"I'm Malcolm Gladwell, Bitch!"

malcolmgladwell2.jpgBusiness journalism feuds are so much fun because there is so little at stake. There's even less at stake in most business journalism than, say, foodie writing. While a restaurant review might effect where you take a date or a client to dinner, when was the last time someone traded based on, say, what Gretchen Morgenson writes about executive pay (does she write about anything else?), much less what Larry Ribstein writes about what Morgenson wrote.

One of our favorite feuds is between Malcolm Gladwell and Steve Sailer. At first glance it looks rather one-sided—Steve Sailer penning these devastating critiques of Gladwell's books and articles in the New Yorker and Malcolm Gladwell getting rich off of writing books and articles in the New Yorker. You could be excused for suspecting that Gladwell has no idea who this Steve guy is. But you'd be wrong.

Not too long ago we ran into Gladwell in a lower east side dive bar called Lolita. He was having a drink with a nice young woman, and we were having quite a few drinks with some journalist types even more dissolute than we are. In the course of our conversation, we asked Malcolm what he thinks of Sailer, half expecting him to say "Steve who?" But Malcolm knew exactly who Sailer was, and proceeded to describe him as "a nut" who was obsessed with him. So, you know, the battle has indeed been joined.

It was pretty clear that Malcolm didn't like Steve. But what we didn't know until today is that Steve likes Malcolm. He just wishes Malcolm's journalism would be, uhm, more like Malcolm is when he talks about Steve. That is, less friendly and enthusiastic and more "I'm effin Malcolm Gladwell. Who the hell do you think you are?"

Here's Steve writing about Malcolm's latest New Yorker article on movie economics:

The average business writer can't afford to make a cool-sounding start-up company wait four months to prove their bona fides in a test designed by the writer. Instead, Joe Average Journalist has to read the press release, make a few phone calls, and churn out some copy. Gladwell, in contrast, can afford to subject his subjects to whatever torture tests he devises. He can say, "I'm Malcolm Gladwell, bitch! Prove it!"

But he doesn't. Unfortunately, Gladwell isn't enough of a jerk to insist that his subjects prove their worth. His problem is that he's not egotistical enough. He's always getting wowed by the overwhelming genius of somebody with a complicated-sounding line of patter. He doesn't do simple reality checks on theories that smart-seeming people tell him because he's just not cynical enough. He really, truly admires all these people he writes about and believes they are all brilliant, even though their theories often contradict each other. (That's why Blink makes no sense whatsoever.)

Malcolm Gladwell on how to write hit movies [isteve.com]

The Formula
[The New Yorker]

Comments

Posted by , Nov 15, 2006 11:26AM

what no more commentary on delta/usairways? like delta's reaction..etc.

the 'deal' in 'dealbreaker' is not real deals. is it just gawker for business media ?
what the f.

Posted by John Carney, Nov 15, 2006 11:29AM

First of all, we've got it covered down in Opening Bell. Don't you people read Joe's morning update? Most days its just about the most concentrated bit of business intelligence you're going to get around here. If you're not reading it first thing everyday, you are really missing out.

Second, that's like a real news story. So we're doing things like calling our sources and engaging in "reporting." More on this soon!

Posted by ko, Nov 15, 2006 11:34AM

Niiiiice

Posted by Bob Fleming, a.k.a. Badger Watch, Nov 15, 2006 12:03PM

It's gratfiying to see that someone at DealBreaker.com reads the demonized and underrated Steve Sailer.

Posted by beanspants1, Nov 15, 2006 7:19PM

i don't know steve sailor, but gladwell's auto safety articles -- in which he compared the handling of a porche 911 to a GM Trailblazer -- was beyond silly. so i'm glad somebody calls him on bs like that.

Posted by Teller, Nov 16, 2006 2:41AM

Sailer has a much better business analyses about the subject though:

"Their advice [for The Interpreter] boils down to, in effect, make it cheesier, more like "The Bodyguard." The marketing researchers' revised plot is exceptionally idiotit”

While "The Interpreter" was kind of stupid if you knew much of anything about Africa and the UN, it didn't seem stupid to Kidman, Penn, and Pollack (who don't). *They wouldn't have made the movie if it was intentionally a lowest common denominator effort.*

It would have ended up getting made with, say, Josh Lucas and Sienna Miller in the lead roles, and then the studio wouldn't have given it much of a promotional budget because it didn't have big stars attached, and it still wouldn't have made much of a profit."

