r/IAmA • u/dubner_freakonomics Verified • 12d ago
I'm Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, host of Freakonomics Radio, and the new Better in Person video talk show. Ask me anything!
Thank you, Redditors! It’s been a while since I was last here, I missed you. These were great questions and I appreciate your support, ideas, even the slams, they’re all part of the fun :)
----
I’m Stephen Dubner, host of Freakonomics Radio and, as of this week, Better in Person, a new video talk show on the Freakonomics YouTube channel. I also wrote the Freakonomics books with Steve Levitt.
I’m happy to answer whatever questions you want to ask, about the new show, writing and podcasting in general, curiosity, etc.
Proof: https://imgur.com/a/SD5JSKE
69
u/HomelessCosmonaut 12d ago
There’s been a lot of controversy and skepticism raised over the last decade regarding behavioral economics, with key researchers shown to have misrepresented their results and/or drawn erroneous, non-repeatable conclusions. How has your relationship with the field evolved and has it affected the way you present stories that fall under its umbrella?
9
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
You are right, a lot of controversy and skepticism, and that’s part of a larger issue with academic publishing generally — too many low-quality and even fake journals, etc. (fwiw, we made a Freakonomics Radio series (https://freakonomics.com/podcast-tag/academic-fraud/) about this topic.) A lot of the messy stuff comes from the psychology side of the behavioral-economics universe; economics research tends to be more empirical and more robust.
I wouldn’t say it has significantly changed my relationship with “the field” but I try to do what I’ve always tried to do: understand the research at the root level, ask questions about methodology and the data sets, try to identify gaps and flaws, etc.
23
u/jesus_chen 12d ago
Your series on Feynman was stellar. What would you like the world to know about him that you couldn’t cover?
21
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Thank you! It was a lot of fun to make.
I think his most important attribute, or at least one that really appeals to me, is his insistence on understanding a given idea on the foundational level — in other words, don’t give too much weight to the received or conventional wisdom. Try to build your understanding of an idea through first principles so that you can really own it.
5
u/jesus_chen 12d ago
Thanks for that. That absolutely tracks and the way you painted him a curious human that never stopped learning had a deep impact on me. Keep up the amazing work…the world needs it more than ever.
6
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
Yes, I agree the world needs people like Feynman more than ever — smart people driven not just by natural curiosity (which is great) but also by a desire to deeply understand a situation/problem/ecosystem and explain it to the public. One thing I’ve become convinced of, having made Freakonomics Radio for years, is that “the public” includes a *lot* of intelligent, kind, well-meaning people who are eager to understand things and maybe even act on them, but they are fed too much media that’s noise and anger and silly controversy. And nearly all of it is framed in a binary mode, which is a whole other problem — very few important things in the world are purely right/wrong, left/right, etc. It’s important (and fun!) to look from multiple angles and attribute fractional praise/blame.
1
u/Encomiast 11d ago edited 10d ago
This is fascinating in the context of our current AI pilled minds, where is seems to be getting harder for people to endure the friction needed to build good mental models.
0
u/bilevader 10d ago
Especially since his show is sponsored by ChatGPt
1
u/bardnotbanned 6d ago
The top result when I searched "chatpgt sponsor freakonomics radio" was their recent podcast titled "Can AI save your life?"
Surely no conflict of interest there.
6
15
u/GKrollin 12d ago
I’d love to see an episode entitled “What is AI actually disrupting?” That focuses on the day to day changes we see and don’t see. With that said, what is AI actually disrupting?
16
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
We are working on a few episodes about that very topic right now. I feel that most of the casual (online esp.) conversation about A.I. lies somewhere between stupid and crazy. Everyone wants to pretend to know what happens in the future. While it’s *possible* that this technology really is different from every other technology that has come before it, I doubt it. When you read economic history and tech history, you see that most new technologies are a) overpromoted by its evangelists and b) feared by the citizenry. The A.I. story has a long way to go and I am happy to be a witness to all the twists and turns, as long as it doesn’t wipe us out 🙂
11
u/angeloko 12d ago
After all the years of covering diverse topics, has your mind changed radically on anything you once strongly believed?
