What do you think?
Rate this book
Against the Machine: Being Human in the Age of the Electronic Mob
From the author hailed by the New York Times Book Review for his “drive-by brilliance” and dubbed by the New York Times Magazine as “one of the country’s most eloquent and acid-tongued critics” comes a ruthless challenge to the conventional wisdom about the most consequential cultural development of our the Internet.
Of course the Internet is not one thing or another; if anything, its boosters claim, the Web is everything at once. It’s become not only our primary medium for communication and information but also the place we go to shop, to play, to debate, to find love. Lee Siegel argues that our ever-deepening immersion in life online doesn’t just reshape the ordinary rhythms of our days; it also reshapes our minds and culture, in ways with which we haven’t yet reckoned. The web and its cultural correlatives and by-products—such as the dominance of reality television and the rise of the “bourgeois bohemian”—have turned privacy into performance, play into commerce, and confused “self-expression” with art. And even as technology gurus ply their trade using the language of freedom and democracy, we cede more and more control of our freedom and individuality to the needs of the machine—that confluence of business and technology whose boundaries now stretch to encompass almost all human activity.
Siegel’s argument isn’t a Luddite intervention against the Internet itself but rather a bracing appeal for us to contend with how it is transforming us all. Dazzlingly erudite, full of startlingly original insights, and buoyed by sharp wit, Against the Machine will force you to see our culture—for better and worse—in an entirely new way.
Of course the Internet is not one thing or another; if anything, its boosters claim, the Web is everything at once. It’s become not only our primary medium for communication and information but also the place we go to shop, to play, to debate, to find love. Lee Siegel argues that our ever-deepening immersion in life online doesn’t just reshape the ordinary rhythms of our days; it also reshapes our minds and culture, in ways with which we haven’t yet reckoned. The web and its cultural correlatives and by-products—such as the dominance of reality television and the rise of the “bourgeois bohemian”—have turned privacy into performance, play into commerce, and confused “self-expression” with art. And even as technology gurus ply their trade using the language of freedom and democracy, we cede more and more control of our freedom and individuality to the needs of the machine—that confluence of business and technology whose boundaries now stretch to encompass almost all human activity.
Siegel’s argument isn’t a Luddite intervention against the Internet itself but rather a bracing appeal for us to contend with how it is transforming us all. Dazzlingly erudite, full of startlingly original insights, and buoyed by sharp wit, Against the Machine will force you to see our culture—for better and worse—in an entirely new way.
182 pages, Hardcover
First published January 22, 2008
17 people are currently reading
298 people want to read
About the author
Lee Siegel
31 books18 followersLee Siegel is a New York writer and cultural critic who has written for Harper's, The New Republic, The Nation, The Atlantic Monthly, The New Yorker, The New York Times, and many other publications. Siegel is a senior editor at The New Republic and lives in New York City with his wife and son.
In September 2006, Siegel was temporarily suspended from The New Republic, after an internal investigation determined he was participating in misleading comments in the magazine's "Talkback" section, in response to anonymous attackers on his blog at The New Republic's website. The comments were made through the device of a "sock puppet" dubbed "sprezzatura", who, as one reader noted, was a consistently vigorous defender of Siegel, and who specifically denied being Siegel when challenged by an anonymous detractor in "Talkback." In response to readers who had criticized Siegel's negative comments about TV talk show host Jon Stewart, 'sprezzatura' wrote, "Siegel is brave, brilliant, and wittier than Stewart will ever be. Take that, you bunch of immature, abusive sheep." The New Republic posted an apology and shut down Siegel's blog. In an interview with the New York Times Magazine, Siegel dismissed the incident as a "prank." He resumed writing for The New Republic in April 2007. Siegel's critique of Web culture, entitled Against the Machine: Being Human in the Age of the Electronic Mob, was published in January 2008.
