I NYT intervjuas Malcolm Gladwell med anledning av sin nya bok "Revenge of the tipping point" i vilken han återvänder till delar av sin första bok - och diskuterar på vilket sätt han hade fel:
The "broken windows" chapter?
Yeah, it’s just like: "I was wrong. Here’s how badly I was wrong. Here’s why I was wrong."
The idea that crime was an epidemic and that criminal behavior was contagious is correct. But the idea that broken windows and stop-and-frisk were the correct response to a contagion is completely false.
What is it like looking back at work that you published, which certainly had an effect on policymakers, and thinking, "I completely disagree with my past self"?
I don’t have any great hesitation about saying I was wrong. If you’re reading a book that is 25 years old, stuff should be wrong. If you don’t recognize that the world has changed in 25 years, there’s something wrong with you.
If you were rewriting the "broken windows" chapter now, what would be the takeaway?
I just went to Philadelphia to hang out with these people who are doing real broken windows, like actual literal broken windows. The thing about broken windows is it’s not a metaphor. I was treating it like a metaphor. No, no, no. It’s literally about fixing broken windows.