L’Economist è uno dei miei giornali preferiti. (L’obiettività è una fanfaluca. Però la stampa anglosassone inclina verso i fatti e le analisi; quella italiana verso le opinioni e il cicaleccio).
Ma può accadere anche a loro di sbagliare, ogni tanto! Ecco alcuni errori che ho beccato e giudicato tanto macroscopici da meritare un commento online:
Jan 16th 2011 10:04 GMT
Accurate bottom line (Italy does not attract young talents), but confused analysis.
A) Italian emigrants with degrees are less than the Oecd average;
B) Of Europeans emigrants to the US with degrees, the “biggest chunks” are ALWAYS managers. The 17% Italians who work in universities is TWICE the average.
C) The article does not quote the sources of those “2004 studies”. Here’s (http://alturl.com/hvhf8) an account of a 2007 study conducted by sociologist Lorenzo Beltrame, attesting what I am saying and confuting most of what the Economist says in that specific paragraph.
Aug 14th 2010 6:00 GMT
Eight years ago, Gartner publication SPA-16-0061 of 2 May 2002, “Why a Universal RFID Infrastructure May Never Exist”, clearly outlined the obstacles on the road to the Internet of Things (some of which are referred to in this Economist article).
The research note contained the following strategic planning assumption: «A universal, standard e-tagging infrastructure will not exist, if ever, before 2010 (0.6 probability)».
The press and the technology vendors create the hype, not serious analysts.
Feb 13th 2010 8:52 GMT
I’m a bit confused, and agree with “scurvy”.
Let’ not mix latency (=interactivity) and bandwidth (=download/upload speed).
(Oh, and signals on copper wires do NOT travel at the speed of light)
Oct 21st 2009 3:11 GMT
There is no scientific evidence of a functional dependence of corporate success from executive pay or quality.
For that matter, a universally agreed-upon global measure of executive quality or effectiveness does not exist, nor does exist a universally agreed-upon synthetical measure of corporate success, i.e. one allowing to compare any two companies on any period of time and say which performed better.
Furthermore, some suggestive, however weak, anecdotal and quantitative empirical evidence published in the business literature over the past decade seems to suggest that no correlation whatsoever exists between corporate performance and executive pay.
Even if prof. Kaplan were right in saying that “market forces” are determining executive pay, we know that market forces do not always work for good and that “invisible hands” can sometimes distort markets, rather that adjust them…