In September 2006, Siegel was temporarily suspended from The New Republic, after an internal investigation determined he was participating in misleading comments in the magazine's "Talkback" section, in response to anonymous attackers on his blog at The New Republic's website. The comments were made through the device of a "sock puppet" dubbed "sprezzatura", who, as one reader noted, was a consistently vigorous defender of Siegel, and who specifically denied being Siegel when challenged by an anonymous detractor in "Talkback." In response to readers who had criticized Siegel's negative comments about TV talk show host Jon Stewart, 'sprezzatura' wrote, "Siegel is brave, brilliant, and wittier than Stewart will ever be. Take that, you bunch of immature, abusive sheep." The New Republic posted an apology and shut down Siegel's blog. In an interview with the New York Times Magazine, Siegel dismissed the incident as a "prank." He resumed writing for The New Republic in April 2007. Siegel's critique of Web culture, entitled Against the Machine: Being Human in the Age of the Electronic Mob, was published in January 2008.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews
July 13, 2021
"We all need each other as means; we need each other as instruments of help, sustenance, and pleasure. But without experiencing each other as an end and not as a means, we will lose our freedom to live apart from other people's uses for us, and from ours for other people - the world around us will shrink to ourselves as the only reference point in the world."
So concludes Lee Siegel in this short but punchy book. It is quite hilarious to see the Goodreads score and some of the reviews that bluster over it, and that have been proven quite wrong.
Lee was right. He was 100% right about almost everything he wrote about back in 2008.
There are so many perceptive lines throughout the book that shine a light. Now, as a cultural critic, he does not come to this topic in order to provide solutions. Rather, his job is the shine a glaring, blaring spotlight on the precise details of the problem of the Internet and those individuals who exacerbate those problems. And Lee does a wonderful, insightful job of it.
Yes, there is a reason he repeatedly uses the terms Internet 'boosters' in reference to those fawning legions of techies that revel in the marvels of the Web. It's called trolling. Repeat something until your opponent withers. But tell me, has Bill Gates changed? Have any of the technophiles that Lee discusses changed their tune? Have the disasters we've witnessed dampened their sense that the only cure to the Internet is more Internet? Insert commentary about viruses and virality here ("Fame is now a 'virus' that 'infects' the masses by means of its 'contagiousness.").
He covers everything from the prevalence of pornography and how that affects the cultural milieu (can anyone deny the destructive nature of pornography on modern life?) to putting a finger to what would become cancel culture ("Web culture's hatred of the famous figure often comes down to an indiscriminate mania for access to what other people have and we don't.") He talks about how futurists and business brought the internet to life in their image, that is, as a consumer vehicle. I mean, to dismiss what Lee says here as biased or without research support or as a technophobe is to put blinders on to what has happened since the book was written. Probably the most pertinent point is his musing on news ("Who needs to assimilate the unrelenting reams of information directed at us twenty-four hours a day?") The operative phrase there being 'directed at us'. Anyone who got caught up in COVID hysteria should at least have the humility to understand what is being said here.
Oh, and one final quote:
"The Internet is the most deliberate, purposeful environment ever created."
You. Are. Not. Immune. To. Propaganda.
So concludes Lee Siegel in this short but punchy book. It is quite hilarious to see the Goodreads score and some of the reviews that bluster over it, and that have been proven quite wrong.
Lee was right. He was 100% right about almost everything he wrote about back in 2008.
There are so many perceptive lines throughout the book that shine a light. Now, as a cultural critic, he does not come to this topic in order to provide solutions. Rather, his job is the shine a glaring, blaring spotlight on the precise details of the problem of the Internet and those individuals who exacerbate those problems. And Lee does a wonderful, insightful job of it.
Yes, there is a reason he repeatedly uses the terms Internet 'boosters' in reference to those fawning legions of techies that revel in the marvels of the Web. It's called trolling. Repeat something until your opponent withers. But tell me, has Bill Gates changed? Have any of the technophiles that Lee discusses changed their tune? Have the disasters we've witnessed dampened their sense that the only cure to the Internet is more Internet? Insert commentary about viruses and virality here ("Fame is now a 'virus' that 'infects' the masses by means of its 'contagiousness.").
He covers everything from the prevalence of pornography and how that affects the cultural milieu (can anyone deny the destructive nature of pornography on modern life?) to putting a finger to what would become cancel culture ("Web culture's hatred of the famous figure often comes down to an indiscriminate mania for access to what other people have and we don't.") He talks about how futurists and business brought the internet to life in their image, that is, as a consumer vehicle. I mean, to dismiss what Lee says here as biased or without research support or as a technophobe is to put blinders on to what has happened since the book was written. Probably the most pertinent point is his musing on news ("Who needs to assimilate the unrelenting reams of information directed at us twenty-four hours a day?") The operative phrase there being 'directed at us'. Anyone who got caught up in COVID hysteria should at least have the humility to understand what is being said here.
