Malcolm Gladwell Revisits “The Tipping Point” in New Book

>>> NOW, FROM ENDING RACIAL SEGREGATION TO THE SPREAD OF PANDEMICS TECTONIC SHIFTS IN SOCIAL NORMS CAN OFTEN BE TRACED BACK TO MULTIPLE SMALL ACTIONS.

UNDERSTANDING THE HOW AND WHY OF THIS HAS BECOME THE LIFE'S WORK OF OUR NEXT GUEST.

25 YEARS NOW AFTER HIS GROUND-BREAKING PUBLICATION "THE TIPPING POINT," SOCIAL THINKER AND "NEW YORK TIMES" BEST SELLING AUTHOR MALCOLM GLADWELL SPEAKS WITH WALTER ISAACSON, REVISITING, IN FACT, THE SUBJECT IN HIS LATEST BOOK.

>> THANK YOU, PAULA.

MALCOLM GLADWELL, WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> THANK YOU, WALTER.

>> YOUR BOOK "THE TIPPING POINT" WHICH CAME OUT ABOUT 25 YEARS AGO SPENT EIGHT YEARS ON THE BEST SELLER LIST.

I MEAN, THAT'S HUGE.

WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO REVISIT IT NOW?

>> WELL, IT WAS THE 25th ANNIVERSARY AND I THOUGHT -- WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE FUN TO JUST DO A REVISED EDITION AND I WENT BACK AND I HADN'T READ IT IN 25 YEARS, AND I WENT BACK AND I READ IT AND I SAID, ACTUALLY, I THINK IT WOULD BE SILLY TO REVISE IT.

IT'S A TIME CAPSULE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS WRITTEN IN 1999.

IF I REALLY WANT TO REVISIT THIS I SHOULD WRITE A WHOLE NEW BOOK.

AND SO I REVERSED COURSE IN MIDSTREAM AND JUST STARTED FROM THE BEGINNING AGAIN.

>> YOU GOT ABOUT MIDSTREAM.

WAS THERE A TIPPING POINT, SO TO SPEAK, WHEN YOU SAID, WAIT, I HAVE TO DO A WHOLE NEW BOOK?

>> THERE WERE SO MANY THINGS I WANTED TO KIND OF -- I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT COVID, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT -- I WAS -- YOU KNOW, I HAD MY ONGOING OBSESSION WITH -- WITH ELITE SCHOOLS.

I SORT OF MADE A LIST OF ALL THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT AND I REALIZED THERE WAS NONE OF THE ORIGINAL BOOK LEFT.

THAT WAS -- I THINK THE CRUCIAL POINT WAS THE OPIOID STUFF.

I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY DID WANT TO TRY TO -- THE BOOK BEGINS AND ENDS WITH THE OPIOID CRISIS AND THAT WAS THE THING THAT GOT ME STARTED AND I HAD A LOT I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THAT AND I COULDN'T FIND A WAY TO FIT IT INTO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE OLD BOOK SO I THOUGHT I WOULD START FRESH.

>> I TALK ABOUT THE OPIOID CRISIS AND OF COURSE THE COVID EPIDEMIC AND THE FRAMING DEVICE FOR THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF A TIPPING POINT BOTH IN YOUR ORIGINAL BOOK AND NOW IS THAT SOMETIMES SOCIAL MOVEMENTS OR IDEAS BECOME A TIPPING POINT LIKE AN EPIDEMIC, AS IF A VIRUS ATTACKS AND THEY SPREAD VIRAL VIRALLY.

HOW DID THAT APPLY TO OPIOID AND COVID.

>> COVID IS SUPER INTERESTING BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID NOT REALIZE UNTIL VERY LATE IN THE PANDEMIC WAS THAT THE COVID PANDEMIC HAD A -- A FEATURE THAT IS OFTEN DISTINCTIVE OF EPIDEMICS, WHICH IS THAT IT WAS PROFOUNDLY ASYMMETRICAL, IT WAS BEING SPREAD BY A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

SO WE HAD THIS ASSUMPTION GOING IN THAT EVERYONE WHO WAS INFECTED WITH COVID POSED SOME RISK TO OTHERS AND THAT IT SPREAD SORT OF FROM PERSON TO PERSON TO PERSON TO PERSON.