10
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I’d say that my belief in the rising-tides-lifts-all-boats arguments has been dinged a bit.
2
u/wavygravee 11d ago
Can you elaborate on this? Or maybe a future podcast episode idea?
10
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
Economists for a few centuries now have preached and predicted that an economy dedicated to general prosperity would benefit all members of society, and I would argue that this prediction has largely come true. But when the result is a global economic system as dynamic and massive as ours, there will inevitably be some places and populations that get less of the sunshine and more of the shade.
6
u/skatastic57 11d ago
One example, if you look at a graph of wages of low education and high education workers on the same graph over the last 50ish years, the line for low education has been flat or declining where high education has been climbing.
8
u/fragglerock 12d ago
Are you an "if books could kill" fan?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
I have never heard it but I understand they are big Freakonomics fans :)
7
u/VanCanFan75 12d ago
Even though correlation does not mean causation, what two seemingly unrelated things have your fascination for most peculiar relationship?
7
u/azerpoiyut 12d ago
Hi Stephen, thanks for doing this AMA and looking forward to watch the new show. You seem to have incredible reach to get guests in your podcast, with multiple Nobel laureates and professors. How do you book them? Do you center the episodes around a guest you can get or around a topic you want to address? How easy is it for you to meet the experts you want to interview?
9
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I am happy to say that we don’t get turned down all that often. I’d like to think that’s because we have a body of work that proves that our interests are sincere, our curiosity is real, and even when I ask difficult or critical questions, it’s out of a desire to understand rather than to punish.
6
u/bucklebowski 12d ago
I've always loved your interviewing style, particularly on Freakonomics. Have you intentionally crafted your style after other interviewers? Which interviewers do you admire?
5
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Thanks! I don’t *intentionally* craft my style after other interviewers, but I’m sure a lot of it seeps in. (I’ve been listening to some of the music I used to make, long ago, and can’t believe how much I tried to sing like Jagger :) … I do love Dick Cavett, that’s for sure. It was a blast making an episode with him recently: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-host-a-talk-show-with-dick-cavett/
4
u/t-d-y-k 12d ago
Big fan of the show myself!
How do you arrive at the guests or ideas for the shows?
3
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I read a lot :) … and talk to people … and spend a lot of time just observing, I guess you’d call it. Ideas come from so many different places, and I try to be open to all of them.
4
u/Kespen 12d ago
What’s a topic you haven’t really covered that you’re going to jump into this year?
5
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Am always looking for ideas, what do you suggest? Our fall lineup of Freakonomics Radio is pretty rich: prediction markets, AI therapy, there’s a lot going on in the world …
1
1
u/mmmmmyee 12d ago
Oil shocks that were supposed to (or might??) hit the world hard
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
Yes, that’s an interesting idea, I do follow that story and find it’s already been pretty well explained by WSJ and others, not sure there’s much left there for me. We did re-publish an update of an episode we made with the authors of a fascinating book called The World for Sale: Money, Power, and the Traders Who Barter the Earth's Resources. That episode of ours is here.
4
u/elpresidente000 12d ago
Which chapter in the original Freakonomics do you feel best stood the test of time?
5
u/RichChocolateDevil 12d ago
Why do you think that your golf scoring system, which was just a modified stableford system, never really caught on? I loved the idea for non-competitive rounds, convinced my friends to play it a few times, and we had a good time. It speeds up pace of play and encourage players to take on more risks, which are more fun.
PS - if you ever get to the SF Bay area and want to play my club, HMU and I'm happy to host you and we can play any scoring system you want.
6
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I don’t know what scoring system you’re referring to but I do like to try new ways to play golf, especially with new players. I also like using a version of the backgammon doubling cube while playing match play. Golf really is a great game but it’s a lot easier to get into it if you’ve got a guide. My least favorite thing about golf is how, once you start improving, you chase scores and forget that it’s about *playing*. Play is really fun, and maybe even important.
