Which takes me back to the question of what you mean by "disinterested academic". You implied it meant there was a monetary conflict of interest, but now you imply that it's something to do with tone?
No. Two different topics, but one is related to the other. If a researcher has a financial interest in the outcome of a study (such as a book for sale), that's suspect but not necessarily disqualifying. What makes it disqualifying in this case is that the inflammatory language so transparently plays into the current wave of political populism in order to sell more books. Since you bring up Piketty, contrast his remarks about his research to Ginsberg's: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/qa-thomas-piket.... Does Piketty demonize the wealthy the way Ginsberg demonizes his subjects? Had Ginsberg been trying to promote Piketty's book, he would've peppered the interview with phrases like "greedy fat cats stealing from the poor".