1

From a Cato Institute article by Steve Hanke1 (emphasis added):

Most press reports about Zimbabwe’s fantastic hyperinflation are off the mark – way off the mark. Even our most trusted news sources fail to get the facts right. This confirms the “95 Percent Rule”: 95 percent of what you read in the financial press is either wrong or irrelevant.

Is the 95 percent rule accurate? In other words, is "95 percent of what you read in the financial press is either wrong or irrelevant?"

What percent of the articles in the financial press are approximately correct2?

Note: Steve Hanke certainly seems to believe that inflation for some countries is higher than actually reported (e.g. the Zimbabwe article I cited, this tweet regarding Sudan from 9 hours ago, and this tweet regarding Argentina from 11 hours ago). This may or may not influence his opinions about the financial press. This question has nothing to do with whether inflation (or hyperinflation) is incorrectly reported.

1Professor of Applied Economics and Co-Director of the Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore 2Approximately correct as in correct by mainstream standards.

closed as primarily opinion-based by Nate Eldredge, BobTheAverage, Oddthinking May 13 at 4:00

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • I understand "irrelevant" may be subjective. I believe that in the spirit of Skeptics.SE I am not supposed to define the term "irrelevant." I will not currently do so, but will do so if requested. – Barry Harrison May 12 at 5:17
  • 2
    A version of this question would be better on money.stackexchange.com I would answer if it was asked there. – fredsbend May 12 at 15:39
  • Unsure if this has to do with money, but I can do that. (Also, the article is about economics and not really personal finance & money.) – Barry Harrison May 12 at 21:13
  • 2
    The claim is so vague that I don't think this can be answered with a proper skeptics answer. Economics has a hard time falsifying most claims, so what does wrong mean? There is no objective standard for relevance either. What specific publications count as the financial press? Without objective standards for any of these, no answer can be based the kind of strong objective evidence that makes the core of a good Skeptics answer. – BobTheAverage May 12 at 23:29
  • 1
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because the claim is so vague as to not be falsifiable. – BobTheAverage May 12 at 23:31

Browse other questions tagged .