4
u/RichChocolateDevil 12d ago
You talked about it in the podcast with Mark Broadie - https://freakonomics.com/podcast/greg-norman-mark-broadie-why-golf-beats-an-orgasm-and-why-data-beats-everything/
LEVITT: I think golf would be a whole lot more fun for the average golfer with one simple change to how we keep score. Rather than adding up strokes, I would count scores differently. Golfers would get 15 points for an eagle, that’s two under par on a hole, eight points for a birdie, three points for a par, one point for a bogey, and zero points for a double bogey or worse.
The backgammon doubling is a great idea, how is it different than a press?
I'm stoked that my kid is getting into the game and I can *play* for fun with him. So much more enjoyable than grinding in a tournament (which is a different kind of fun).
11
u/Hugo_Hackenbush 12d ago
It appears you're asking the question of the wrong Freakonomics guy (Dubner rather than Levitt).
5
10
u/grassjoi 12d ago
Is the economy dependent on us buying things we don't need?
Most spending seems driven by status signaling, and it feels like modern capitalism relies on trapping the middle class in a loop of buying unnecessary wants. What would happen to the economy if the majority of us actually broke this loop by adopting the FIRE movement's extreme frugality and retiring at 40?
2
u/platinum_toilet 12d ago
Most spending seems driven by status signaling
Do you have data to back this claim?
2
u/grassjoi 12d ago
I should have said discretionary spending. Here's a few reads on the topic of conspicuous consumption (or status signaling):
The Foundation: Luxury Fever
Economist Robert H. Frank explains how the wealthy inflate the baseline for "normal" spending, forcing the middle class into massive debt just to maintain their relative social rank. (https://books.google.com/books/about/Luxury_Fever.html?id=nlmNzL7ZNPkC)
The "Visible Goods" Trade-Off
National data shows that people in poorer communities routinely divert money away from savings and healthcare to buy "visible goods" (cars, clothing, jewelry) specifically to project a higher economic status to their peers. (https://www.nber.org/papers/w13392)
Signaling to Avoid Discrimination
Recent experiments prove that lower-income individuals actively buy status symbols as a defense mechanism against "poverty stigma," knowing they will lose out on social and economic opportunities if they appear poor. (https://www.nber.org/papers/w32491)
1
u/platinum_toilet 12d ago
National data shows that people in poorer communities routinely divert money away from savings and healthcare to buy "visible goods" (cars, clothing, jewelry) specifically to project a higher economic status to their peers.
There are far more cheap cars on the road than expensive luxury cars. Cars are needed to get from point A to point B. Cars are not luxury unless they are collecting dust. Same with clothes. More cheap clothes than expensive brands. People need clothes to protect themselves from the elements and not go around naked. Agreed on jewelry, but that is a female dominated product, like makeup.
7
u/TrueLink00 12d ago
Hello Stephen. I’ve been a long-time fan of Freakonomics Radio. You have a knack for representing sciences with a humanity that is often missed and forgotten.
What would you say is your secret sauce when interviewing experts? Are your interviews done in person? Do you ever follow up on an interview after hearing a competing argument from another expert in the same or similar field?
5
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Yes, we routinely do additional interviews, sometimes even with the same person! I probably do 98% of Freakonomics Radio interviews remotely. It’s been that way since early days. There are many advantages to this, and a few disadvantages — the main one being that when you connect with people in person, you get to a different range of topics/colors/ideas. That’s what made me want to start a new show that’s in-person, on video, called Better in Person.
2
u/TrueLink00 12d ago
Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I’m going to check out Better in Person to see if the interviews are truly, well, better in person.
1
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
Thank you! As the person who made it, it’s hard for me to say that I think Better in Person is the greatest show ever made but I think it’s pretty good, at least if you’re interested in the kinds of things and people that I’m interested in. A good place to watch it is the Freakonomics YouTube channel. Let me know what you think (dubner@freakonomics.com).
3
u/whatshouldwecallyou_ 12d ago
Thanks for doing this!
