Gell-Mann amnesia and its opposite

Naming is clearly a form of branding. Why Michael Crichton called it the Gell-Mann amnesia effect:

By the way, why is the effect named after the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann? Crichton explained

I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.

-

It reminds me of why von Neumann told Shannon to call it entropy:

When Shannon first derived his famous formula for information, he asked von Neumann what he should call it and von Neumann replied “You should call it entropy for two reasons: first because that is what the formula is in statistical mechanises but second and more important, as nobody knows what entropy is, whenever you use the term you will always be at an advantage!

http://www.spatialcomplexity.info/what-von-neumann-said-to-s...

I've found this to be extremely important because many of the tough (and popular) topics we discuss today are extremely complex. But if people are only going into the basics and don't talk to experts about the complexity and nuance they will frequently make extremely bad conclusions. Science communicators are supposed to be taking the complex and nuanced topics that experts understand and distill it into something more palpable for the common (or even a bit nerdy) audience. But I do find that a lot of our extremely popular YouTube pop-sci channels or information based comedy shows (and even news) often don't actually seek out discussions with experts for clarity, even if they appear to or have the budget for it. It has really limited my source list of these channels and shows, but I also think it has really helped.

"I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false."

Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 14 June 1807, Works 10:417--18

(sigh - sometimes people notice, but not much can be done, and trying only seems to make things worse, ahem, "fact-checking", cough ... perhaps we should lower expectations, and not demand that advertisement padding double up as a source of truth.)