After overcoming some technical difficulties, we seem to have perfected the process by which we send out free autographed Freakonomics bookplates. This allows you to turn a common, mass-produced object into an autographed common, mass-produced object (and, thereby, a cherished keepsake). While we are not making any promises, there is a good chance that if you order a bookplate in . . .
When someone writes a comment on this blog, it goes into a moderation queue — where, if everything is working right, it gets promptly approved and shows up on the blog. (The moderation process is the Times‘s measure against spam and outrageousness.) Usually it is our site editor, Melissa Lafsky, who moderates the comments, but occasionally I do it too. . . .
Whenever we run a contest or quiz on this site, we offer the winner/s some kind of prize. Until now, we’ve never gotten around to showing what the prizes look like. So here, friends, is our current assortment of Freakonomics schwag. The T-shirt and yo-yo are, as they say, unavailable in any store. (So is Don King, as far as . . .
We have temporarily floated our tag cloud up to the top of the right-hand column of our home page so you can take a good look at it. We haven’t tagged our entire archives yet, but we’re getting there. So feel free to play around with the tags to see what’s in the vault, and know that there’s more to . . .
Anyone who’s ever written a book — and these days, who hasn’t? — can tell you that watching your sales rank on Amazon.com can be a pretty fun sport. But something happened recently that made it a lot more fun for some people, and a lot less fun for others. I noticed the change the other day when I checked . . .
March 5, 2021: These bookplates are no longer available. We’re sorry for the inconvenience. Once in a while, someone writes to ask if we would autograph his or her copy of Freakonomics. And we say: sure, thanks for asking. But the logistics aren’t very smooth. A person would have to mail the book to one of us, and include a . . .
On his excellent blog, the Harvard economist Greg Mankiw (written about most recently here) posted a one-line item about a new ranking of economics blogs. The rankings are apparently determined by the number of incoming links for each blog. A commenter named Karl Smith had this to say: Freakonomics I believe is artificially high because it has a shadow blog . . .
If all goes as planned, I will be appearing on Good Morning America tomorrow (Wed., 8/8 — lucky in China!) at about 8:30 a.m. EDT to talk about this very blog, and to announce a fairly significant change. Hope to see you there. As one result of this change, comments on the blog will be temporarily suspended today, starting in . . .
A few months ago, I attended yet another boring Knicks game at Madison Square Garden. This time, at least something good came of it. I met a guy named Weber Hsu, one of two young Merrill Lynch employees who left finance to start a yo-yo company, Yo-Yo Nation. Weber asked if we wanted them to create a special promotional Freakonomics . . .
After Freakonomics got popular, it was unbelievable how many interview requests/invitations I received. I don’t think I’m exaggerating in saying there were at least 10 per day for a year, or over 3,500 in that time. Now I get “only” three or four a day. Needless to say, I got really good at saying no, much to the chagrin of . . .
Our British publisher, Penguin U.K., continues to delight and astound us with their marketing cojones. How would you like to come across this new poster in the Tube? It is perhaps not surprising that Penguin won a big marketing award this year for their work on Freakonomics. It should be noted that the “3 million copies sold” refers to worldwide . . .
Last week, I blogged about the conservative/Christian website Conservapedia, one of several Wikipedia copycats. Another of these sites is Uncyclopedia, which pokes fun at Wikipedia’s credibility issues by fudging practically every fact. The site is an impressive piece of mockery, perhaps best judged by its very excellent entry on Freakonomics — a book written, per Uncyclopedia, by “economist Bill Reichstag . . .
Despite our slight incredulity, Freakonomics has beaten Jane Austen and advanced to the final round of Time Out New York‘s “Ultimate Book Bracket,” meant to determine the book most essential to cocktail party conversation in New York City. Now Freakonomics is up against the winner of the “American Classics” category, none other than Vladimir Nabokov‘s Lolita. At first blush, the . . .
What’s wrong with this picture? A contest sponsored by Time Out New York to pick the book that is “most essential to life — and cocktail conversation — in New York City” has reached the semifinals. Freakonomics is still in the running, pitted this week against Jane Austen‘s Pride and Prejudice. Talk about apples and oranges. If we happen to . . .
