Scan barcode
dixiet's review against another edition
4.0
As persuasive and at least as apt as when I first read it in the 1980s. And as a problem, as unsolvable.
annalsiciliano's review against another edition
3.0
if I didn't read this for school I'd probably like it more. reading each chapter was so boring, despite the intriguing lines every so often i dreaded opening this book.
joegisondi's review against another edition
2.0
I really wanted something deeper on why we do these things, why we chose to be entertained versus thinking. It didn’t really give me that but just made the case that everything is now entertainment and that TV is the center of it. I don’t agree with a lot of his commandments anymore and think TV has gotten better and being much more philosophical and able to shine a light on our darker aspects of society. It was dreadfully boring at times and it bothered me that it took so long to read. Very repetitive in spots and could have been read in a shorter essay format.
jdauer5's review against another edition
5.0
Such a timely book. I believe reading this would help many make sense of the last 50+ years of US American history. The falling of US American society can be partly explained by Postman's premise that we are living in a Huxleyan dystopia, not an Orwellian one as many of us would like to believe.
What we love is killing us. However, this is not true love. It's cheap love--a love that never gives anything in return.
I believe many pastors and theologians would do well to take the time and read what Postman has to say to the church. There is one chapter directly about televangelism, but there are notes and comments throughout his book that people in ministry need to hear as they form congregations and ministries.
What we love is killing us. However, this is not true love. It's cheap love--a love that never gives anything in return.
I believe many pastors and theologians would do well to take the time and read what Postman has to say to the church. There is one chapter directly about televangelism, but there are notes and comments throughout his book that people in ministry need to hear as they form congregations and ministries.
michaelacabus's review against another edition
5.0
“We look at the present through a rear view mirror. We march backwards into the future.”
― Marshall McLuhan
"You've got a beautiful face but got nothing to say (oh)
You look famous, let's be friends and portray we possess something important
And do the things we like, meaning
We've just come to represent
A decline in the standards are what we accept
Yeah, yeah
Yeah, no"
--The 1975, "Love me"
It would be easy to disregard 'Amusing ourselves to death' as a relic of new media analysis; published in 1985, and making quaint sounding references to 'television programs' (quite different, we could argue, than the user-generated experiences of YouTube, and the near-relative, Netflix, which may not be user-created but certainly has a flavor of YouTube, with entertainment indiscriminate and vast), one could argue that Postman failed to see the evolution of television and the new media he warns his readers about.
However, it's that subtitle that may give the reader pause; the U.S. president is a product of show business: not just his reality TV show, but his entire career; one could counter he is a product of this 1980s-era Postman writes about, as are a majority of his voters, but the truth is that Trump has proven skillful at adapting to new forms of show business and entertainment, as his effective use of Twitter has proven. Given his trajectory, Trump may be the greatest showman on earth.
The broader argument Postman makes is convincing as a way to understand television in the 1980s and social media in 2019. To Postman, if we could point to a dystopia that is most likely, it is less Orwellian and more Brave new world: it's not that the thought police will control our reading and thoughts, but rather we will just happily slip into unknowing.
Looking at any social media feed can provide evidence; we may have access to a lot more information, but, as Postman points out, its relevancy to us often isn't significant. He points to politics as an example: most of us can only do one thing about who is an elected official: vote, at one designated time. The constant information that abounds sometimes a year and half away doesn't help us, Postman would argue, and could even be preventing us from taking action on issues that really matter to us.
Postman seems heart broken over the loss of the typographic era that preceded television media: changing the way we act and think, digital media has meant, in Postman's view, the loss of the ability to follow sustained arguments, to vote for personality over substance in politics, the diminishing of religious experience which has become more entertainment and less divine, to make education defined by making the audience happy.
It is discussion of religious experience that seems most like our social media world today and indeed seems heart breaking: when even the sacred is thought of as entertainment, the way objects are framed, the way the rituals appear visually, all take precedence over actual sacred experience (which can appear dull on camera or social media). If food can be thought of as spiritual experience (and trust me, it can be), mobile phones can be thought to try to beat, and hence make worse, that experience.
Are things that dire? Yes, most social media is a nest of fake accounts, information that is often questionable in terms of value or even truthfulness, and ugly comment sections; and, yes, the US has a president who seems to lack real skill, except his ability to co-opt media to make the ugliness of it to his advantage.
However, to regard the new media revolution as purely useless is to ignore the potential it represents, particularly as a way to facilitate personal creativity and expression. Postman was writing in a time in which television was largely a product of large corporations, that had wide control over what content was available; in theory, the Internet is malleable for new kinds of media creation, really in whatever form we design.
This is the hope of new technology, but currently we've drifted towards the very models and systems Postman outlines,systems largely controlled by a handful of large corporations; perhaps that is a form of determinism, but it would be one of the saddest evidences of it. While we watch episodes of The handmaid's tale on our devices, and worry about some external force, it could just be we ease our way into misinformation and complacency, that books and intellectualism and thoughtfulness will just be naturally evolved out of us. The way forward may be to embrace the openness of technology as a medium; and, as Postman states, to recognize what current models of media do to us, and resist it, by all becoming the artists the internet wants us to be.
