I like him. Lively writing, interesting anecdotes, bold (to say the least) explanations of described phenomena.
It's a fair point that he/his publishers often hype it as the real thing (like in real science) but that's how promotion is done these days. I don't see the case of Gladwell as especially abusive in this respect and again the guy has a lot of interesting/entartaining things to say.
Comparing it to Oprah and The Secret hype (as some other commenters did) which is snake oil in the purest form is not fair imo.
I've read and enjoyed Mr. Gladwell's books, and may even prefer his essay writing[1].
The guy isn't writing a dissertation; this is lightweight pop-science from a fairly good writer and presenter, with a knack for inductive reasoning (albeit sometimes controversial). The fact that the masses misjudge the scientific efficacy of his arguments is not a real issue. It's not like the guy is selling hate-speech. He should be WAY down the list of authors requiring a scientific debunking.
"The guy isn't writing a dissertation; this is lightweight pop-science from a fairly good writer and presenter, with a knack for inductive reasoning"
Gladwell's angle is that he's done the heavy lifting and read those dissertations for you, in the end democratizing these counterintuitive tidbits of intellectual shortcuts that will allow everyone to understand the world better. His audience listens to him because there is a belief that he is simplifying hard material.
Only he isn't. The conclusions he draws seldom have any legitimate supports, though Gladwell writes as if he does. Indeed, I have to disagree that he has any knack for inductive reasoning -- his real knack is to identify those conclusions that will get him PR, which in turn will make him rich and important.
The fact that the masses misjudge the scientific efficacy of his arguments is not a real issue
This is unfair to every reader of Gladwell. Unfair to everyone who quoted his various assertions in blog posts or infographic form. Because they did it based on the idea that there is a reasonable probability that his claims are valid. But they aren't. They might be randomly generated with as much legitimacy.
Gladwell is a fantastic writer, but scientifically he operates with the same behavior of a million snake oil salesman.
Comparing it to Oprah and The Secret hype (as some other commenters did) which is snake oil in the purest form is not fair imo.