AND THEN WHAT WE BEGAN TO UNDERSTAND NEAR THE END OF THE PANDEMIC WAS THAT SORT OF A VERY SMALL FRACTION OF INDIVIDUALS 5%, 5% PROBABLY AT MOST FOR SOME REASON WE DON'T ENTIRELY UNDERSTAND, SOMETHING TO DO WITH THEIR GENETIC MAKEUP WERE PRODUCING HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS MORE VIRAL PARTICLES OR EXHALING THEM IN THEIR BREATH AND IN THEIR SPEECH THAN EVERYBODY ELSE AND THAT THOSE PEOPLE WERE PROBABLY THE ONES WHO WERE DOING THE MAJORITY OF THE DAMAGE IN THE PANDEMIC.

>> THAT IDEA OF A SUPERSPREADER TAKES ME BACK TO THE ORIGINAL BOOK BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE THE SUPERSPREADERS OF IDEAS, THAT SMALL PERCENTAGE.

>> YEAH, SO THAT BECOMES -- I TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE ORIGINAL BOOK, BUT THE IDEA THAT SUPERSPREADER BECOMES A VERY BIG PART OF THIS BOOK BECAUSE IT'S ALSO WHAT MAKES -- HELPS US MAKE SENSE OF THE OPIOID CRISIS.

THAT WHEN YOU -- STAGE ONE OF THE OPIOID CRISIS WAS DRIVEN BY DOCTORS PRESCRIBING OXYCONTIN AND THE QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE MAKE SENSE THAT HAVE BEHAVIOR?

WAS THIS EVIDENCE OF SOME KIND OF FUNDAMENTAL FAILING OF THE MEDICAL PROFESSION?

AND WHEN YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT HOW PURDUE FOMENTED THE SPREAD OF OXYCONTIN YOU REALIZE THEY WEREN'T RELYING ON A FLAW IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION.

THEY WEREN'T EVEN RELYING ON THE EFFORTS OF THE MAJORITY OF DOCTORS.

WHAT THEY WERE DOING WAS EXPLOITING A VERY, VERY TINY NUMBER OF HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC, HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE DOCTORS WHO THEY REALIZE THEY ONLY NEEDED A COUPLE THOUSAND DOCTORS TO START A NATIONAL EPIDEMIC AROUND OXYCONTIN.

THERE WAS ONE DOCTOR WHO -- THERE WERE DOCTORS -- ONE DOCTOR WHO COULD BE CONVINCED TO PRESCRIBE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PILLS OF OXYCONTIN WAS SUFFICIENT.

YOU DIDN'T NEED TO CONVINCE 100 TO PRESCRIBE IT TEN TIMES.

RIGHT?

THEN THERE WAS THIS EXACT SAME PRINCIPLE THAT DROVE THE COVID PANDEMIC, WAS BEING DRIVEN BY THE SPIRIT OF SMALL CORE.

IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE OXYCONTIN SPREAD AS QUICKLY AS IT DID, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE BEHAVIORS OF A VERY SELECTIVE GROUP OF DOCTORS WHO WERE DELIBERATELY TARGETED BY PURDUE.

>> YET WHEN YOU FRAME THESE THINGS AS EPIDEMICS, THERE SEEMS TO BE A MAJOR DISTINCTION TO ME AT LEAST BETWEEN OPIOIDS AND, SAY, COVID.

COVID IS AN EPIDEMIC THAT HITS US FROM THE OUTSIDE, A VIRUS COMES AND GETS US.

OPIOID IS SOMETHING WE DID TO OURSELVES.

WHY DO YOU MUSH THOSE TWO TOGETHER?

I KNOW AT THE END YOU SAY WE HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE IDEAS AND THEMES THAT SURROUND US.

SO TO WHAT EXTENT IS THIS TIPPING POINT IDEA, THIS EPIDEMIC IDEA, ONE IN WHICH WE HAVE POWER TO CONTROL?

