[Seth] believe[s] that there’s an inverse relationship between data and information–the more data we have, the less we know. Consumers can find out just about anything about just about any product or service, but we actually have less insight than we used to.
Some very successful politicians, organizations and corporations have broken through the clutter and succeeded by limiting the amount of data they offer. The result is that people end up with the information the marketer wants them to have.
The difference between data and information, as I have explained it, is that data is oil in the ground and information is gas at the pump: one is unrefined, not all that useful stuff, and the other, is useful for having been refined, sometimes essential.
Seth’s point seems to restate the old saw about specialists and generalists: the former knows a lot about ad one subject, while the latter knows a little about many. I don’t see how this informs his conclusion that “[s]ome very successful politicians, organizations and corporations have broken through the clutter and succeeded by limiting the amount of data they offer.”
The triumphs of marketing he alludes seem to be driven by cognitive dissonance, a lack of curiousity, or simple ignorance.