Jan Haugland writes about how blogs have been bad news for people named Lott:
Even if Lott is not an outright fraud (which the evidence so far suggests he is), he is certainly not a scholar, and he is a using unethical methods and sloppy research.
Also commenting on blogs and Lott are Greg Vassie and Dan Gillmor.
More like this
Ted Frank has your must read blog post on Lott's lawsuit against Levitt. He has a copy of the complaint and an explanation from Lott:
When a book sells well over a million copies this goes beyond a mere debate among academics. To say that other scholars have been unable to replicate one's work…
Via Eli Rabett I find a long article by James L. Meriner in Chicago magazine on the Lott-Levitt lawsuit. There's some new information on the history of Lott and Levitt such as this:
Just when and how the Lott-Levitt feud started is not clear -- neither man would directly comment on the lawsuit…
The Chronicle of Higher Education is running a symposium on the benefits of academic blogging. This symposium addresses ostensibly the failure of Juan Cole, a prominent Middle East scholar and proprietor of the blog Informed Comment, to recieve tenure at Yale University. Many have attributed that…
What does it take to get an advocate of pseudoscience to change his or her mind? Many are the times I've asked myself that question. Over the years, I've covered the gamut of techniques, going from what some might call "militant" or even insulting to being as reasoned and calm as can be--and…