>> I THINK WE HAVE POWER TO CONTROL -- I MEAN, WHAT LINKS THOSE TWO EXAMPLES, ONE IS OBVIOUSLY A BIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON, THE OTHER IS A BEHAVIORAL PHENOMENON, BUT THEY -- FIRST OF ALL, THEY RESEMBLE EACH OTHER IN THE PATTERN OF THEIR -- OF THE PHENOMENON.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY FOLLOW AN EPIDEMIC CURVE.

THESE ARE NOT PROBLEMS THAT ROSE SLOWLY AND STEADILY OVER TIME.

THEY EXPLODED AT A CERTAIN CRITICAL MOMENT IN EXACTLY THE WAY THAT NONLINEAR PHENOMENON LIKE EPIDEMICS DO.

SECONDLY THERE WAS THIS DYNAMIC OF ASYMMETRY WHICH IS A POWERFUL INDICATOR OF EPIDEMICS, THAT SMALL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WERE MOVING THEM FORWARD, BUT THERE'S ALSO -- THERE IS A CONTAGIOUS ELEMENT IN BOTH.

YOU KNOW, IN ONE CASE IT'S CONTAGION THAT WE UNDERSTAND, BIOLOGICAL CONTAGION, BUT WITH OXYCONTIN THERE WAS A BEHAVIORAL CONTAGION THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT SPREAD WITHIN COMMUNITIES WHERE THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, THE EXPOSURE TO SOMEONE WHO WAS AN OXYCONTIN USER, DRAMATICALLY INCREASED YOUR -- YOUR CHANCE OF BECOMING AN OXYCONTIN USER YOURSELF.

I THINK WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT OUR -- OUR BIOLOGICAL MODEL OF CONTAGION IS TOO NARROW.

THAT THIS IS -- THESE ARE PHENOMENON THAT APPLY VERY BROADLY TO BEHAVIORS.

>> YOU CALL IT THE "REVENGE OF THE TIPPING POINT."

WHY REVENGE?

>> BECAUSE I WAS STRUCK IN THE BOOK BY HOW OFTEN I THOUGHT INSTITUTIONS OR INDIVIDUALS WERE DELIBERATELY USING THE EPIDEMIC PRINCIPLES TO FURTHER THEIR OWN ENDS.

SO THAT PURDUE WOULD BE THE CLASSIC EXAMPLE, THAT'S WHY I SPEND SO MUCH TIME ON THAT CASE, BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A CHAPTER ON HOWARD UNIVERSITY.

I THINK THAT ELITE UNIVERSITIES ARE PLAYING A SIMILAR -- IT'S NOT AS EGREGIOUS A GAME, BUT THEY'RE PLAYING A GAME AROUND -- THEY'RE USING EPIDEMIC RULES TO TRY AND MANAGE THEIR INSTITUTIONAL CULTURE.

SO HOW DO YOU -- IF YOU'RE SOMEONE WHO, YOU KNOW -- THAT CHAPTER IS ALL ABOUT THE WAY SPORTS ARE USED BY HARVARD AND SCHOOLS LIKE HARVARD.

ESSENTIALLY TO MAINTAIN A KIND OF CULTURE, UPPER MIDDLE CLASS PRIVILEGE CULTURE IN THEIR -- IN THEIR SCHOOL.

THE WAY HARVARD LOOKS AT A SCHOOL LIKE CAL TECH THAT HAS HAD DRAMATIC SHIFTS IN ETHNIC PROPORTIONS OVER THE LAST 25 YEARS, AND I THINK MAKES A VERY DELIBERATE DECISION THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO BE.

THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE COURT CASE LAST YEAR WAS ABOUT, WHY IS HARVARD SUPPRESSING THE NUMBER OF ASIANS.

MY CHAPTER IS HOW DID THEY GO ABOUT SUPPRESSING THE NUMBER OF ASIANS IN THEIR SCHOOL?

THE ANSWER IS IN PART THAT THEY USED ATHLETICS, THEY USED THE BACK DOOR, THEY USED -- THEY HAVE MORE VARSITY SPORTS THAN ANYBODY ELSE AND THEY CREATE A BACK DOOR FOR ATHLETES TO GET IN WITH MUCH LOWER TEST SCORES AND THAT'S HOW THEY MAINTAIN WHAT THEY THINK OF AS HARVARD.

