Steven Johnson

Discusses the intellectual benefits of elements from modern popular culture, including video games and reality TV programs.

How Today's Popular Culture is Actually Making Us Smarter

Everything Bad is Good for You

Michael Springer

Despite the critical readers on here giving this book one star for not, you know, being RELIABLE, I'm going with four. I'm rating it based on what I usually rate books on: entertainment value. 

That said, the logic here is severely shitty. Thesis: modern films, television, and other technologies are more complex than they used to be. People nowadays have slightly higher IQs on average than they used to have. Therefore, modern media is making people smarter. 

This is flawed in too many ways to name, but I'm gonna give it a shot: first of all, I don't think "Transformers 2" or "Harry Potter 6" are really that much more complex than "Alien" or "Taxi Driver," thankya very much. Movies now, as I notice every fucking time I go to one, FUCKING SUCK THESE DAYS. Have y'all seen "Repo Men"? 

Television, if we just look at shows like "The West Wing," "House," "Lost," and "The Sopranos," looks like a pretty thoughtful terrain. But we can't forget about "2 and a Half Men," "The Flava of Love," and "The Bachelor." Television has more stations now, so the variety is a lot greater than it was back in the days of "Green Acres," but most of it's still pretty stupid. 

And other technologies? Well, there's this website, which pretty much proves the web is frickin' awesome. But, you know, there's also this: . The web is a pretty mixed bag. We have greater ACCESS to knowledge through the web, but I don't think that proves the average man in Pennsylvania actually uses it for anything but finding videos of midget sex or watching goofy videos on YouTube. (No offense to PA; that was a totally random state.) 

Those are my qualms with the first of the three sentences of his thesis. Let me sum up for the rest: The IQ test is fallible and culturally biased, and even if sentence 1 and 2 were sufficiently proven, the third sentence wouldn't hold true, because correlation doesn't prove causation. 

Why would we not assume that, as people naturally get smarter through evolution or eating their Wheaties, they will start wanting more complex forms of entertainment? Why is entertainment the cause, not the effect? 

Okay, done ranting about the logical suckiness at work here. THIS BOOK WAS FUN! His arguments were outlandish and creative, and I would love to think that by watching "The West Wing" I'm strengthening my synapses. I'd also love to think that my time playing "Grand Theft Auto" was me challenging myself with a difficult game. I personally thought I was just running around and shooting people with flamethrowers. The coolest thing was when you were such a menace that the army tanks started coming after you! Did anybody actually play that game the way they were supposed to? 

And is "The Legend of Zelda" any more challenging than playing poker, or Dungeons and Dragons? D&D go back a long way, and poker a looooooong way. So, no. Homeboy doesn't know what the shit he is saying. 

Read this for some nonfiction entertainment, when you want some trash but don't feel like reading something about vampires or killer crabs.

Bruno Costa Teixeira

Lucas Kohorst

Putting forward an alternative to the endless complaints about reality TV, throwaway movies and violent video games, this book shows that mass culture is actually more sophisticated and challenging than ever before.

Everything Bad is Good for You How Today's Popular Culture is Actually Making Us Smarter

Reviews