The authors of the best-selling Freakonomics are alleging that a reviewer is gaming reviews of the book. Better yet, however, is the gloves-off debate in the comments section, including some interesting discussion about whether and how Amazon’s reviews can be gamed.
[via Robot Wisdom]
Related posts:
On Slate.com in 1999, I debated with Freakonomics author Steven D. Levitt over his most celebrated theory: that legalizing abortion cut crime. When Freakonomics came out earlier this year, I posted a review on Amazon.com that was mildly positive about most of the book, but pointed out the severe flaws in his abortion-crime sections. My review went up for awhile, but then was deleted. After my review was shoved down the Memory Hole, somebody at Amazon then even rewrote other reviews arguing with my review to delete references to my crimethink.
Hey, Amazon made a lot of money peddling “Freakonomics,” so who can blame them?
The irony is that on November 27th, the Wall Street Journal reported that two economists at the Boston federal Reserve have pointed out that Levitt’s abortion-cut-crime theory was based on two fatal mistakes in Levitt’s calculations.
You can read everything about the abortion-cut-crime theory that Amazon doesn’t want you know at http://www.iSteve.com/abortion.htm
Hey, the catfight in the comments section at the Freakonomics site is worth checking out!