A+
― Marshall McLuhan
"You've got a beautiful face but got nothing to say (oh)
You look famous, let's be friends and portray we possess something important
And do the things we like, meaning
We've just come to represent
A decline in the standards are what we accept
Yeah, yeah
Yeah, no"
--The 1975, "Love me"
It would be easy to disregard 'Amusing ourselves to death' as a relic of new media analysis; published in 1985, and making quaint sounding references to 'television programs' (quite different, we could argue, than the user-generated experiences of YouTube, and the near-relative, Netflix, which may not be user-created but certainly has a flavor of YouTube, with entertainment indiscriminate and vast), one could argue that Postman failed to see the evolution of television and the new media he warns his readers about.
However, it's that subtitle that may give the reader pause; the U.S. president is a product of show business: not just his reality TV show, but his entire career; one could counter he is a product of this 1980s-era Postman writes about, as are a majority of his voters, but the truth is that Trump has proven skillful at adapting to new forms of show business and entertainment, as his effective use of Twitter has proven. Given his trajectory, Trump may be the greatest showman on earth.
The broader argument Postman makes is convincing as a way to understand television in the 1980s and social media in 2019. To Postman, if we could point to a dystopia that is most likely, it is less Orwellian and more Brave new world: it's not that the thought police will control our reading and thoughts, but rather we will just happily slip into unknowing.
Looking at any social media feed can provide evidence; we may have access to a lot more information, but, as Postman points out, its relevancy to us often isn't significant. He points to politics as an example: most of us can only do one thing about who is an elected official: vote, at one designated time. The constant information that abounds sometimes a year and half away doesn't help us, Postman would argue, and could even be preventing us from taking action on issues that really matter to us.
Postman seems heart broken over the loss of the typographic era that preceded television media: changing the way we act and think, digital media has meant, in Postman's view, the loss of the ability to follow sustained arguments, to vote for personality over substance in politics, the diminishing of religious experience which has become more entertainment and less divine, to make education defined by making the audience happy.
It is discussion of religious experience that seems most like our social media world today and indeed seems heart breaking: when even the sacred is thought of as entertainment, the way objects are framed, the way the rituals appear visually, all take precedence over actual sacred experience (which can appear dull on camera or social media). If food can be thought of as spiritual experience (and trust me, it can be), mobile phones can be thought to try to beat, and hence make worse, that experience.
Are things that dire? Yes, most social media is a nest of fake accounts, information that is often questionable in terms of value or even truthfulness, and ugly comment sections; and, yes, the US has a president who seems to lack real skill, except his ability to co-opt media to make the ugliness of it to his advantage.
However, to regard the new media revolution as purely useless is to ignore the potential it represents, particularly as a way to facilitate personal creativity and expression. Postman was writing in a time in which television was largely a product of large corporations, that had wide control over what content was available; in theory, the Internet is malleable for new kinds of media creation, really in whatever form we design.
This is the hope of new technology, but currently we've drifted towards the very models and systems Postman outlines,systems largely controlled by a handful of large corporations; perhaps that is a form of determinism, but it would be one of the saddest evidences of it. While we watch episodes of The handmaid's tale on our devices, and worry about some external force, it could just be we ease our way into misinformation and complacency, that books and intellectualism and thoughtfulness will just be naturally evolved out of us. The way forward may be to embrace the openness of technology as a medium; and, as Postman states, to recognize what current models of media do to us, and resist it, by all becoming the artists the internet wants us to be.
A+
davehershey's review against another edition
4.0
Orwell believed the government would hide the truth, ban books, and in essence dominate people. Huxley believed people would have access to so much information they would not know what truth is and there would be so much entertainment no one would read.
Huxley was right.
Postman's work is an extended analysis of television. It is a bit dated since he writes at the onset of computers. Much of what he said holds true, but it would be interesting to get his take on how smartphones have changed things. On one hand, we are addicted to smartphones and can get entertainment always and anywhere (Huxley's soma). On the other hand, podcasts have made available much learning and there are good podcasts that go quite deep and are popular (History of Rome, Hardcore History, just to name a few). I suspect Postman might say that even here, entertainment taints it. Or, the people who read are the ones who use their smartphones to learn while those who do not read focus only on the memes.
If anyone has any contemporary books that bring Postman (and Ellul, who I am surprised was not referenced) up to date, that would be great. For now, this book is a valuable read.
Huxley was right.
Postman's work is an extended analysis of television. It is a bit dated since he writes at the onset of computers. Much of what he said holds true, but it would be interesting to get his take on how smartphones have changed things. On one hand, we are addicted to smartphones and can get entertainment always and anywhere (Huxley's soma). On the other hand, podcasts have made available much learning and there are good podcasts that go quite deep and are popular (History of Rome, Hardcore History, just to name a few). I suspect Postman might say that even here, entertainment taints it. Or, the people who read are the ones who use their smartphones to learn while those who do not read focus only on the memes.
If anyone has any contemporary books that bring Postman (and Ellul, who I am surprised was not referenced) up to date, that would be great. For now, this book is a valuable read.