Malcolm Gladwell Criticism
The cluster centers on critiques of Malcolm Gladwell's work, highlighting his storytelling style, cherry-picking of facts, and presentation of entertaining anecdotes as science rather than rigorous analysis, with some defending him as enjoyable reading.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Friendly warning, the article quotes Malcolm Gladwell uncritically.
Malcolm Gladwell's articles can be very enjoyable reading[1]. I suppose you have to bear in mind that he's not an expert on anything besides writing.[1] http://gladwell.com/category/the-new-yorker-archive/
Referencing Malcolm Gladwell unironically == zero credibility
I'm with you.I've read and enjoyed Mr. Gladwell's books, and may even prefer his essay writing[1].The guy isn't writing a dissertation; this is lightweight pop-science from a fairly good writer and presenter, with a knack for inductive reasoning (albeit sometimes controversial). The fact that the masses misjudge the scientific efficacy of his arguments is not a real issue. It's not like the guy is selling hate-speech. He should be WAY down the list of authors re
I feel it's worth pointing out that this paraphrases poorly researched and anecdotally supported arguments from Malcolm Gladwell.
Gladwell is an entertainment writer who picks facts and writes interesting stories.None of them should be taken as factual; he cherry picks and often writers stories well after the source material has been disproven.For example, Gottman's marriage research in blink that could predict divorce with extreme success was an overfit model without a validation set that didn't generalize well.
See here: https://culture.ghost.io/forget-gladwell/
Gladwell is a fantastic storyteller.Unfortunately, this isn't obvious to many people, who seem to think he's a scientist or a journalist, despite no claims on his part for these qualifications or assertions that his work stands up to the rigors of those disciplines. They have decided that he is one or both of these things, and since he isn't, he does not fare well when assessed along those lines.He writes very well, his books are interesting, his anecdotes are carefully selected and edite
Reminds me of Malcolm Gladwell without all his hucksterism
True Gladwell writes garbage that sells itself, but isn't this article attempting to do the same thing?