It might surprise you to learn that more members of the Freakonomics Fan Club hail from New Jersey than any other state. Well, actually, all of the Freakonomics Fan Club members are from New Jersey. All two of them. Except for my mother, Janice and Carole Szelich (president and co-president of the fan club) are the most loyal fans we . . .
This week’s New York Magazine breaks down how money is made by all kinds of New York City individuals and businesses from a yellow-cab driver to sex shops to financial firms. Levitt gets a hat tip in the “Drug Dealer” write-up. A CDC study finds that violence costs the U.S. more than $70 billion per year, as much as the . . .
If you happen to live near Minneapolis, or are passing through in the vicinity of June 18, please stop in and hear me give a lunchtime Freakonomics lecture. I will be warming up for this fellow. Perhaps this time I will have a chance to ask him some of your questions. I am not sure why he gets such bigger . . .
We got an e-mail the other day from John Yinger, a professor of economics and public administration at Syracuse University. It went, in part, like this: By coincidence, I read a chapter of “Tom Sawyer” to my 10-year-old son the day your column on leisure time came out. It’s the famous chapter on whitewashing the fence. Here’s how it ends: . . .
I am in Vancouver for about 36 hours. Vancouver anytime is pretty great; in springtime, it is even greater. Snowcaps glimpsed between modern skyscrapers; people from everywhere; lots of green. And, of course, that spectacular meeting of mountain and water. A few random observations: 1. There seem to be more coffee shops per square block, including Starbucks, Blenz, and others, . . .
Several months ago, I got an e-mail from a money manager in Spain. He’d read a blog post here called “Will the High Price of Oil Make Americans Skinnier,” and decided to start trading (mostly agricultural stocks) based on the ideas mentioned therein. Good luck, I told him. Now my friend James Altucher at Stockpickr.com has had a similar idea, . . .
We have a new column in this week’s New York Times Magazine, which is a special issue on the boomer generation. Our piece is called “Laid-Back Labor,” and it actually germinated from a blog post here a few months ago. Here’s one paragraph from the column: Isn’t it puzzling that so many middle-aged Americans are spending so much of their . . .
Greetings, Freakonomics community! This is your friendly neighborhood web editor, Melissa. Starting today, while Steven and Stephen will continue to post the same high-brow discussions of crack dealing, cheating, gold-digging and online poker that have long graced this site, I’ll also be posting under the eponymous apple/orange. So keep sending your good ideas to levittdubner (at) freakonomics (dot) com. The . . .
Time Out New York is the magazine that people buy when they’re visiting New York and want to know where to go and what to see. (It’s a British import but has been here at least 10 years by now; secret confession: my family and many other New Yorkers use it too, all the time.) This week, T.O.N.Y. is running . . .
As stated here before, this blog was barely meant to be born at all, much less go on for two years. But now we’ve decided to stick around for at least a couple more years — when, if all goes well, we’ll publish our next book. Since we’re going to keep at it, we figured, we might as well try . . .
I gave a lecture at Wayne State University yesterday. They were a really fantastic set of people. I got to spend some time with the president of the University, Irvin Reid. He is very impressive. I suspect we will be hearing a lot more from him in the future. The most memorable part of my day though, was when two . . .
I blogged a few weeks back about a piece in The New Republic last month that claimed I was ruining economics. At that time, there wasn’t a full version of the article online to link to, so there did not seem to be much point in saying much about the piece. Now, you can read the full article here. If . . .
I am not hip enough to be part of Facebook.com, but my research assistants who are tell me that there is a Freakonomics Group there. Unfortunately, that link only works if you are hipper than me.
To all devoted blog readers who’ve requested signed bookplates: Don’t lose faith! Demand continues to outstrip supply here in the Freakonomics office. A great many of you have taken the authors up on their offer, and we are happily working to make good. I’ll be mailing 2,000 bookplates this week from HarperCollins and will send the remainder as fast as . . .
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois is apparently not much of a Freakonomics fan, or maybe he thinks it’s something that it’s not. He trashed our good (ha!) name the other day during a Senate Appropriation Committee hearing that was probing the budget of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget. Here’s the story, as covered by OMB . . .
On April 12, 2005, Freakonomics was published. We had high hopes and low expectations. From what I recall, nothing magical happened on that day. But at 12:01 a.m. on the morning of April 13, this Wall Street Journal review appeared. It was the kind of review that, in the theater, is known as a “money review”: it doesn’t just say . . .