Also, I recall a BBC article a while back citing a study showing that ~half of all scientific studies turn out wrong because they failed to exclude variables. The study, below, needs to be supported by other studies in other circumstances (and maybe those exist -- I don't read psy journals).
In January 2006, Drew Westen and a team from Emory University announced at the annual Society for Personality and Social Psychology conference in Palm Springs, California the results of a study[2] showing the brain activity for confirmation bias. Their results suggest the unconscious and emotion-driven nature of this form of bias.
The study was carried out during the pre-electoral period of the 2004 presidential election on 30 men, half who described themselves as strong Republicans and half as strong Democrats. During a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan, the subjects were asked to assess contradictory statements by both George W. Bush and John Kerry. The scans showed that the part of the brain associated with reasoning, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, was not involved when assessing the statements. Conversely, the most active regions of the brain were those involved in processing emotions (orbitofrontal cortex), conflict resolution (anterior cingulate cortex) and making judgment about moral accountability (posterior cingulate cortex).[3]
Dr. Westen summarised the work:
"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged. Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones....
Everyone from executives and judges to scientists and politicians may reason to emotionally biased judgments when they have a vested interest in how to interpret 'the facts'."[4]
---end of wikipedia excerpt---
As nearly as I can tell, this kind of bias afflicts most/all of the folks who frequent YC News. To understand why I think this, review my previous submissions and the non-response each received. It seems that (aspiring) entrepreneurs who are pure tech (I'm a hybrid of comp sci & comedy writing) just don't want to believe that, going forward, their companies will probably have to market profitably through branded entertainment to be competitive.
That said, your comments don't languish because they contradict some deeply held notions of the news.YC community. They languish because they're irrelevant and read like spam. Most people here know they have to market profitably, they just don't think anything you've proposed is the best approach to that.
Be specific.
Opposite extreme of confirmation bias is going by research and the written laws. And we know very well the limits of research.
Obviously confirmation bias is no excuse to ignoring apparent problems and flaws. That is just denial--especially in later stages of a startup.
As best I can recall, relevant (meta-analyses of) studies of entrepreneurship concluded that successful entrepreneurs are typically very mindful of risk. Amar Bhide's book The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses may be a good source for a survey of the aforesaid scholarship.
I agree with the idea that here in this Web Startup World Echo Chamber, we're all probably suffering from a big helping of confirmation bias... but your comment at the end about this being reflected by your submissions being ignored is a total non-sequitur. How does branded entertainment relate to news.yc? Lack of interest in the videos you recorded doesn't necessarily indicate that the audience here suffers from confirmation bias. Maybe the community just isn't interested in your submissions.
Well, as nearly as I can tell, many of the folks who frequent YC News are interested in understanding how to give rise to a successful startup, and two big pieces of that puzzle are marketing and generating profits...
Your premise here may very well be valid, but that doesn't mean the voted down posts were good.
Basically this post = "Everyone here is so deluded that they ignore me!" and not even in your own words.
(But thanks for the interesting data point :-)