“How to Rule the World” provides lessons for leaders in STEMM
Source: Figure generated using Microsoft Copilot
Theo Baker’s 2026 book“How to Rule the World: An education in power at Stanford University” warns about dubious scientific research and flawed ethics and provides insight into an undergraduate’s experiences at a leading research university.
By Patricia A. Maurice
9 June 2026, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20472342
As a Stanford alumna (PhD 1994), I wanted to know what all the buzz was about the new book How to Rule the World: An education in power at Stanford University. The book was written by Stanford undergraduate Theo Baker and released this May [1]. Rather than watching an interview with the author or reading a review of the book, I decided simply to read it myself, as soon as possible. After a day and a half of marathon reading, I realized it touched on so many of the themes we have covered in this blog that it was worth writing about it here. Of course, as a proud graduate of Stanford, my thoughts may well be biased. I’ve chosen to focus on four topics: research ethics, the opportunities and challenges that the tech industry provides for academia, the lingering effects of the COVID pandemic, and the importance of not underestimating undergraduates.
Research ethics matter
Our previous posts, particularly “Why STEMM leaders need to talk seriously about ethics” [2] and “Liar, liar campus on fire: How to deal with dishonest colleagues” [3] have delved into ethical problems on college campuses, and how we, as senior women leaders in STEMM, could address them proactively. The issues of flawed scientific research and lack of proper research ethics loom large over the scientific community. If our science cannot be trusted, then it becomes worse than useless.
In How to Rule the World, Theo Baker describes how he became a journalist for The Stanford Daily “as a hobby” at the beginning of his freshman year at Stanford. He soon stumbled upon a potentially explosive story about the then-president of Stanford, Marc Tessier-Lavigne (known as MTL). Baker found “a slew of apparently fraudulent research studies bearing MTL’s name published across two decades.” The book details Baker’s months-long investigation of MTL, how Baker became the youngest recipient ever of the George Polk Award in journalism [1, 4], and how the investigation ultimately resulted in MTL being forced to retract a number of published papers. MTL also stepped down as Stanford president. One of the biggest ethical issues was repeated instances of falsified data, including heavily doctored images. However, Baker notes that MTL was never accused of falsifying data, himself, or of directing members of his research group to do so.
The book has important lessons for senior women leaders in STEMM. First, we need to be aware that scientific misconduct occurs and always be on the lookout. In this case, data were fabricated in various scientific papers with MTL as a (co)author, including a very high profile paper purporting to present a new view of Alzheimer’s disease. The lesson is that we need to take research ethics seriously within our own laboratories, as reviewers and editors, and when hiring and/or promoting colleagues. A second lesson is that as soon as we discover an issue such as fabricated data in our laboratories, we need to correct it quickly and decisively and take accountability. This is something MTL apparently failed to do consistently, even when confronted with strong evidence. HIs failure to accept accountability purportedly played a role in his ultimate downfall as Stanford president. A third lesson is that how we run our laboratories can affect whether lab members resort to fraudulent or unethical behavior. As a specific example, rewarding postdocs who generate favorable results can create an unhealthy research dynamic.
One might ask why, if someone is effective as an academic administrator, past lapses of research ethics matter. The book points out that MTL could not remain an effective leader once the faculty had been alerted to his problematic publications. Moreover, questions about his research ethics were tarnishing Stanford’s reputation. I would argue that any academic leader who is not absolutely dedicated to ethics, transparency, and accountability runs the risk of eventually infecting the entire university. Some of my colleagues have wondered whether Baker’s book is unduly harming Stanford and academia at a time when science and academia are already under attack by the US administration. Again, I would argue that while there may be short-term pain, there will hopefully be long-term gain in exposing a problem that cannot be allowed to fester.
Baker quotes Condoleezza Rice, former U.S. Secretary of State, former Stanford Provost, and incumbent Director of the Hoover Institution at Stanford, as saying “If you’re going to have a big research enterprise, and you’re going to have a big commercialization arm, and if you’re going to encourage people to take risk, you will have some bad actors.” He then goes on to write his personal response as: “Perhaps it’s just that I’m young, as Rice pointed out, but I have a less fatalistic view. I think you can inculcate innovation without enabling fraud. If Stanford is going to claim credit for its success stories, it must also shoulder responsibility for its failures.”
