Early career
In 2000, Hari was joint winner of The Times Student News Journalist of the Year award for his work on the Cambridge student newspaper, Varsity .
After university, he joined the New Statesman , where he worked between 2001 and 2003, and then wrote two columns a week for The Independent. At the 2003 Press Gazette Awards, he won Young Journalist of the Year. [8] A play by Hari, Going Down in History, was performed at the Garage Theatre in Edinburgh, and his book God Save the Queen? was published by Icon Books in 2002. [8]
In addition to being a columnist for The Independent , Hari's work also appeared in The Huffington Post , The New York Times , the Los Angeles Times , The New Republic , The Nation , Le Monde , El País , The Sydney Morning Herald , and Haaretz , and he reported from locations around the world, such as Congo and Venezuela. [9] He appeared regularly as an arts critic on the BBC Two programme The Review Show and was a book critic for Slate . In 2009, he was named by The Daily Telegraph as one of the most influential people on the left in Britain. [10]
2011 plagiarism, fabrication and misconduct scandal
Plagiarism
In June 2011 bloggers at Deterritorial Support Group and the Yahoo! Ireland editor Brian Whelan discovered that Hari had plagiarised material published in other interviews and writings by his interview subjects. [11] [12] For example, a 2009 interview with Afghan women's rights activist Malalai Joya included quotations from her book Raising My Voice in a manner that made them appear as if spoken directly to Hari. [13] A piece entitled "How Multiculturalism Is Betraying Women" which Hari submitted when entering the Orwell Prize was plagiarised from Der Spiegel. [14] Hari initially denied any wrongdoing, stating that the unattributed quotes were for clarification and did not present someone else's thoughts as his own. [15] [16] He later admitted that his behaviour was "completely wrong" and that "when I interviewed people, I often presented things that had been said to other journalists or had been written in books as if they had been said to me, which was not truthful". [17]
Hari was suspended for two months from The Independent [18] [19] and in January 2012 it was announced that he was leaving the newspaper. [20]
The Media Standards Trust instructed the council of the Orwell Prize, who had given their 2008 prize to Hari, to examine the allegations. [21] [22] The council concluded that "the article contained inaccuracies and conflated different parts of someone else's story" and did not meet the standards of Orwell Prize-winning journalism. [23] [24] Hari returned the prize, [25] though he did not return the prize money of £2,000. [26] He later offered to repay the sum, but Political Quarterly, which had paid the prize money, instead invited him to make a donation to English PEN, of which George Orwell had been a member. Hari arranged with English PEN to make a donation equal to the value of the prize, to be paid in installments when he returned to work at The Independent, but he did not return to work there. [27]
Fabrication and misrepresentation
In one of the stories for which Hari won the Orwell Prize, he reported on atrocities in the Central African Republic, stating that French soldiers told him that "Children would bring us the severed heads of their parents and scream for help, but our orders were not to help them." However, an NGO worker who translated for Hari said that the quotation was invented and that Hari exaggerated the extent of the devastation in the CAR. [28] [29] In his apology after his plagiarism was exposed, Hari said that other staff of the NGO had supported his version of events. [30] [31]
In an article about military robots, Hari falsely claimed that former Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi was attacked by a factory robot and was nearly killed. [32] [33] Hari falsely claimed that a large globe erected for the Copenhagen climate summit was "covered with corporate logos" for McDonald's and Carlsberg, with "the Coke brand ... stamped over Africa."Private Eye's Hackwatch column also suggested that he pretended to have used the drug ecstasy and misrepresented a two-week package tour in Iraq as a one-month research visit, in order to bolster support for the Iraq war by stating that Iraqi civilians he spoke to were in favour of an invasion, although in an earlier article [35] he had given a conflicting account stating that Iraqis were reticent about their opinions. [36]
Hari has been accused of misrepresenting writing by George Galloway, Eric Hobsbawm, Nick Cohen and Noam Chomsky. [37]
Malicious editing of Wikipedia
In September 2011, Hari admitted that he had edited articles on Wikipedia about himself and journalists with whom he had had disputes. Using a sock puppet account under the name "David r from meth productions", he added false and defamatory claims to articles about journalists including Nick Cohen, Cristina Odone, Francis Wheen, Andrew Roberts, Niall Ferguson [38] and Oliver Kamm, [39] and edited the article about himself "to make him seem one of the essential writers of our times". [38]
