Challenging Top Economists as Corrupt: Part 3 of INET's Interview with Charles Ferguson

The transcript discusses the reactions of academic economists and administrators to interview questions about conflicts of interest. Initially, there was surprise, not due to ignorance of the issues, but because they were unaccustomed to being challenged. The interviewee realized that these individuals were used to deference and had never been questioned sharply, especially by journalists. The discussion highlights the media's role and the sensitivity surrounding conflicts of interest in economic and finance departments.

What was the initial reaction of the academic economists and finance department administrators to the interview questions?

• They were eager to discuss the issues.

• They were indifferent to the questions.

• They were surprised because they were not used to being challenged.

• They were unaware of the issues.

Why did the interviewees find the questions surprising?

• They had never thought about these issues before.

• They were not used to being questioned on these topics.

• They disagreed with the questions.

• They found the questions irrelevant.

What realization did the interviewer come to during the interviews?

• The interviewees were eager to discuss conflicts of interest.

• The interviewees were accustomed to deference and not being questioned.

• The interviewees were used to being challenged.

• The interviewees were unaware of the conflicts.

How did the interviewees typically expect to be treated by journalists?

• With hostility.

• With skepticism and challenge.

• With deference and respect.

• With indifference.

What specific topic did the interviewees not expect to be challenged on?

• Departmental procedures.

• Economic theories.

• Conflicts of interest.

• General policy questions.