Speaking of bussiness, it’s partially Sailors own fault if he does not make enough money. He is a creative guy, instead of bloging for free he should take some of his least controversial posts and make books out of them. It’s enough if one of them becomes a reasonable hit.

Posted by AMac, Nov 16, 2006 10:00AM

If Sailer isn't always right, his batting average is still better than just about anyone else's. His blog is a much better value than my New Yorker subscription--good enough to support via PayPal. Plus he manages to write snappy and amusing paragraphs. Made better in this case by having already scanned Gladwell's lengthy paen to Hollywood's improbable geniuses.

Per Teller's comment supra, if anyone deserves to make a good living from writing about current events, it's Sailer.

Posted by L'Emmerdeur, Nov 16, 2006 11:35AM

God damn it, John, stop feeding the anonymous trolls. If they want boring bullshit posts and news, they can read the WSJ, like all the other trader-wannabe operations drones.

Posted by MT, Nov 16, 2006 11:46AM

Sailer is a far superior thinker than Gladwell. Problem is, he speaks honestly and lots of folks don't like that. Raed his stuff on racial differences and IQ and you'll see why he's marginalized.

Posted by John Carney, Nov 16, 2006 11:53AM

Thanks for the reminder L'em.

Posted by Jim O'Sullivan, Nov 16, 2006 11:58AM

Sailer looks at the data and draws rational conclusions, even if those conclusions are taboo. Doesn't he know you're supposed to torture the data to make it support your core beliefs? Sailer is therefore unfit for polite society.

Posted by fish, Nov 16, 2006 1:56PM

Ya know.....Sailer would have a lot more credibility if he would just grow one of those wicked cool afros!

Posted by lisa, Nov 16, 2006 5:28PM

Sailer is a nobody. Gladwell makes more in a week than that turkey probably makes in a year. Neo-nazis and rejects are the only ones who read Sailer's blog.

Posted by D'Autreau, Nov 16, 2006 6:18PM

Sailer is punk. Gladwell is The Wiggles.

And what's up with Gladwell's crazy-ass afro? He looks like a moron.

Posted by Finklesteyn, Nov 16, 2006 7:20PM

Malcolm Gladwell... ah damn it, I just can't stop laughing! What a joke he is. But the funniest part is that a man like Sailer, who far outshines him in every (positive) respect, is almost universally despised. Only a silly world can make such silly men as silly Malcom Gladwell famous; but such silliness comes at a price: total civilizational collapse. Gladwell, Jared Diamond, Daniel Goleman and all the other supersillies are driving us into the abyss.

Posted by Zorba the Turk, Nov 16, 2006 9:05PM

It's really true: Sailer may be the best critic working in America right now, but the conclusions he draws are so taboo (notice I didn't say 'incorrect,' just taboo) that he couldn't get a gig writing at the New Yorker if he tried.

Posted by M_David, Nov 16, 2006 11:10PM

Sailer is a nobody. Gladwell makes more in a week than that turkey probably makes in a year. Neo-nazis and rejects are the only ones who read Sailer's blog.

News for you lisa: making money isn't what defines good ideas. Following your reasoning, we would have rejected Einstein's work 'cause he was a lowly patent clerk.

Oh, and Sailer's blog is read by folk who enjoy real creative thinking, regardless of who's ox gets gored. But you already knew this I'm sure...it just drives folks like you crazy that PC can't censor everyone.

Posted by Number 6, Nov 16, 2006 11:49PM

Sailer's site is one of the best on the web. He's got a lot of interesting and original ideas on current events and public affairs. I think he devotes to much ink (too many bits?) to sports. I find that stuff to be a snore, but then I'm not a sports fan. And anyway it's his site.

I've never read Gladwell, but if he is as credulous and mistaken as many say, he shouldn't be writing for the New Yorker. He should be writing for the Economist.

Posted by TestTester, Nov 17, 2006 12:24AM

I'm not going to knock Gladwell, I've enjoyed reading many of his pieces and think his stuff is generally good with the obvious exception of Blink.

But Sailer is someone I enjoy reading every day. I've learned a lot of things from his site, like how I.Q. is used extensively in the military. I worry that Sailer considers himself financially unsucessful, and someday he'll stop writing the truth to get a "real job". I too think that he could pick almost any of his various strains of thought and write a very popular book.

Posted by Cato, Nov 17, 2006 1:33PM

I think Sailer is working on a book. Go to www.vdare.com and check out his archive there.

Post Your Comment