I'm so glad you wrote this! After reading this section, I too was having
similar thoughts (well, my version didn't use "credulous" -- had to look
this one up). How could the Economist buy all the hoey shoveled at them?
Granted, they do point out several times how over-hyped this business is,
but, despite dismissing the most outrageous claims, they still seem to find
themselves getting pushed in the direction of hype due to the lack of other,
I'm somewhat disappointed. The one time they do a special issue on an area
where I have deep personal knowledge, they come up pretty short. What does
this imply about the rest of their coverage?
Geesh, at the very least I expected to see some variation of Rohit's
argument "It's all zero-sum, darn it!"