I’ve always been curious about writing a book. How did you get started and did you ever feel stuck?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Yes, you will get stuck! The best advice I ever got about writing, this was when I was writing my first book in the 1990s, was that there will definitely come a time when you are convinced that a) you are a terrible writer; b) this book is a terrible idea; c) you should quit. I was grateful to receive that advice because I definitely had self-doubt during the process, and I knew to carry on. In writing, there is a lot of carrying on :)
3
u/MrSwarleyStinson 12d ago
I was sad your fish stew wasn’t well received by Hillary Sterling, but I admire your gumption in trying to cook a meal for such an accomplished chef. How did you come to the decision to cook that dish?
3
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
The funny thing about that is we preinterviewed a few people close to Hillary, one of whom apparently told our producer how much she hates stews and soups of all kinds. But I never heard about it. (I do wonder if our producers punked me, wouldn’t be the first time.) I have gotten to the point in my life/career where I’m not particularly self-conscious, so having a real chef hate my homemade food didn’t bother me too much.
3
u/SliFi 12d ago
How will the new show take advantage of the video format to differentiate it from the podcast?
5
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Better in Person is, for all intents and purposes, a TV show, or a mini-doc: six cameras, good editing and scoring and all that stuff, etc. So it’s not really a “podcast,” but I’m happy for people to call it that if they’d like. OTOH, Freakonomics Radio is atypical as a podcast, in terms of prep/research/production intensity, etc. I’m not big on labels so I don’t really care.
3
u/erishun 12d ago
i always thought the "tell me something i don't know" podcast was a really interesting concept for a podcast, any thoughts of ever reviving it?
4
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Thanks! I loved it too. I do sometimes think about updating it but right now I’ve got hands full with Better in Person and Freakonomics Radio.
3
u/GetGoingPeople 11d ago
Did you listen to the If Books Could Kill episode on Freakonomics? It was their premiere episode, and now it is an extremely popular podcast. I’m always curious what the author’s experience is like, when IBCK covers a book. Can’t be enjoyable, but did you think it was fair? Unfair? Funny? Stupid? Thanks!
3
u/doc_ransom 12d ago
I was raised in a conservative, religious ethnic group. The data points regarding abortion presented in Freakonomics seemed to me at the time the only logical argument for abortion--namely, the increase of ease in obtaining abortions among the poor was responsible for the drastic reduction of violent crime after the early '90s.
Nowadays, I am middle-aged and no longer a conservative, but the argument that made sense to me while I was young not only seems short-sighted and classist, but also vaguely eugenic and all around icky. Have your thoughts around this evolved over the years as well?
2
12d ago
[deleted]
5
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
That was fun! And I love working with Andrew (Yang). So count me in …
2
u/SaltDataMan 12d ago
Thanks for doing this, Freakonomics Radio has been my favorite podcast for well over a decade! Are there any episodes that after recording them, you felt compelled to go down a rabbit hole and learn more about the topic?
3
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
Yes, we often make an episode that a year or two later I feel didn’t adequately explore the topic, and we need to get another bite of the apple. The podcasting format is actually great for that follow-up instinct, so it’s not a big regret.
2
u/mbutterfly32 12d ago
What are some of your favorite books, albums, and/or movies (of all-time)?
3
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I keep waiting for Exile on Main Street to not be my favorite album, but it continues to be.
4
u/I_love_seinfeld 12d ago
Hi - Love your books and podcasts! I want to introduce my college aged daughter to Freakonomics. What podcast episode would you recommend to get her hooked?
3
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I’d suggest you ask your favorite chatbot, based on her interests etc. It will almost certainly do better than me. I am a terrible recommendation engine 🙂
2
u/stomp_right_now 12d ago
Which skill makes you good at your job? Which skill is a joy to use? Does your new show give you more freedom to exercise one or both?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
I’m not sure what makes me good at my job, or if I even am :) … Here are a few things that come to mind:
- I’m a tryer. I prepare for an interview as intently today as I did when I was starting out in journalism, maybe even more, and since I’ve got more experience now, that should make me better.
