On new-is-better bias

Humans suffer from "new-is-better bias" — a form of neophilia that systematically distorts how we compare novel technologies against incumbents. Sutherland uses the Kindle-vs-printed-book case (where he and Daniel Kahneman both wrongly predicted the Kindle would replace print) to illustrate the mechanism: we tick the new's distinguishing features and stop there, drowning out any thought of what the old has that the new lacks. The bias is exploitable by marketers (car comparison tables that hide features unique to the cheaper trim) and underlies how we misjudge the relationship between new and traditional media. The historical kicker: direct marketing had the same advantages as digital marketing decades ago — accountability, measurement, targeting — but lost to TV because it "wasn't shiny and new."

This is the article's sharpest point, hidden in the last paragraph. Sutherland spent decades in direct marketing, trying to get people excited by accountability and measurement. The pitch failed because direct marketing "wasn't shiny and new" — clients preferred TV. Digital marketing later re-launched the exact same pitch (accountability, measurement, targeting) and won, because it was shiny.

1. "Adaptive Cruise Control, not the engine" test. When evaluating a new tool/technology/medium, ask: what new features is it highlighting? Then ask: what existing capabilities (in the old) does it not even mention? If the new is being sold on 4 differentiators and the old has 100 capabilities the new lacks, you're looking at the ACC, not the engine.