NOW, THOSE -- THAT IS IN A CERTAIN SENSE USING EPIDEMIC PRINCIPLES TO CONTROL THE CULTURE OF INSTITUTION.

>> GAVIN NEWSOM, THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, JUST SIGNED A LAW SORT OF STOPPING LEGACY ADMISSIONS, GIVING FAVOR -- FAVORED STATUS TO PEOPLE WHOSE PARENTS WENT TO A CERTAIN COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT?

>> OH, MY GOD.

SO HAPPY ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER.

I WOULD HAVE GONE FURTHER.

THIS IS NOT MY IDEA IT'S ADAM GRANT A PSYCHOLOGIST'S IDEA.

ADAM GRANT SAYS IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT SCHOOLS ARE NEUTRAL, IT SHOULD BE THEY SHOULD PENALIZE YOU IF YOUR PARENTS WENT TO THAT SAME INSTITUTION BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY RECEIVED THE CHILD OF SOMEONE WHO HAS ATTENDED HARVARD HAS ALREADY RECEIVED THE BENEFITS THAT HARVARD BESTOWED ON THEIR PARENTS, RIGHT?

SO THEY SHOULD -- SO THEY'VE ALREADY GOT THEIR LEG UP SO THEY SHOULD BE PENALIZED IF THEY WANT TO ATTEND THE SAME INSTITUTION.

NOW, THAT'S SAID IN TONGUE IN CHEEK.

I THINK THAT LEGACY -- LEGACY ADMISSIONS, YOU KNOW, IN THESE SCHOOLS WERE -- I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY WERE A STAIN ON AMERICAN MERITOCRACY AND I AM ASTONISHED IT HAS TAKEN US THIS LONG FOR SOMEONE LIKE GAVIN NEWSOM TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST IT.

AND IF THIS TIME NEXT YEAR THE SCHOOLS OF THE NORTHEAST HAVE NOT FOLLOWED SUIT, I WILL BE APPALLED.

>> WHEN I WAS GROWING UP THE TERM THE TIPPING POINT OFTEN REFERRED TO RACIAL TIPPING IN A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I GREW UP IN BROADMOOR IN THE CENTRAL CITY OF NEW ORLEANS WHICH WAS A MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE WERE CONSCIENCE EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT REAL ESTATE AGENTS WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TIP THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE IT ALL BLACK OR ALL WHITE AND IT REMAINS AND STILL IS A MIXED RACIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

HOW DOES THAT NOTION OF A TIPPING POINT TIE INTO OUR RACE AND NEIGHBORHOOD DISCUSSIONS?

>> SO THE PHRASE A TIPPING POINT, YOU'RE RIGHT, ACTUALLY ORIGINATES FROM THE 1950s DURING THE ERA OF WHITE FLIGHT.

REALTORS -- IF FACT, WE KNOW EXACTLY -- IF YOU LOOK IN KIND OF THE HISTORY OF THAT TERM IT WAS FIRST USED BY REALTORS TO DESCRIBE THIS VERY THING.

THE POINT AT WHICH THERE WERE SO MANY BLACKS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE WHITE POPULATION WOULD LEAVE EN MASSE.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AS WELL THAT IN THE '50s AND '60s THERE WERE SOME UNSCRUPULOUS REALTORS WHO SOUGHT TO REACH THE TIPPING POINT BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE TURNOVER.

THERE WERE LANDLORDS WHO WELCOMED THE INFLUX OF -- WHO THOUGHT THEY COULD EXPLOIT THE NEWCOMERS IN A WAY THAT -- SO THAT'S WHERE THE TERM ORIGINATES, AND MANY OF OUR IDEAS ABOUT BEHAVIORAL CONTAGION AND THE APPLICABILITY OF EPIDEMICS TO SOCIAL BEHAVIOR COME FROM THAT ERA, RIGHT?

IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE FAMOUS ECONOMIST THOMAS SHELLING WHO WRITES ABOUT -- WHO PRODUCED ALL KINDS OF LITERATURE ON TIPPING POINTS SPOKE -- WROTE EXPLICITLY ABOUT THIS SAME PHENOMENON.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARNED -- I TALK ABOUT THIS IN ONE OF MY CHAPTERS.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARN FROM THAT ERA IS WHERE THE TIPPING POINT WAS.

