When a book is presented as a popularization of science, it's reasonable to expect that it is evenhanded with the evidence that is available when it is written.

Gladwell would probably end up making his books stand up better to criticism without making them any less interesting. It's fun to read about how much practice talented people have done. The problem is when you distill that down to a soundbite that sounds like a conclusion.

I watched his Master Class and at no point does he even mention getting it right as a goal. His writing tips are only about making it interesting, memorable and shareable.

IMO, he's breaking the Spiderman rule of morality, "With great power comes great responsibility."

He's putting out intellectual versions of fraudulent ear worms without any sense of responsibility.