Last night I caught AC’s Radio 4 program on teaching economics after the financial crisis. It’s a great story, well told. But, it is just that. In its totality, a distorting dramatisation, on account of allowing multiple silly, uninformed critiques to go unchallenged in the program. Yet presented as a reasonable, impartial take on what is going on in economics. If this were an op-ed in a newspaper, it would be forgivable. Most people know that when they read comment that they are getting selective advocacy. But I think a lot of listeners think of Radio 4 as a station they can trust to explain things how they really are. This program reveals that sometimes the editors slip up.
Here are some examples the one-sidedness that undermines AC’s attempt to portray himself as your friendly, impartial, interlocutor.
1. The tale of the panics and bubbles course that Manchester University…
View original post 1,726 more words
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments