I caught the headline “Are Some Stock Analysts Rewriting History?” An excerpt from the article:
In their paper titled “Rewriting History,” professors Alexander Ljungqvist of New York University, Christopher J. Malloy of the London Business School and Felicia C. Marston of the University of Virginia say they found 55,000 changes to the database from 1993 to 2002 that tend to make certain stock analysts look good. The database is widely used by fund managers, academic researchers, by regulators to track questionable activity on Wall Street — and by The Wall Street Journal to assemble its annual list of the best analysts.
Remember the Gomer Pyle surprise, surprise, surprise (MP3) line? It is amazing that this much effort goes into categorizing predictions. Am I surprised that efforts might go into making the prediction mavens look good? Not exactly.