In July 2011, Cohen wrote about the suspicious Wikipedia editing in The Spectator, [38] prompting the New Statesman journalist David Allen Green to publish a blog post collecting evidence. [40] Hari used the fake identity "David Rose" to pretend to be an editor who was qualified in environmental science. [41]
This led to an investigation by the Wikipedia community and "David Rose" was blocked from Wikipedia. [40] Hari published an apology in The Independent, admitting that he had been "David Rose" and writing: "I edited the entries of people I had clashed with in ways that were juvenile or malicious: I called one of them anti-Semitic and homophobic, and the other a drunk. I am mortified to have done this, because it breaches the most basic ethical rule: don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you. I apologise to the latter group unreservedly and totally." [42]
Use of libel law to suppress criticism
Hari used threats of suing for libel to prevent critics revealing his misrepresentations. [43] British bloggers criticised his critique of Nick Cohen's What's Left: How Liberals Lost Their Way for factual and interpretive errors. Hari used libel law against a blogger who wrote that "a reputation for making things up should spell career death", leading to the blogger removing the post in question. [37]
Later career
Chasing the Scream (2015)
Hari's 2015 book, Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs, is a critique of the global prohibition of illicit drugs. [44] [45] Hari argues that prohibition, drug laws, and the persecution of people who use drugs collectively do more harm to people and society than the drugs themselves. [46] Hari also delivered a 2015 TED Talk on the topic. [47] Hari posits that illicit drug use and most addictions are neither primarily character flaws nor genetic disorders, but rather responses to negative experiences and/or a lack of supportive relationships.
The book covers the history of drug prohibition, starting in early 20th-century America. Figures discussed in the book include jazz singer Billie Holiday, the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics Harry J. Anslinger, and gangster Arnold Rothstein.
In Chasing the Scream Hari discusses the societal consequences of the war on drugs, such as mass incarceration, crime and violence, and the role of drug cartels. Hari advocates for decriminalization, harm reduction, and treatment as alternatives to punishment. The book presents examples of where such policy shifts are effective according to Hari, including Portugal and Vancouver, Canada, among others.
John Harris, reviewing for The Guardian, wrote that "Chasing the Scream is a powerful contribution to an urgent debate, but this is its central problem: in contrast to the often brutal realities it describes, it uses the gauche journalistic equivalent of the narrative voice found in Mills & Boon novels." [48] Barbara Spindel, in a review in the San Francisco Chronicle, praised Hari's writing and described the book as "riveting," but added that his focus on himself and his own experiences come off as "as naive or, worse, manipulative" when compared to the people he interviewed. [49] Seth Mnookin writing for New York Times stated that Hari's arguments are weakened by forced conclusions, an eagerness to accept some researchers' conclusions, and a reliance on anecdotes instead of data. Mnookin describes these issues as similar to Hari's previous professional misconduct. [50] A wholly positive write-up by Kirkus Reviews described Chasing the Scream as a “compassionate and humane argument to overturn draconian drug policies.” [51] In a review for New Matilda , Michael Brull expressed reservations about Hari's citational practices and highlighted contradictions between the narrative in Chasing the Scream and a 2009 article by Hari. [52]
Lost Connections (2018)
Lost Connections discusses depression, anxiety, and related mental health issues, arguing in favor of the biopsychosocial model that these conditions are caused by a combination of chemical imbalances in the brain and in social, environmental, and psychological factors, such as access to meaningful work, proximity to friends and family, and past experiences with childhood trauma.
In the book Hari emphasizes the importance of human connection in mental well-being. Hari attributes superficial interactions and increasing isolation to an increase in feelings of loneliness and disconnection, which can correlate with long-term conditions such as depression and anxiety.
In the second half the book he discusses possible solutions to these mental health conditions, highlighting the importance of meaningful relationships, community involvement, and a sense of purpose in combating mental illness. Hari cites his own childhood issues, career challenges, and experiences with antidepressants and psychotherapy as the motivation for writing the book.