An overarching lesson from the book is that some researchers may be so obsessed with money and power that they do not do enough to ensure their research is sound and ethical. Baker also gives many examples of how members of the tech industry, and even students aspiring to become tech leaders, can appear to be more obsessed with money and power than with being ethical and doing good in the world.
The tech industry provides both huge opportunities and huge challenges for academia
Recently, I reviewed Kara Swisher’s Burn Book: A Tech Love Story [5]. As I wrote in that post, “If you read this book, you will see why many people simply don’t care if leaders are narcissistic self-serving, power-hungry and dishonest — because that’s exactly what far too many leaders are. Of course there are also many great leaders.” In addition to detailing his investigation of MTL, Baker writes about the huge amount of money that flows from Silicon Valley to the Stanford campus, and how it can affect students, especially those who are still teenagers. Many tech icons are focused on money and power, and their experiences can be translated to students as ‘how to rule the world.’ Some people will likely read Baker’s book primarily for the insider view of how the tech industry interacts with top-flight undergraduates.
It’s noteworthy that Baker has been a student at Stanford just as massive changes in AI, including development of ChatGPT, have taken hold. Sam Altman, co-founder and CEO of OpenAI, which developed ChatGPT, was a Stanford undergraduate computer science major who dropped out. Baker describes watching a fellow student signing a declaration that he had not used ChatGPT in a homework assignment “with ChatGPT open in a split window right next to it.” This reflects challenges addressed in our previous posts on “What every senior woman academic leader should know about artificial intelligence” [6] and “Development of generative AI policy at Lund University” [7]. Students are already using ChatGPT, as are many faculty.
Students are still being affected by the COVID pandemic
Baker writes about how the COVID pandemic has continued to affect students. He lost a beloved grandparent to COVID-related illness just before starting at Stanford, and it affected his mental health and wellbeing. He observes that, as students, “We were worse at math than we should’ve been, unused to the workload that had been expected pre-pandemic.” He detailed a COVID lock down on campus in January 2023, which actually isn’t that long ago. Many people in the world want to put the COVID pandemic behind us, but we need to be aware that it is still affecting our students and, indeed, the entire world, even in 2026.
Do not underestimate undergraduates
Theo Baker was only 17 years old when he started his freshman year at Stanford. Yet, during that year he wrote articles for The Stanford Daily not just about MTL but on other consequential topics, as well. He managed to remain a student in good standing while also juggling time-consuming activities such as serving on the organizing committee for the annual international computer science event, Tree Hacks (named for the Stanford ‘tree’ mascot). He is scheduled to graduate from Stanford this June, after writing and publishing his highly anticipated and publicized book.
As a Stanford graduate (albeit, PhD), I have observed many truly amazing Stanford students. Again, I’m biased. But I’ve witnessed and worked with amazing undergraduates throughout my career, including as a faculty member at Kent State University in Ohio and the University of Notre Dame. I’ve met many other exceptional undergraduates at conferences and while serving on various advisory and review boards. Faculty often under-estimate and even under-value undergraduates. But their youth, energy, intelligence, and curiosity can be eye-opening. They notice things happening on campus and watch faculty and academic leaders. We do well to pay attention to them and to devote significant time to teaching and mentoring. They are our future. As we’ve written before, teaching deserves our attention and our respect [8].
Questions for further consideration
• How seriously do you take scientific research ethics, and what specific steps do you take to ensure your lab is not engaging in data falsification or other unethical behavior?
• Do you stay up-to-date on available tools and approaches to search for data falsification?
• How engaged are you with undergraduates, even if you are serving as a senior academic leader?
References and links
[1] Baker, T. (2026) How to Rule the World: An Education in Power at Stanford University, published by Penguin Press.
[2] https://www.epistimi.org/blog/why-stemm-leaders-need-to-talk-seriously-about-ethics
[3] https://www.epistimi.org/blog/liar-liar-campus-on-fire-how-to-cope-with-dishonest-colleagues
[4] https://www.liu.edu/polk (Accessed May 23, 2026).
[5] https://www.epistimi.org/blog/a-womans-eye-view-of-the-very-bad-boys-of-tech
[7] https://www.epistimi.org/blog/development-of-generative-ai-policy-at-lund-university
[8] https://www.epistimi.org/blog/our-students-are-our-greatest-gifts-and-our-proudest-legacies