Scan barcode
woodiefrog's review against another edition
funny
informative
medium-paced
3.0
A bit of an outdated book when it comes to media theory of the new decade. A bit of outdated information too for anyone wants to know more about the effects of new media (video game, film etc.) as it did came out a million years ago in the scale of digital age’s evolution.
moment2shine's review against another edition
4.0
A quick engaging read that will resonate with milennials and anyone who is obsessed with Tv shows these days!
mgmoore's review against another edition
4.0
Very interesting book that turns around the idea that popular culture is dumbing down society. The author admits there are holes in the science, but there is science and a pretty convincing argument.
karenleagermain's review against another edition
1.0
I would have completely given up on this book, if it hadn't been such a quick read. The entire book is Johnson's argument that popular culture is actually making us smarter. He is not very persuasive and much of his points are very weak. I really didn't buy into most of his argument. The only thing I can say, is now I have a very weak defense for my love of reality TV! I also want to add, that Johnson seems to be really obsessed with video games and this is where he totally lost what little interest I had.
jwsg's review against another edition
3.0
I'll admit - I'm one of those people who thinks that Books Are Good For You and Video Games and TV Are Bad. But Johnson's book has made me rethink whether the conventional criticism that TV, video games and other forms of popular culture is making us dumber and passive consumers of intellectually undemanding fare is really true. And that the sole benefit, if any, of gaming is that it improves hand-eye coordination.
Johnson's argument revolves around what he calls the Sleeper Curve - that "the most debased forms of mass diversion - video games and violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms - turn out to be nutritional after all....culture is getting more intellectually demanding, not less". Essentially, he argues that we cannot use the same metrics to judge the merits of reading and the merits of non-literary popular culture - it's like comparing apples and oranges. While reading hones the ability to make sense of words, to convey complicated information, to immerse oneself into another's perspective, non literary popular culture hones a different set of mental skills. Gaming forces players to make decisions, to explore and unlock the logic of the game. Meanwhile, Johnson argues that TV shows have become much more complex in recent years; changes in the business model (where most of the profit is derived from syndication and DVD sales, rather than from the original airing of the show) now favour more complex shows that bear repeated viewing. So instead of Least Objectionable Programming, we are now moving towards Most Repeatable Programming, shows that you would want to watch and rewatch even 3 years after they originally aired. Technology that allows us to record, rewind, rewatch and dissect certain scenes also allows for more complex plots and narratives. And even the worst of popular TV - Johnson cites the Apprentice - much less acclaimed programmes such as The Sopranos and The West Wing, have a higher level of complexity in the network of social relationships playing out in the show (which audiences themselves then navigate and analyse).
Some might find Johnson's book a little repetitive - he makes broadly the same arguments for games, then TV, then film, then summarises these in Part II of the book. But Johnson's an engaging writer with a crisp, punchy style and the 200 pages went quite quickly for me.
Johnson's argument revolves around what he calls the Sleeper Curve - that "the most debased forms of mass diversion - video games and violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms - turn out to be nutritional after all....culture is getting more intellectually demanding, not less". Essentially, he argues that we cannot use the same metrics to judge the merits of reading and the merits of non-literary popular culture - it's like comparing apples and oranges. While reading hones the ability to make sense of words, to convey complicated information, to immerse oneself into another's perspective, non literary popular culture hones a different set of mental skills. Gaming forces players to make decisions, to explore and unlock the logic of the game. Meanwhile, Johnson argues that TV shows have become much more complex in recent years; changes in the business model (where most of the profit is derived from syndication and DVD sales, rather than from the original airing of the show) now favour more complex shows that bear repeated viewing. So instead of Least Objectionable Programming, we are now moving towards Most Repeatable Programming, shows that you would want to watch and rewatch even 3 years after they originally aired. Technology that allows us to record, rewind, rewatch and dissect certain scenes also allows for more complex plots and narratives. And even the worst of popular TV - Johnson cites the Apprentice - much less acclaimed programmes such as The Sopranos and The West Wing, have a higher level of complexity in the network of social relationships playing out in the show (which audiences themselves then navigate and analyse).
Some might find Johnson's book a little repetitive - he makes broadly the same arguments for games, then TV, then film, then summarises these in Part II of the book. But Johnson's an engaging writer with a crisp, punchy style and the 200 pages went quite quickly for me.
lindsayharmon's review against another edition
3.0
I found Johnson's argument that pop culture has become more complex to be interesting, even compelling. I'm still not sure I completely agree with him, but if nothing else it gave me a little more respect for video games and the people who play them. One thing that did bother me (and perhaps it's because I've been spending a lot of time lately reminding students to evaluate their information sources) is that I didn't get a good sense of Johnson's credentials. Based on some of the things he mentioned in the acknowledgments, I'm guessing he has a scholarly/research background, but the jacket copy just says he writes for Wired and Slate.
sasha_in_a_box's review against another edition
3.0
Everybody who freaks about about the violence in video games causing Aurora, Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech shootings needs to read this book first. And shut the hell up.
andrejagibese's review against another edition
3.0
the book is a bit redundant, I'm not sure he had enough material to fill a two hundred page book-- but the concepts are interesting nonetheless. It gives reason for why my grandma cant follow a modern movie, It's not that she's old as much as her mind has not been trained to jump from storyline to storyline like ours have. And it makes you feel okay about still playing video games as an adult.
leanneymu's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
A really interesting argument about the ways in which popular media (primarily TV, films and video games) are growing in complexity, and in so doing, making society smarter. Compelling, but due to the fact that this books was written almost 20 years ago, it fails to discuss the explosion of social media in its pop culture analysis (because it didn't exist at the time!) As a result, it feels a little unfinished to a modern reader. I'd love an updated version with info about whether social media has an up side too.
margeryb's review against another edition
4.0
There is a lot of fear mongering about how techology and TV and whatnot is making humanity stupid, and this book counteracts those often baseless accusations and examines how generations are getting smarter along with the media we consume.