Hari emphasizes that someone who is taking anti-depressant medications should not stop taking them without first seeking professional advice. [53] [54]
Kirkus Reviews published a positive review of the book. [55] Jo Case, writing for The Sydney Morning Herald, praised Hari's use of techniques from fiction and said the book was almost as compelling as Chasing the Scream. [56] The Guardian published multiple articles related to the book. In a review for the paper, Fiona Sturges praised the book as being well-researched, despite some frustration over its writing style and Hari’s tendency to underestimate the reader. Sturges also noted Hari's earlier journalistic malpractice, attributing this to Hari's practice of making notes and interview recordings available. [57] Also in the Guardian, neuroscientist Dean Burnett criticised Lost Connection for presenting mainstream psychological concepts as niche ideas that Hari had discovered. Burnett also described Hari's claims regarding antidepressant use as "dangerous", and later said that The Guardian had made editorial interventions in the paper's coverage of the book on behalf of Hari. [53] [58] Psychotherapist Tom Strong, writing for the Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy in 2018, said the book covers some well-worn territory, comparing it to psychologist Gary Greenberg's book Manufacturing Depression (2010), John Bentley Mays's memoir In The Jaws of Black Dogs (1999), and William Styron's memoir Darkness Visible (1989). [59]
Stolen Focus (2022)
Hari's 2022 book, Stolen Focus: Why You Can't Pay Attention – and How to Think Deeply Again argues that people’s declining attention spans are not due to personal failings, but rather are the result of modern technology. [60]
As with his previous books, Stolen Focus presents a mix of research, interviews, and first-person narrative. Hari identifies twelve factors which he says contribute to an "attention crisis". Examples include technology addictions such as social media, the increased prevalence of chronic stress, the decline of children's exposure to outdoor play and independent exploration, and the purported influence of ultra-processed foods on brain functions. Hari suggests that late-stage capitalism's emphasis on profits over human well-being is partly to blame. He criticizes the tech industry for designing products that exploit people to maximize engagement. Stolen Focus also discusses the impacts of sleep deprivation and the lack of opportunities for meaningful work. Hari calls for collective action and suggests a focus on societal changes, rather than personal action.
The book debuted at number seven on the New York Times nonfiction best-seller list for the week ending 12 February 2022. [61] Stolen Focus was listed as one of the Financial Times' "best books" of 2022. [62] Psychologist Stuart J. Ritchie criticised Stolen Focus for over-relying on personal anecdotes while failing to cite strong evidence for the existence of shrinking attention spans. [58] The Sydney Morning Herald recommended the book for people interested in the subject, while describing it as mostly a retelling of research already covered in other publications. [63] Karlin Lillington, writing for the Irish Times, praised Stolen Focus for being a more accessibility companion to Shoshana Zuboff's work on surveillance capitalism, but says Hari sometimes goes too far in reducing complex topics to bullet points. [64]
Writer/broadcaster Matthew Sweet investigated some of the statements in the book and found that Hari had failed to cite the primary sources for some studies, and misrepresented the results of studies that suggested multitasking could have benefits in certain conditions. Sweet called on the publisher to withdraw the book for misinterpreting its sources. [65] [66] An author of one of the papers Hari cited intervened to state that he was "not happy with misrepresentation of our results". [67] [68]
Magic Pill (2024)
Magic Pill: The Extraordinary Benefits and Disturbing Risks of the New Weight Loss Drugs, explores the development and rise in popularity of semaglutide medications for type 2 diabetes and obesity. The book focuses on the best-known of these medicines, Novo Nordisk’s brand-name Ozempic for diabetes and Wegovy for weight loss, but its findings are applicable to semaglutide drugs in general.
In addition to a summary of existing research, Hari interviews scientists in the space. He also delivers a first-person account of his own experience taking Ozempic for more than one year.
Upon publication, both The Telegraph and Booklist gave positive reviews. [69] [70]
Writing for The Guardian, Tom Chivers criticised the use of references which did not support the book's claims, as well as scientific inaccuracies. [71] A fact check by The Daily Telegraph found six examples of "errors, outdated data and disputed claims". [72] Private Eye magazine criticized Hari's book for what it described as false claims and dubious references. [73]