Oh, and one final quote:
"The Internet is the most deliberate, purposeful environment ever created."
You. Are. Not. Immune. To. Propaganda.
April 29, 2008
Boring neo-luddite polemic. There are a few interesting ideas here, but nothing is well researched if researched at all. Instead of being thoughtfully critical of (what Siegel calls) the "Internet Boosters", he is instead malicious and insulting - with the result that he comes off more as a spoiled child than a cultural critic. There is so much in this book ranging from the ill-thought-out to the just-plain-wrong that I could have written volumes in response, but in the end I felt like that would giving this blowhard way too much of my time and attention. It's just not worth it.
December 17, 2016
I hated this book. Reading it was intensely frustrating. The author buried a few important and original insights at the bottom of a mountain of snobbery and repetition; he raised foundational questions about how we should determine truth and value in the information age and then didn’t even try to answer them in favor of denigrating those he disagreed with.
A bit of context: to me 2016 was a year that exposed unequivocally the many ways in which the Internet has amplified the negative in our society. Until this year I believed that the Internet and the popularization of information was on balance beneficial for humanity. I find myself less sure of that now, both because of the Internet’s role in providing a home for outrageous partisan vitriol and hatred, and less obviously because of a related and general unmooring of the foundational values that make our society more than a collection of disconnected individuals.
Browsing my bookshelf I found this book from 2008, patiently waiting unread for the right time to catch my attention. I latched onto it as a way of helping me frame and inform my thinking, and it did, to a degree. These are the insights I found useful.
1: The Internet can provide an illusion of self-fulfillment and self-definition that limits personal growth. The self is defined by an interplay between our internal vision of who we are and the reflections we see in our interactions with others. The Internet provides reflections without substance, because the reflections we get online are reflections of our curated self, an illusion of what we think we ought to be driven by the our need for acceptance, and measured by by the thin and nearly meaningless flow of likes on social media.
2: Information is not knowledge. Information can be the enemy of knowledge when the flow of information is so voluminous as to strip us of our ability to focus long enough to generate knowledge. From the book: “Knowledge guarantees your autonomy. Information gets you thinking like everyone else who is absorbing the same information.”
3: Popularity does not measure quality, but since popularity is easily measured by machines it becomes the definition of value on the Internet, and since the Internet has become so ubiquitous in our lives popularity has replaced quality in the popular consciousness.
Almost completely obscuring those insights is Siegel’s condescending dismissal of anyone with a different perspective than his. For example, the ideas of people as diverse as Pierre Omidyar, Alvin Toffler, James Surowiecki and Douglas Rushkoff (among others) were flawed and unworthy of consideration because their authors were crass commercialists with a financial stake in the success of the Internet. He ridiculed and reviled mash up culture and YouTube videos without the slightest attempt to consider them from their perspective, in the style of a bow-tied 1950’s Senator decrying the scourge of rock and roll. And Siegel seemed weirdly concerned with pornography, digressing frequently to accent whatever dark picture of the present he’s currently painting with a dash of sexual unsavoriness.
Most damning, in my opinion, is the fact that Siegel criticized without offering any constructive proposals. The closest he got to proposing how things might be different is an unsaid implication: if only those who had been anointed by the institutions of sophisticated society were allowed to define what was valuable, than all this Internet nonsense could be set aside.
A bit of context: to me 2016 was a year that exposed unequivocally the many ways in which the Internet has amplified the negative in our society. Until this year I believed that the Internet and the popularization of information was on balance beneficial for humanity. I find myself less sure of that now, both because of the Internet’s role in providing a home for outrageous partisan vitriol and hatred, and less obviously because of a related and general unmooring of the foundational values that make our society more than a collection of disconnected individuals.
Browsing my bookshelf I found this book from 2008, patiently waiting unread for the right time to catch my attention. I latched onto it as a way of helping me frame and inform my thinking, and it did, to a degree. These are the insights I found useful.