IT IS NOT THE CASE THAT ONE BLACK FAMILY MOVING INTO A WHITE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SUFFICIENT TO MAKE ALL THE WHITE PEOPLE LEAVE.

THERE IS A NUMBER, IT'S SOMEWHERE AROUND 25 -- BETWEEN 25% AND A THIRD WHERE WHEN THE OUTSIDERS REACH THAT -- THE NEWCOMERS REACH THAT NUMBER, THE EXISTING POPULATION LEAVES EN MASSE.

AND I DESCRIBE IN THE BOOK THIS FASCINATING EXPERIMENT DONE IN PALO ALTO IN A COMMUNITY CALLED THE LAWRENCE TRACT WHERE THEY SAID WE'RE GOING TO MAKE COMMUNITY RULES THAT SAY NO ETHNICITY WHITE, ASIAN OR BLACK CAN EVER BE ABOVE A THIRD.

WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO POLICE -- YOU EXPLICITLY USED THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND EPIDEMICS TO MAKE SURE WE CAN MAINTAIN RACIAL DIVERSITY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WHAT YOU WERE DESCRIBING IN BROADMOOR SOUNDS LIKE AN INFORMAL VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

THE PEOPLE REALIZED THAT THROUGH COLLECTIVE ACTION THEY COULD KEEP THE FEAR OF WHITE PEOPLE IN CHECK BY TELLING THEM WE'RE NOT GOING TO LET THIS PROCESS BE TAKEN OVER BY UNSCRUPULOUS REAL ESTATE AGENTS OR LANDLORDS.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE -- WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A -- IN THE MIDST OF THIS KIND OF UPHEAVAL, KEEP A STEADYING HAND ON THE WAY THAT THE CHANGE WORKS, RIGHT?

THAT.

I KNOW IT'S COMPLICATED AND I KNOW IT RAISES ALL KINDS OF QUESTIONS BUT I THINK THE IDEA OF THOUGHTFULLY INTERVENING IN THESE KINDS OF PROCESSES BECAUSE YOU UNDERSTAND THE WAY CONTAGION WORKS IS THE SOLUTION TO MANY OF THESE KINDS OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS.

>> I WANT TO APPLY SOME OF THIS IMMIGRATION.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A CERTAIN POINT, IT'S KIND OF CLOSE TO THE TIPPING POINT YOU TALK ABOUT IN NEIGHBORHOODS, 15 TO 20%, THROUGHOUT AMERICAN HISTORY OR THE HISTORY OF ALMOST ANY OTHER COUNTRY IF THE NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS IS MORE THAN 15 OR 20% YOU HAVE THE BIG BACK LASHES OF THE 1840s AGAINST THE IRISH OR THE ITALIANS OR JEWS OR BLACKS OR HAITIANS NOW.

TELL ME ABOUT HOW WHAT YOU WRITE ABOUT APPLIES TO OUR CURRENT DEBATE ON IMMIGRATION.

>> YEAH.

SO THAT'S A REALLY INTERESTING QUESTION.

AND I DO THINK THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE LEARNED FROM THE LITERATURE ON TIPPING POINTS AND APPLIED TO IMMIGRATION.

SO IF I HAD -- IF I WAS TO WAVE A MAGIC WAND AND REDO AMERICAN IMMIGRATION POLICIES FROM SCRATCH, WHAT I WOULD RATHER HAVE SEEN, RATHER THAN HAVE THESE SURGES FOLLOWED BY BACK LASHES FOLLOWED BY SURGES FOLLOWED BY BACK LASHES, A SMARTER THING TO DO WOULD BE TO HAVE A STEADY STATE AT SOMEWHERE BELOW WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE THE TIPPING POINT FOR SOCIAL UNREST.

SO NEVER HAVE -- AND THEN WHAT -- SO YOU WOULD -- SO YOU COULD SORT OF AVOID -- YOU COULD ENGINEER YOUR WAY OUT OF THESE VERY SOCIALLY UNPRODUCTIVE AND PROBLEMATIC BACKLASHES BECAUSE VERY OFTEN THE BACKLASH, WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH HAITIANS IN SPRINGFIELD IS JUST APPALLING.

