568. Why Are People So Mad at Michael Lewis? | Freakonomics Radio

[@timmurphy14]

This guy demonstrated that you can, in fact, con a conman. I listened to his podcast about the trial and every opportunity he could he tried to lighten the judgment on SBF, ultimately discussing how unfair the criminal justice system is. While I can’t completely disagree with that, because it certainly can be, it’s hard to argue that it was anything but just here. Michael Lewis sitting with SBF’s parents in the courtroom also gave a bad look. I was a huge Lewis fan before, with the Big Short and Flash Boys both being recommendations I would have made to anyone. Now I just don’t see myself wanting to read anything else he writes.

[@katejones9046]

If Michael Lewis had written the book reflecting what he said in this podcast and not what he actually wrote, it would have been a much better book.

[@matthewmaguire3554]

To paraphrase George Castanza…It’s not a con…if you believe it.

[@Omar_Little]

"His parents didn't know that they owned the mansion in the bahamas. They didn't know what was going on about anything." - Michael Lewis STILL being a credulous fool.

[@nickwright9064]

Isn't there an email from the father complaining about not getting enough cash from the business? Not exactly how ML portrays them!!

[@shaunspadafora7943]

It's rare to see a combination of both autism and psychopathy, but I believe SBF may be an example.

[@HTHAMMACK1]

No, what Michael Lewis did was defend this guy and try to build him up as some great guy.

[@kentedify]

I've read most of ML's books but have no interest in this one. I've always viewed crypto as gambling since it has ZERO intrinsic value and is based on speculating. I'm sure that SBF is a lot more interesting than the people speculate and call it investing. Being mad at ML is blaming the messenger.

[@Omar_Little]

"If he played chess against a GM but the rules of the game changed during the game he might beat them".. This is absolute nonsense. Lewis spouting complete stupidity. He clearly has no idea what chess GMs are capable of and how often they also play variations on chess. Similarly he believes EA conmen aren't conmen because "they're academics". He is genuinely so willing to fawn over rich people that he is outrageously willing to believe things that fall apart under even a few moments of scrutiny or critical thought.

[@shaunspadafora7943]

The chess analogy is simply a symbolic representation of the chaos and complexity involved in high frequency trading.

[@natetaylor9744]

He's critical of EA, the thing he said about chess GMs is absolutely true; the things that are lacking are your attention span, your knowledge of chess, and your reading comprehension.

[@meestabob]

It’s not a story for people who can’t see nuances, but here the critics can’t even see contradictions. For example, ML points out the contradiction that the bankruptcy solution of Ray/SullCrom will lose more money than the bankruptcy itself. Whoa, that should slow down any criticism. The courtroom antics of the prosecution are right out of Dickens. I mean, twisting the arms of scared innocent young people so they testify for you! And ML points out that the so called loss might be a win in the end. What!? The real injustice here is that the very concept of “crime” doesn’t apply. He’s somehow deficient in understanding basic concepts, as ML clearly shows, so the whole legal proceeding should have been shut down at the beginning. The court did not establish a motive if SBF did not understand that his “mistakes” were against the law. Lack of intent is a solution granted to violent offenders all the time. It’s really ironic that the one concept that SBF understands, altruism, is never mentioned by critics, but Judge Kaplan sentenced him for not showing empathy by showing him no empathy. What!? I thank ML for his nuanced book.

[@natetaylor9744]

SBF is a fun villain, he's fun for people to hate, and people hate it when you get in the way of their hate.

[@matthewmaguire3554]

Hmmm…Like when people get busted for drug possession the response quite often is….What is your problem? Why are you bothering me?🤗

[@robertstolzoff8469]

"Lack of intent is a solution granted to violent offenders all the time. ' That's utter nonsense .

[@robertstolzoff8469]

". The court did not establish a motive if SBF did not understand that his “mistakes” were against the law. " There is this motive called "Billions of dollars" , so wtaf are you babbling about ?

[@robertstolzoff8469]

"e’s somehow deficient in understanding basic concepts," Or he did a great job of making gullible people yourself included , think that

[@justseifert]

Obsessed with the people he writes about except when they're not a rich narcissists. He interviewed everyone but Michael Oher for The Blind Side. And was more interested in his exploitive guardians and took them at face value.

[@seanwebb605]

That's complete nonsense.

[@scottparrish7244]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Michael Lewis went to school with Sean Tuhoy.

[@robertstolzoff8469]

@@seanwebb605 not really, his so called guardians took advantage of him and ripped him off

[@seanwebb605]

@robertstolzoff8469 All evidence to the contrary.

[@matthewmaguire3554]

Why when commenting on sites do I feel like Steve Martin in “The Jerk “ when the new telephone book arrives?🎭

[@bengrace8808]

Dang the comments really are riled up about this guy huh

[@waltwhitman7545]

bro tried to justify Bankman-Fraud

[@sararichardson737]

Hilarious. Tragic.

[@phenomenalfemale524]

The bad reviews on Amazon are monumentally bad in a way I've never read before. SBF is a bad guy and any author that writes a book about SBF and sidesteps this is absurd.

[@seanwebb605]

Sam Bankman Fried just isn't a very good villain. He's not some sinister person polluting the oceans, stealing from little old ladies our tearing down poor people's homes. He committed crimes. And he was justly convicted and will likely go to prison. But he's just not a very good villain. Lewis never excused his crimes or behaviour. All that he is saying is that it was an interesting story with an interesting character. Someone that people really did marvel at. Someone that everyone wanted to be around. Lewis is right. He gave us all of the information to draw our own conclusions. The company was a mess and the man was incredibly unorthodox. And he committed crimes. Lewis has said many times before that had he testified it would have been bad for Fried. If he was on they jury he would have voted to convict. Why are people angry at Lewis? He wrote an interesting book that told us everything that could be known up until the trial.

[@natetaylor9744]

I too blindly trust online pile ons - I mean if everyone shouting the exact same thing it must be true.

[@whazzat8015]

The book assumes the defense's position, sort of. He was convicted, if that is a critical review of the position. Guilty, guilty, guilty Still it's a suported argument to present.

[@almor2445]

Sbf is a classic narcissist but one who has decided he wants a reputation for good deeds at any cost. No wisdom at all.

[@billychad89]

This is the last freakenomics podcast for me. Critical thinking just getting worse and worse on this show.

[@allie_hart]

They didn't press him on anything people are mad about! They just gave him another opportunity to shill his book. They didn't ask him about his attacks on Michael Oher or him being entirely dismissive of Zeke Faux when his book was actually well researched and he didn't fall victim to the pitfalls of access journalism as Lewis ALWAYS does. God I hate this guy

[@seanwebb605]

@@allie_hart You're insane.

[@seansexton1472]

Ok.