A few thoughts about this big @nytimes story on Roland Fryer.
nytimes.com/2018/12/14/bus…
Econ-fam, there's a lot here, and we should talk about it. [1 of a few]
nytimes.com/2018/12/14/bus…
Econ-fam, there's a lot here, and we should talk about it. [1 of a few]
I know the reporters @bencasselman & @jimtankersley well and I'm sure they weighed each word carefully. I also know the standard of evidence at the @nytimes is incredibly high.
So I believe everything that they reported.
They've uncovered behavior that is flat out unacceptable.
So I believe everything that they reported.
They've uncovered behavior that is flat out unacceptable.
The article reveals many instances of very poor judgment from someone whose research I had admired. I'm sad about that. It reveals several young women whose careers were tanked. I'm sadder about that.
And I've heard enough stories about other economists that I know this is a more pervasive problem in my field, which is, frankly, depressing.
My more constructive reaction is that we all must do better. Roland has to do better. And so do many other economists who still bring neanderthal views about gender to their professional lives and inflict them on others. But it's not just others who need to do better.
I think we’ve all got a role to play.
But how to do better?
My friend @causalinf wrote a splendidly thoughtful thread on this: .
He only partly threaded his tweets, so he continued it here:
(And yes I admire the hell out of Scott.)
But how to do better?
My friend @causalinf wrote a splendidly thoughtful thread on this: .
He only partly threaded his tweets, so he continued it here:
(And yes I admire the hell out of Scott.)
Go and read what @causalinf wrote. He's wise.
In the short term, there's no way that Roland Fryer should serve on the executive committee of the American Economic Association.
It's bad for economics, bad for women, and it sends a horrible signal.
He should step aside while under investigation.
It's bad for economics, bad for women, and it sends a horrible signal.
He should step aside while under investigation.
Some have expressed surprised there's been so little discussion of this case. When I wrote about econjobrumors, hundreds of people stood up.
Back then we were disparaging anonymous others. This time it's someone many of us know & had admired. It's harder.
Back then we were disparaging anonymous others. This time it's someone many of us know & had admired. It's harder.
People who engage in unacceptable behavior, behavior that harms others, aren't always and everywhere doing harm. That's why many of us just didn't see this coming and so haven't known what to say. But the evidence has been gathered and it's clear that Roland's actions were wrong.
But we can't let personal relationships shape how we respond.
Some will debate what side of the line Roland's behavior was on. My own response is shaped by the brilliant Aussie comedian @Hannahgadsby: jezebel.com/hannah-gadsby-…
My plea: Watch this before debating where the line is
Some will debate what side of the line Roland's behavior was on. My own response is shaped by the brilliant Aussie comedian @Hannahgadsby: jezebel.com/hannah-gadsby-…
My plea: Watch this before debating where the line is
There's more work to be done.
The American Economic Association took a first step in passing a code of conduct. But when someone breaches this code, what are the consequences? Is it a code of conduct, or a list of suggestions?
The American Economic Association took a first step in passing a code of conduct. But when someone breaches this code, what are the consequences? Is it a code of conduct, or a list of suggestions?
The broader #metoo movement has been so important, and its time for economics to live up to the moment. Too many brilliant women have been driven from our field, and I'm not alone in being mad as hell about it.