1: The Internet can provide an illusion of self-fulfillment and self-definition that limits personal growth. The self is defined by an interplay between our internal vision of who we are and the reflections we see in our interactions with others. The Internet provides reflections without substance, because the reflections we get online are reflections of our curated self, an illusion of what we think we ought to be driven by the our need for acceptance, and measured by by the thin and nearly meaningless flow of likes on social media.
2: Information is not knowledge. Information can be the enemy of knowledge when the flow of information is so voluminous as to strip us of our ability to focus long enough to generate knowledge. From the book: “Knowledge guarantees your autonomy. Information gets you thinking like everyone else who is absorbing the same information.”
3: Popularity does not measure quality, but since popularity is easily measured by machines it becomes the definition of value on the Internet, and since the Internet has become so ubiquitous in our lives popularity has replaced quality in the popular consciousness.
Almost completely obscuring those insights is Siegel’s condescending dismissal of anyone with a different perspective than his. For example, the ideas of people as diverse as Pierre Omidyar, Alvin Toffler, James Surowiecki and Douglas Rushkoff (among others) were flawed and unworthy of consideration because their authors were crass commercialists with a financial stake in the success of the Internet. He ridiculed and reviled mash up culture and YouTube videos without the slightest attempt to consider them from their perspective, in the style of a bow-tied 1950’s Senator decrying the scourge of rock and roll. And Siegel seemed weirdly concerned with pornography, digressing frequently to accent whatever dark picture of the present he’s currently painting with a dash of sexual unsavoriness.
Most damning, in my opinion, is the fact that Siegel criticized without offering any constructive proposals. The closest he got to proposing how things might be different is an unsaid implication: if only those who had been anointed by the institutions of sophisticated society were allowed to define what was valuable, than all this Internet nonsense could be set aside.
July 24, 2015
If you aren't looking for a rant, then here is my quick view... Read this book.
If you want the rant, please continue...
Before you look further at this review, please note that the below comments are not pointed at those of you who run video blogs or book reviews on YouTube... I am looking more at the lack of quality in the majority of what is out there... I will explain...
I have long believed that part of society's problems stem from the way kids are being "dumbed down". This is not to insult all the teenagers who are out there reading and making a difference. I am talking about the ones who mindlessly mill about on YouTube, watching videos of some idiot jumping off of his house and breaking a leg. This is today's entertainment. This is what our children are taking part in. It's a mad marketplace for who can outdo the last person and get the most page hits. (I know a 13 year old who has a steady income from their mash-up videos... I praise the ambition and use of technology, but I really never wanted to see 2-pac and Elvis in a duet.) This is the society we are bringing them in to.
What happened to books??? We are on one the great social sites in history as its focus is the written word. Other sites are secondary to me. I love the written word and crave the experience and knowledge it brings. Now, don't get me wrong, I love Epic Rap Battles and Bad Lip Reading and KEXP's concert series, but do we really need 10 people doing the same thing and then having it repeated by hundreds of others? No...
This is why this book appeals to me. I don't agree with every word, but he makes a great point. We have turned Self-Expression into a profitable business based on how many people "like" you... It's High School all over again. We thrive on ridiculous entertainment and skip all of the great knowledge that exists on the World Wide Web.
The author attacks the Blogosphere as something that is completely against actual news and is more self indulgent. I disagree. As a blogger, I like being able to write some thoughts out there. If someone reads them and cares, cool. If not, also cool. I am sharing my struggle to write a book with world and if the only person that reads that is me, then it is.
I see his points though. We really have become socially lazy. We don't go outside or walk around to meet people. We go to dating sites, which we are all happy about when we start talking to someone and then meet them and think, "This isn't who I was talking to." We don't mingle anymore. We base our popularity on how many friends we have online, not in real life. (I have over 800 friends on Facebook. With very few exceptions, these are people I have known in real life first. About 90% are from my time in the Army.)
We share thoughts with people online and, in some strange way, experiences, but the veil of who I am online versus who I am in reality is up and firmly stuck in place.
