started · updated
Daron Acemoglu rebukes The Economist over academic critique
Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu has issued a sharp rebuttal to The Economist following a critical article titled “The world’s most influential economist is oddly unconvincing.” Acemoglu characterized the publication as a “hit piece” and a “smear piece,” arguing that the magazine’s critique lacks scientific rigor.
Acemoglu criticized the magazine for relying on the opinions of unnamed economists and a single blogger, Noah Smith, to evaluate his 33-year academic career. He further contended that the article selectively used past constructive criticisms from scholars like Tyler Cowen and Francis Fukuyama to present a skewed narrative.
The dispute also touches upon the timing of the article, which coincided with the release of Acemoglu’s new book, “What Happened to Liberal Democracy?” Acemoglu suggested the critique was timed to influence the book's reception, noting that the magazine's review misrepresented the work's focus on artificial intelligence.
The original Economist article questioned the data in Acemoglu’s influential research on colonial institutions and prosperity, citing a Nobel Committee report that noted certain mortality figures used in his studies were “superficial” in places.
Entities
Daron Acemoglu · James Robinson · Massachusetts Institute of Technology · Noah Smith · Simon Johnson · The Economist
Claims
What the coverage asserts, and how many sources carry each claim.
- [○ 1 SOURCE] Acemoğlu states that the book review inaccurately presented his new book as being primarily about artificial intelligence. www.gazetebirlik.com
- [● 2 SOURCES] Acemoğlu suggests the timing of the critique coincided with the release of his new book, 'What Happened to Liberal Democracy?'. www.gazetebirlik.com · www.gazetepencere.com
- [● 2 SOURCES] Acemoğlu argues that the magazine's assessment of his persuasiveness relied on anonymous opinions rather than rigorous academic sources. www.gazetebirlik.com · www.gazetepencere.com
- [● 3 SOURCES] Daron Acemoğlu claims The Economist's critique of his work was characterized by weak and loosely connected assertions rather than scientific debate. www.cnbce.com · www.gazetebirlik.com · www.gazetepencere.com