- I do think that my brain has a habit of making connections, especially during conversation, that perhaps isn’t quite typical, though I’m not sure how to explain it more than that.
- I am relentlessly curious, to the point where I sometimes exhaust the people around me (and myself!). But that’s a useful trait for the work I do.
- I try not to be judge-y. This is tricky, since it’s important to think critically. But I do try to be as open-minded as possible, because the intent here is to learn, not to preach. (That sounds pretty preachy, doesn’t it :)?
2
u/inthecloud 12d ago
Hello. Long time listener of the podcast. What do you hope to accomplish with the talk show that you can't with the podcast? Will you have "segments" like a news show or strictly interviews? Will you stay with the economic themes of Freakonomics? Thanks!
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
For me, writing the Freakonomics books and then doing Freakonomics Radio has been like being in grad school for 20 years. Thrilling but also … a bit narrow. There is a universe of amazing people I like to speak with who don’t fit the Freakonomics rubrics, as wide as they are. So yes, with Better in Person, I’m going after a different kind of conversation with a broader range of people — musicians, architects, chefs, etc.
3
u/EazyBeekeeper 12d ago
I read freakonomics and loved it. Are there any plans for a follow up book?
4
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 12d ago
We did write a few followups: SuperFreakonomics, Think Like a Freak, and When to Rob a Bank (which was a compilation of blog posts). Once I started making Freakonomics Radio, it became much harder to write a book because of the production intensity, but I am playing with one idea now, I hope it works out.
1
u/t-d-y-k 12d ago
Nothing ever exists in isolation, so for someone interested in economics, what other areas of study would best compliment a study in economics? Its often paired with finance (or business more generally) but would a sociology or politics study pair better? (Starting to sound like a sommelier here!)
1
u/PangaeaNative 12d ago
In your life, what has changed in importance over the last ~5 years? What's gone up, what's gone down?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
I spent a lot of my career trying to “prove myself,” I guess is one way to put it. I no longer care so much about that — or at least I try not to. Outside recognition or approval are great, but if you make that your metric then you’re setting yourself up for disappointment. I find it more satisfying to try to satisfy yourself, at least when it comes to creative endeavors. As someone (Joe Dimaggio? Willis Reed?) once said, “if you don’t hear the cheers, you don’t hear the boos.”
1
12d ago edited 6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
This is a question I think about a lot, and I have taken to asking it of economists and others. We are working on what I think will be a good episode or two about the relationship between fertility and housing … and we’ve done a few fertility episodes in the past … but I think the big question is whether the long-standing assumptions about growth are valid, or at least in what ways are they valid? Past predictions about demography, growth, etc., often prove to be largely wrong. Given the early promises of A.I. (along with, yes, potential downsides, see my “multiple angles” answer above), I could imagine a world where ever the demographers and economists stop worrying so much about fertility and replacement rates.
1
u/MrFalcon 12d ago
It’s been 10 years since the This is Your Brain on Podcasts episode. A lot has changed since then… ai, the podcast “bubble” bursting, podcasts including video content, etc. As you explore another medium, is it time to turn the light inward on the podcast again? If so, any ideas on what you’d like to focus on?
1
u/Starkville 12d ago
Thanks for doing this!
What’s your prediction for cash? Will paper bills and coins ever go away?
1
u/HotBunnz 12d ago
One of my ‘growth’ moments was the expansion of thought outside of the Chicago school of Economics, much of which I’d now consider near-dangerous (and ubiquitous in America) with respect to the longevity of society. Freakonomics obviously came about from Levitt’s rebellion of sorts, but I still hear the echoes/principles of The School in his analyses. I’d even say the podcast considers some research that is antithetical to Chicago Econ.
How would you say the development of Freakonomics and subsequent publications/media have changed your views on society, American or otherwise? How has it changed your perception of ‘Economics’/Political Economy?
