Status Updates From The Age of Missing Information

I'm so torn over this book. He absolutely abused the hell out of McLuhan on the participatory nature of TV (yet makes a similar McLuhanian argument when it favors his biases!). The experiment itself is a comparison of caricatures. He's avoiding the potential for depth in television by design. His whole experiment is structured to emphasize what he values/devalues about each experience, so what's the point?

I like the book very much. The author has begun to acknowledge his bias, but the book is still very much in favor of nature of technology.

I do like the book and there are certainly many powerful messages about the impact of television, but the author is clearly in favor of nature’s lessons over TV.

"We say 'information' reverently, as if it meant 'understanding' or 'wisdom', but it doesn't. Sometimes it even gets in the way."