Jealous Critics of Malcolm Gladwell

The Atlantic gathers negative reviews of Gladwell and asks - are they just jealous?

I'd argue not. Gladwell is like the Sinatra of the (insert clever Rat Pack Reference) of these youthful contrarian non-fiction writers - Michael Lewis, Steven Levitt, and Bill Simmons who write highly entertaining, generally contrarian, long form journalism and books. I love these guys. I love reading their stuff. But I have noticed a trend, the predictive value of all of their theories is next to useless. Michael Lewis "predicted" the market crash 20 years in advance. Big deal. I predict things will get back to normal again in 20 years. And they will and no one will call me a genius. Michael Oher - the subject of the Blind Side - might lose his starting position with the Ravens, if he hasn't already. The Moneyball A's aren't doing so hot right now and their picks from those Moneyball years are hardly worth mentioning. (if you want look at the A's success, you might want to examine their AAA farm system as they do seem to produce an inordinate number of good young players, but not necessarily via the draft).

Gladwell's BLINK is all about quick decision making vs. weighting all the options to death. And when you really think about it - is this a very sophisticated or insightful poit? Isn't this just a statement of the obvious, actually? Sometimes I just pick the first thing that looks good on the menu for dinner and it turns out great. Sometimes I mull every option and weigh every scenario and the choice turns out bad. Booya. Pay me a million bucks.

Anyhow, the writing is better than the ideas, and maybe that's okay.