History Main / AppealToPopularity

[[folder:Film]]
* ''Film/TheCaseForChrist'': A priest in the film whom Lee interviews states there are many more copies of Gospels than other ancient works and thus implies that the Resurrection happened. This however does not mean they were ''accurate'' (he compares it for instance with ''Literature/TheTrojanCycle'', a work of fiction, having less). At most, it proves that this was really popular (which is obviously true).

[[folder: Live Action TV ]]

* On ''Series/HaveIGotNewsForYou'', Louise Bagshaw argued against the Alternative Vote method based on the fact that very few countries use it. This prompted Ian Hislop to point out that much of the world is starving, which is a pretty strong argument against eating.
* The BBC PanelGame ''Series/{{QI}}'' uses this extensively. Points are awarded for "quite interesting" answers, and are taken away for boring ones. If the answer given to a question is one that "everybody knows" and is '''wrong''', a klaxon sounds and ten points are taken away. Both the examples of lemmings and piranhas have been used. Sometimes, however, the obvious answer ''is'' the real answer, which sometimes leads to the panel members phrasing their answers very carefully in case the question is a double bluff.

[[folder: Western Animation ]]

* "The Mob Song" from ''WesternAnimation/BeautyAndTheBeast'' includes the line "Here we come, we're fifty strong and fifty Frenchmen can't be wrong".

[[/folder]]

* For a meta example, the {{Vaudeville}} act of The Cherry Sisters attracted a very large audience. However, this was solely due to BileFascination; they were at the time unanimously considered absolutely dreadful. They, however, were completely oblivious to this fact, and figured that because they were getting such large audiences, they must be absolutely fantastic and dismissed the savage reviews they got as CriticalDissonance.[[note]]Ordinarily, it would be [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement dangerous]] to list audience opinions of a work as an example of a non-YMMV trope, but in this particular case, [[MissingEpisode those opinions are all that remains of it]]; no recordings of any of their shows survive, and this was so long ago that the only people who could possibly subjectively discuss them are time travelers and ghosts -- none of which, to our knowledge, are TV Tropes users.[[/note]]

The latter logic is referred to as the "Appeal to Minority," and it underlies the phenomenon of ItsPopularNowItSucks, often used with regard to "edgy" and unconventional media. This also often plays a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the scientific consensus' acceptance of geocentricism, the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the assumption that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find an unpopular belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore correct. But the matter of fact is that there is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is always a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it:

The "silent majority" argument combines this with BeggingTheQuestion, since the lack of existence of popular support is held to show something is so popular nobody bothers to openly declare support for it rather than so unpopular nobody supports it at all.

:: The appeal to popularity is built around the belief that something is true (or false) because a lot of people believe it is. This is fallacious because it confuses whether an idea is ''justified'' with whether it is ''accepted''. Demonstrating widespread support for something only proves it is popular, not that it is true.

::This is the standard version; the belief that a large group is incapable of being incorrect. The fallacy can also be inverted, however, with popularity being taken as a sign something is ''wrong'':

--->'''Bob:''' Alice, what's that terrible noise coming out of your speakers? I thought you liked The Band.\\
'''Alice:''' Geez, get with the times, The Band sucked since they [[SellOut sold out]] and went mainstream.

::The latter logic underlies ItsPopularNowItSucks, and is often used with regard to "edgy" media. It is referred to as the "Appeal to Minority."

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the scientific consensus' acceptance of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is that there is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is always a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

-->"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus[[note]]Ironically, this itself is an example of the Appeal to Popularity. While the belief that Columbus was fighting against a flat Earth majority is popular even today, the reality was that the Earth's sphere shape was a well known fact in Europe at the time. Columbus' actual opposition was the (correct) belief that the distance he had to sail was so great that he would never make it to Asia. It's only luck that they found another continent and weren't killed by starvation.[[/note]], they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

::The "silent majority" argument combines this with BeggingTheQuestion, since the lack of existence of popular support is held to show something is so popular nobody bothers to openly declare support for it rather than so unpopular nobody supports it at all.

** Well, they're French, [[AdHominem of course they would say that]].

'''Alice:''' Geez, get with the times, The Band sucked since they [[SellOut sold out]] and [[AppealToObscurity went mainstream]].

* "The Mob Song" from ''Disney/BeautyAndTheBeast'' includes the line "Here we come, we're fifty strong and fifty Frenchmen can't be wrong".

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the scientific consensus' acceptance of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is that there is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is always a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

-->"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus[[note]]Ironically, this itself is an example of the Appeal to Popularity. While the belief that Columbus was fighting against a flat Earth majority is popular even today, the reality was that the Earth's sphere shape was a well known fact in Europe at the time. Columbus' actual opposition was the (correct) belief that the distance he had to sail was so great that he would never make it.[[/note]], they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

** Lemmings are a prime example, as well as an ''Appeal to Authority''. If everyone, including random authorities, say that lemmings commit mass suicide.... The truth: [[http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s979473.htm Stoats]]. (Not to mention that a famous lemmings-jumping-off-a-cliff video, as filmed by Disney, had people off-camera herding the lemmings over said cliff. This isn't as horrific as it sounds, because [[SquareCubeLaw lemmings fall slowly enough to be unharmed by the fall]], but still dodgy.)

** As does the idea that birds won't take back hatchlings that smell like humans (fun fact: very few birds actually have a sense of smell acute enough to ''notice'' if their baby smells strange).

::These concepts, like economical value, linguistic meaning, or etiquette, are things that only exist because a large number of us believe that they exist. While it is ''objectively'' the case that gold has certain physical properties that give it useful applications in, say, electronics, if everyone collectively decided that it was worthless ''anyway'', [[WorthlessYellowRocks its value would indeed disappear]] (this happens at the beginning of the novel ''Galapagos'').

-->'''Bob:''' Alice, what's that terrible noise coming out of your speakers? I thought you liked The Band.\\

-->"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus[[note]]Ironically, this itself is an example of the Appeal to Popularity. While it even now is popular to believe that Columbus was fighting against flat Earth belief, the reality was that the Earth's sphere shape was a well known fact in Europe at the time. Columbus' actual opposition was the (correct) belief that the distance he had to sail was so great that he would never make it.[[/note]], they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

-->"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is that there is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is always a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is always a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there is still a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there's a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it

->"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there's a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it:

::The latter logic also often play a role in the so-called "Galileo Gambit" or "Galileo Fallacy", which refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his championing of heliocentrism which challenged the orthodox Biblical literal idea of geocentricism, which was the then-held majority belief in Europe. At the center of this fallacy is the belief, that if the establishment or mainstream opinion find a belief or a theory ridiculous or even offensive, then that belief or theory must be unfairly persecuted and therefore most have something correct to it. But the matter of fact is no necessary link between being perceived as wrong and actually being correct; if people perceive something to be wrong, there's a fair chance that it is wrong. As Creator/CarlSagan once put it:

::These concepts, like economical value, linguistic meaning, or etiquette, are things that only exist because a large number of us believe that they exist. If everyone believed that gold is worthless, [[WorthlessYellowRocks its value would disappear]] (this happens at the beginning of the novel ''Galapagos'').

::The latter logic underlies ItsPopularNowItSucks, and is often used with regard to "edgy" media.

'''Alice:''' Geez, get with the times, The Band sucked since they sold out and went mainstream.

->"They voted for the impossible, and the disastrous possible happened instead."

!'''[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum Appeal To Popularity]]''':