This is misleading, because it falsely counts winners of the "The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences Prize in Economic Sciences" as a Nobel price. Alfred Nobel did not donate a price for economics. The Sveriges Riksbank (= bank of the swedish empire) created this price (against the explicit wishes of the Nobel foundation [1]) in order to 'cash' in on the reputation of Nobel price. This is well-known and it is most likely that an institution that false counts winners of the Sveriges Riksbank as Nobel price winners is doing this to mislead the audience.
Seems to be a technical distinction without a difference though. Same amount of money, announced at the same time, awarded at the same ceremony, and just as prestigious. Sure, it’s an expansion of the original prize, but that shouldn’t take away from the fact that for anyone in the world, the awardee is for all practical purposes a Nobel prize winner.
This is true but orthogonal to my point. You talk about facts, my point was normative.
More precisely my speech act was performative: I'm leading by example, because I hope that others will copy my behaviour and speak up whenever somebody falsely calls winners of the Bank of the Swedish Empire a Nobel price winner. The best case outcome is that eventually the false prestige will be eroded away. (Compare with the Nobel Price for Literature and Peace, they are both widely regarded as jokes and nobody cares -- or worse in case of the Peace price.)
Anyway, sorry for this tangent, I don't want to derail the thread, the main subject of which is of great interest to me.
no one cares about any of those prizes except the institutions that care about them. you can't take the prestige off of an institutionally legitimated prize by talking at people (and you are talking at people not to)
The Nobel Prize awards outstanding contributions to humanity. The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences awards people pushing neoliberalism. Read up on the Mont Pelerin Society to learn more about it.
I at least know of one example (because the economists is so famose) of one recent (relatively) laureate that is definitely not a neo-liberal: Paul Keugman.
I don't think the University of Chicago, which is one of the most exclusive and renowned schools in the country, is really trying to mislead anyone. Harvard, Yale, and Stanford brag about their Econ Nobels as well.
Since the shady nature of the Economics prices is widely known, and brand management is a core imperative for modern high-fee universities, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford are just as guilty. The problem of false-Nobels is widely known and discussed among economists and physicists.
I find it surprising that there is so much resistance to the (widely discussed [1]) false advertising involved in the mislabelling the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences Prize in Economic Sciences. I've brought up this subject many times on HN, and always get negative reactions (but never a coherent defense of the practise of mislabeling Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences Prize). In contrast, when I bring this subject up in face-to-face communication, my interlocutors always agree.
It may turn out that nobody cares about the distinction you're trying to make. Sorry. I keep telling people Diet Orange Crush tastes like pennies, but they keep making it. Super frustrating! I know how you must feel.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...