I MEAN, PEOPLE WHO COME TO THIS COUNTRY WHO ARE WORKING, WHO ARE HERE LEGALLY, WHO HAVE REVIVED A COMMUNITY.

SO BACKLASHES ARE THINGS THAT WE DESPERATELY NEED TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO AVOID AND I THINK SOMETHING, YOU KNOW -- LOWERING THE -- BE CAREFUL NOT TO EXCEED THE KIND OF PUBLIC THRESHOLD FOR -- WOULD BE A VERY WISE STRATEGY.

THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, I'M A CANADIAN, CANADA HAS BEEN A COUNTRY THAT OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS HAS QUITE HAPPILY, UNTIL VERY RECENTLY, SUSTAINED A MUCH HIGHER LEVEL OF ANNUAL IMMIGRATION THAN MANY OTHER WESTERN NATIONS.

SO I WONDER -- I WOULD -- I WOULD COUPLE THAT ADVICE WITH SAYING IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO GO TO COUNTRIES LIKE CANADA AND AUSTRALIA AND FIND OUT WHY THEY HAVE MANAGED TO MAINTAIN HIGHER LEVELS OF IMMIGRATION WITHOUT THAT KIND OF PUBLIC BACKLASH.

THAT'S A VERY -- THE CANADA PUZZLE, AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP THERE AND WAS AN IMMIGRANT TO CANADA MYSELF HAS ALWAYS FASCINATED ME.

CANADA TAKES WAY MORE REFUGEES AND THE PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR TAKING REFUGEES IS MUCH HIGHER THAN ALMOST ANYWHERE ELSE.

IT'S REALLY -- THAT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE STORY CANADIANS TELL THEMSELVES ABOUT WHO THEY ARE.

THAT THAT STORY INCLUDES A KIND OF -- THAT THEY ARE, YOU KNOW A BIG EMPTY COUNTRY THAT WANTS TO BE FILLED UP WITH PEOPLE FROM AROUND THE WORLD.

THAT'S A VERY POWERFUL STORY.

IT'S BEEN TOLD FOR 250 YEARS IN CANADA AND HOW THEY'VE KEPT THAT STORY ALIVE WOULD BE A VERY INTERESTING THING TO INVESTIGATE.

>> ONE OF THE BIG DIFFERENCES BETWEEN 25 YEARS AGO WHEN YOU WROTE "THE TIPPING POINT" AND NOW WHEN YOU WRITE THE "REVENGE OF THE TIPPING POINT" IS YOU'VE HAD TWO KIDS.

HOW DOES HAVING A COUPLE OF KIDS CHANGE THE WAY YOU LOOK AT THIS AND HOW DOES THE WAY YOU LOOKED AT THE NEW BOOK CHANGE THE WAY YOU RAISE YOUR TWO YOUNG KIDS NOW?

>> WELL, HAVING KIDS MEANS THAT I WILL NEVER GIVE PARENTING ADVICE AGAIN.

I'M OUT OF THAT GAME.

I NOW REALIZE HOW FUTILE IT IS TO TELL ANYONE HOW TO RAISE THEIR KIDS SINCE I HAVE NO CLUE MYSELF.

YOU JUST EVERY DAY ARE CONFRONTED WITH -- I TRY AND TRACK THE PERCENTAGE OF TIMES MY 3-YEAR-OLD AGREES WITH ME OR OBEYS SOME COMMAND I MAKE.

IT'S NOW -- I'M DOWN AT LIKE 25% AND SHE'S ONLY 3 SO WHERE WILL I BELIEVE WHEN SHE'S 16?

AND ALSO, I DON'T KNOW, I'VE ALSO BEEN PLEASANTLY SURPRISED AT HOW LITTLE ALL OF MY THEORIZING ABOUT THE WORLD IS -- HOW LITTLE OF IT I USE IN MY OWN DAY TO DAY PARENTING.

I THINK ALL BETS ARE OFF WHEN YOU'RE RAISING SMALL CHILDREN.

IT HAS BEEN A POWERFULLY HUMBLING EXPERIENCE.

>> MALCOLM GLADWELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU, WALTER.