The Content Hierarchy of BS
Rank formats by how much they let you get away with — then hold yourself to the top of the pyramid.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~ongoing to results
- Steps
- 3
- Confidence
- 90%
Formats differ in how much they permit unsupported claims. One-directional formats — tweets, keynotes, podcasts, short posts — let you say something that sounds wise and walk away without defending it, so they tolerate BS. As formats become more interactive and longer-form, the tolerance collapses: long articles, books, and above all live cohort-based courses force you to defend the idea in front of people who can push back in real time. The practical use is as a self-imposed standard: write everything as if it had to survive the top of the pyramid.
Origin
Wes Kao's framework, formed from running altMBA with Seth Godin and Maven, where live student pushback exposes any claim that doesn't hold up.
Core principles
- 01Format determines accountability; accountability determines rigour.
- 02One-directional formats allow the mic-drop with no rationale, no counterpoints, no defence.
- 03Interactive live formats are the highest-rigour format because students can challenge you as you speak.
- 04Content matters more than format at the margin — some books should be 10-page blog posts, others earn every page.
How to run it
- 1
Place your format on the pyramid
Bottom (most room for BS): tweets, short articles, podcasts, keynote speeches. Middle: long-form in-depth articles, books. Top (least room for BS): courses, especially live cohort-based courses with real-time interaction.
- 2
Notice what the format is letting you skip
For a low-rigour format, name explicitly what you are not being forced to supply: the rationale, the counterpoints, the defence of the idea, the handling of edge cases.
Pro tip The 280-character mic drop is the purest example — you say it, leave it there, and walk away.
- 3
Stress-test the claim at the top of the pyramid
Ask: if I said this live to students who could type 'this doesn't make sense for XYZ reasons' into the Zoom chat, could I defend it? If not, the claim is not ready regardless of the format you're publishing in.
Pro tip Imagining a specific hostile-but-fair student question is more useful than a vague self-review.
Watch out Passing this test is a quality bar, not a licence to publish only in high-rigour formats.
In the wild
Threads that read as profound but collapse on inspection are, on this framework, an artefact of the format: Twitter is at the bottom of the pyramid, where you can drop an assertion and leave without ever supplying the reasoning or the counterpoints.
→ Applying the top-of-pyramid test before posting removes the claims that only survive because nobody can challenge them.
In a live course, students are present, can ask questions, and can talk in the Zoom chat while you present. A weak claim triggers an immediate visible thread of pushback.
→ Lenny, having built and run a course, confirmed that 'here's a wise thought, let's move on' does not survive the format — you have to actually get into it.
Common mistakes
Letting the format set your standard
Allowing yourself to spew BS just because the format permits it. The format's tolerance is not a statement about whether the idea is true.
Treating length as rigour
Some books could be a 10-page blog post; some earn every page. The hierarchy is about accountability and interaction, not word count.
Is it for you?
Best for
Operators and creators publishing across multiple formats who want one consistent quality bar
Not ideal for
Purely expressive or entertainment content where defensibility is not the point
From the transcript
“so if you imagine a pyramid triangle at the bottom there's more room for BS and at the very top of the triangle there's less…”
“as you move up the triangle uh the content hierarchy of BS there's less and less room for BS”
“great for holding ourselves to a higher standard to make sure that we are not allowing ourselves to spew BS just because the format might…”
From the episode
Persuasive communication and managing up
Wes Kao (Maven, Seth Godin, Section4)