is their main source of news, putting it ahead of television (Chart 1). Media has always been open to the criticism that it tells people what they want to hear rather than 18  the difficult truth . But the selection and delivery of news by algorithms which guess users’ preferences based on content they have previously read and liked would seem to dramatically increase the risk of living one’s life in an informational echo chamber. 14  Estimate by Harvard School of Public Health cited in Nichols, Thomas (2017), The Death of Expertise, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 15 Popper, Karl (1963) Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, London: Routledge. 16 There have been several recent examples where the release of data and attempts to replicate results has fostered healthy debate. See for example Reinhoff and Rogoff (Growth in the Time of Debt, NBER Working Paper No. 15639) and Thomas Herndon, Michael Ash and Robert Pollin (Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff, Cambridge J Econ (2014) 38 (2): 257-279), and Picketty (Capital in the 21st Century, translated by Arthur Goldhammer, Harvard University Press) and Giles (‘Data problems with Capital in the 21st Century. See https://www.ft.com/content/9bb07a8f-11bc-366b-98bb-fb2d450f1189). 17 Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Levy, D.A., Nielsen, R.K. (2016) Reuters Institute digital news report 2016, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.