Author and Essayist, New York
Bosch Fellow in Public Policy - Class of Spring 2015
Evgeny Morozov is a writer of Belarusian origin who studies political and social implications of technology. His articles have been published in the New York Times, New Yorker, Financial Times, Economist, Wall Street Journal, London Review of Books, and many other publications. His monthly column appears in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Germany), El País (Spain), and Corriere della Sera (Italy), among other newspapers. Morozov has been a visiting scholar at Stanford University, a Schwartz fellow at the New America Foundation, and contributing editor of and blogger for Foreign Policy magazine. His previous positions include a Yahoo! fellow at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service, a fellow at the Open Society Institute, director of new media at the NGO Transitions Online, and columnist for the Russian newspaper Akzia.
In 2011, Morozov published his first book, The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom (PublicAffairs), a New York Times Notable Book of 2011 and awarded the 2012 Goldsmith Book Prize from the Harvard Kennedy School. In addition to exploring the impact of the Internet on authoritarian states, the book investigates the intellectual sources of the growing excitement about the liberating potential of the Internet, and links it to the triumphalism that followed the end of the Cold War.
Morozov’s second book, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism (PublicAffairs, 2013), published in German as Smarte neue Welt: Digitale Technik und die Freiheit des Menschen (Karl Blessing Verlag, 2013), examines the effects of technology on subjects ranging from politics and criminology to weight loss. Technology, Morozov proposes, can be a force for improvement—but only if we keep “solutionism” in check and learn to appreciate the imperfections of liberal democracy. Morozov writes, “There are good reasons not to run our politics as a start-up . . . good reasons to value subjective but high-quality criticism, even if it doesn’t stem from the ‘wisdom of crowds.’”