1. I disagree with Daron Acemoglu on nearly every major policy issue, including AI related issues. (I did not sign the @erikbryn letter because of my fundamental disagreements with it.) But @DAcemogluMIT is a truly outstanding economist, and I greatly admire his academic work and his work as a public intellectual. He is a role model for all economists, especially for those interested in both academic research and in public affairs. 2. The Economist article highlights some important issues facing academic economics: (1) The extent to which publications in elite journals are determined by club dynamics, to take just one example, would shock most professionals who are not economists. (2) The extent to which arguments and analysis and papers are evaluated based on their byline rather than the substance of the work is also shocking. (3) The extent to which hugely successful academic economists who are outside of the most-elite club are unwilling to criticize those in the most-elite club is also surprising. Each of these three issues poses a clear threat to the ability of the academic economics profession to most efficiently produce new knowledge, which is its mandate and self-professed objective. They also pose a clear threat to the credibility and perceived usefulness of academic research among non-economists. 3. There is a great article to be written about these important, systemic issues: their origins, the status quo, and their consequences. But the article in The Economist about Acemoglu is not that article. I think maybe this is what The Economist was going for? Or maybe not — I am not sure. But if it is what The Economist was going for, then it missed. 4. The Economist is a phenomenal newspaper. I have been a print subscriber for years and I read it every week. It is indispensable and excellent.