Take a photo of a barcode or cover
68 reviews for:
Bunk: The Rise of Hoaxes, Humbug, Plagiarists, Phonies, Post-Facts, and Fake News
Kevin Young
3.35 AVERAGE
68 reviews for:
Bunk: The Rise of Hoaxes, Humbug, Plagiarists, Phonies, Post-Facts, and Fake News
Kevin Young
3.35 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
I was more interested in a history of hoaxes and while I got this to some degree with this book, there was a great deal more analysis about "what it all means" than I would have liked. Beyond that, the analysis gets to be a bit redundant. This book didn't need to be 450 pages to get the author's point across.
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
This was very interesting yet boring at the same time—I found myself reading a little bit at a time, putting it down for awhile, and not really wanting to pick it back up again.
I was really excited for this book. However, each chapter is written like an essay, with many direct quotes that are confusing and take you out of the story.
I just want to hear about funny hoaxes, not all this.
I just want to hear about funny hoaxes, not all this.
Interesting and full of information, but could use more pictures and some *serious* editing.
Why more pictures? In the beginning portions, Young goes into great detail describing hoax images—pages of descriptions, even—when simply including a copy of the images in the text and pointing out specific elements instead would have made it much easier to follow along with.
Why more editing? At times, the writing seemed excessively circular. Additionally, throughout the text, there were blindingly obvious errors that made me doubt the accuracy of the book as a whole. For example, the book references Pocahontas and “Joseph Smith” (an entertaining thought, ha), when it should reference Pocahontas and John Smith. Later, the book describes how Rachel Dolezal led her “local Oregon NAACP,” when she actually led the chapter in Spokane, Washington.
Why more pictures? In the beginning portions, Young goes into great detail describing hoax images—pages of descriptions, even—when simply including a copy of the images in the text and pointing out specific elements instead would have made it much easier to follow along with.
Why more editing? At times, the writing seemed excessively circular. Additionally, throughout the text, there were blindingly obvious errors that made me doubt the accuracy of the book as a whole. For example, the book references Pocahontas and “Joseph Smith” (an entertaining thought, ha), when it should reference Pocahontas and John Smith. Later, the book describes how Rachel Dolezal led her “local Oregon NAACP,” when she actually led the chapter in Spokane, Washington.
Not only is this an intensely researched and fascinating history of hoaxes and plagiarism, but it also references Horcruxes and other fun pop culture things. This might be one of my favorite reads of 2018.
challenging
funny
informative
sad
medium-paced
Had to bail on this after getting about 1/3 of the way through. A bit dense for vacation reading, and much more of a literary approach than I expected. The transitions from one example of a hoaxer to another were, well, murky in a way that made me loose track.
And for such a thorough and obviously knowledgeable author, I was surprised at some of the weird mistakes that slipped through, most notably referring to Teddy Roosevelt’s Rough Riders being in the Philippines (?).
A good book on the topic, I’m sure — but it’s not for me.
And for such a thorough and obviously knowledgeable author, I was surprised at some of the weird mistakes that slipped through, most notably referring to Teddy Roosevelt’s Rough Riders being in the Philippines (?).
A good book on the topic, I’m sure — but it’s not for me.
There were moments in the book when I was hooked and really enjoyed Young's storytelling. Unfortunately, those moments were few and far between. This book was just not for me.