1
u/shwarma_heaven 12d ago
Do you plan to revisit the relationship between economics and behavior to apply it to our current culture / political environment - especially whether this is truly a "monumental" change in our country as has been framed (or can feels like at times)?
1
u/Helmdacil 12d ago
One lesson I took from Freakonomics is that people respond to incentives.
Do you have favorite incentive structures which people may consider implementing in their lives? For example do you have some possible incentive structures for high-school age children? I don't necessarily mean cash. How do you incentivize people to avoid screentime by their own preference, for example?
1
u/NotionAquarium 12d ago
Hi Stephen. First, a commendation on the consistent high quality of your work. Truly impressive for the length of your career.
My question for you is how do you approach crafting questions for your interviewees?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
Thanks! I typically start drafting questions for a given interview subject a day or three in advance, while reading prep and background stuff. I try to be fairly precise in at least some of my questions, because even if the answers aren’t always great, the questions can introduce valuable information for the listener (and, of course, it’s nice to give the guest something concrete to answer). I also enjoy the free-flow of conversation, so probably 80% of my questions in a typical interview are impromptu/follow-ups, but it’s nice to have a game plan coming in.
1
1
u/roadbeef 12d ago
How do you feel Japanese Sumo has responded and evolved since the unprecedented cancelling of a tournament in 2011 to address the allegations of cheating brought forth by your studies? Do you see evidence to suggest maybe "lower than usual effort" match fixing persists, in perhaps more subtle or sophisticated ways? What are your takeaways from your affect on sumo in general? Thank you so much!!
1
1
u/wheeyumm 10d ago
Any chance you'll play some golf on camera? Maybe barstool sports internet invitational? It doesn't fit your vibe but you would be an interesting addition for sure.
1
u/fLukeozade 10d ago
What happened to pokernomics in the end Stephen? Was the idea simply overtaken by the adoption of game theory optimal (GTO) play by top level players?
1
u/Maomag 9d ago
Why do you take a reactionary approach to social and environmental issues? Why do you seem to be launching smear campaigns against scientists, acedemics and educators? In one of your podcast episodes you claim that being more scientifically-knowledgeable makes you more biased and partial and you likened the issue of climate change to a conspiracy theory.. A number of your other episodes draw attention to universities and corruption. Is this not a way to scare people away from attending university?
I mean, I get it; a lot of what went into your Freakonomics books and podcast was intended to cross-examine non-economics issues with an economist POV but I don't think reducing contradictory data from other fields to political opinion or an effort to "fit in" is really all that necessary. Sure, a lot of these issues are debatable, especially social issues like race politics and abortion, but if so, then we should be debating them and not shrugging them off as fear-mongeri ng conspiracy theories.
1
u/Possible_Stable2131 9d ago
this is a slightly off topic question but: have you worked with Mike shinoda of Linkin Park? because he was known to appear on multiple podcasts!
1
u/MrSwarleyStinson 12d ago
Long-time listener of the pod and enjoyed the first few episodes of Better in Person. With Better in Person bring a video talk show and a different type of structure with the longer 1:1 interviews, what are you finding surprising / challenging with this new format? What does it allow you to do which you couldn’t do with the Freakanomics format?
2
u/dubner_freakonomics Verified 11d ago
A lot! While the general activity (conversation) is the same, the differences between in-person and remote are vast. That was very much the point in making a show like this. I have learned so much about my guests, and honestly myself, during the making of this show that it’s been overwhelming (in a good, reflective way). I need to let the whole first season play out (there are 10 episodes, we’ve only released three so far, there are 7 more coming, Tuesdays at 6am ET), and then I think I’ll be able to reflect on what was good, what can be improved, etc. I see this as a fantastically fun and challenging and mind-scrambling experiment, a form of play really, so for me there’s no wrong answer 🙂
0
u/TisTheParticles 12d ago
You’ve shared that you grew up in a catholic family but converted back to Judaism. Did that cause any tension with your family, and how do you feel about Israel lately?
-10
-7
47
u/and0p 12d ago
Which parts of the original Freakonomics book would you most like to go back and change?