I think what I take away from this book more than anything is that we, as a society, suck at being ourselves and meeting people. Would it kill us to go out into the scary world and meet some people? No. Would it hurt us to abandon our YouTube channels. Maybe... (If that is your primary income then keep Vlogging.)
Mr. Siegel and I see face to face on one main thing: We need to get out and experience life again.
This is an excellent, thought provoking read. Worth the time...
If you want the rant, please continue...
Before you look further at this review, please note that the below comments are not pointed at those of you who run video blogs or book reviews on YouTube... I am looking more at the lack of quality in the majority of what is out there... I will explain...
I have long believed that part of society's problems stem from the way kids are being "dumbed down". This is not to insult all the teenagers who are out there reading and making a difference. I am talking about the ones who mindlessly mill about on YouTube, watching videos of some idiot jumping off of his house and breaking a leg. This is today's entertainment. This is what our children are taking part in. It's a mad marketplace for who can outdo the last person and get the most page hits. (I know a 13 year old who has a steady income from their mash-up videos... I praise the ambition and use of technology, but I really never wanted to see 2-pac and Elvis in a duet.) This is the society we are bringing them in to.
What happened to books??? We are on one the great social sites in history as its focus is the written word. Other sites are secondary to me. I love the written word and crave the experience and knowledge it brings. Now, don't get me wrong, I love Epic Rap Battles and Bad Lip Reading and KEXP's concert series, but do we really need 10 people doing the same thing and then having it repeated by hundreds of others? No...
This is why this book appeals to me. I don't agree with every word, but he makes a great point. We have turned Self-Expression into a profitable business based on how many people "like" you... It's High School all over again. We thrive on ridiculous entertainment and skip all of the great knowledge that exists on the World Wide Web.
The author attacks the Blogosphere as something that is completely against actual news and is more self indulgent. I disagree. As a blogger, I like being able to write some thoughts out there. If someone reads them and cares, cool. If not, also cool. I am sharing my struggle to write a book with world and if the only person that reads that is me, then it is.
I see his points though. We really have become socially lazy. We don't go outside or walk around to meet people. We go to dating sites, which we are all happy about when we start talking to someone and then meet them and think, "This isn't who I was talking to." We don't mingle anymore. We base our popularity on how many friends we have online, not in real life. (I have over 800 friends on Facebook. With very few exceptions, these are people I have known in real life first. About 90% are from my time in the Army.)
We share thoughts with people online and, in some strange way, experiences, but the veil of who I am online versus who I am in reality is up and firmly stuck in place.
I think what I take away from this book more than anything is that we, as a society, suck at being ourselves and meeting people. Would it kill us to go out into the scary world and meet some people? No. Would it hurt us to abandon our YouTube channels. Maybe... (If that is your primary income then keep Vlogging.)
Mr. Siegel and I see face to face on one main thing: We need to get out and experience life again.
This is an excellent, thought provoking read. Worth the time...
November 5, 2013
Despite its promising title, Lee Siegel's Against the Machine is less about the struggle to maintain our humanity in the digital age and more about his problem with how the internet age has completely bereft our society of creativity, impartiality, and pure artistic originality.
My very negative preview of Against the Machine was for the most part confirmed by my reading it for my Digital Culture class. It is for the most part poorly written, with a few coherent statements and positive suggestions scattered amongst lengthy commentary on how the internet and its promoters have destroyed our culture and anecdotes about how the internet has turned its consumers or "prosumers" into distorted reflections of itself. He is all about how the internet is people with no talent or originality selling their poor interpretations of things they did not create. Value in this digital society is determined by popularity, not quality or artistry, and value is also based on marketability rather than detached enjoyment. Between the lines of Siegel's ranting is a drawn-out elegy of the death of gatekeeping, regulated print culture, major media outlets and "real" art.
The good points Siegel does make, as I have pointed out, are few and far between, but I will point them out just so we don't lose faith in the author's humanity. He does have a point that he says that the individualization/customization of the internet is not always a good thing. While it surrounds us with the things we like, however, individualized media insulate us from things we do not like. The internet encourages the glorification of the self and the self's fantasies rather than bringing us closer to understanding other people. Siegel claims that this contributes to the hate, bigotry, and misunderstanding on political blogs, comments, and other internet posts. People just say what they want rather than trying to understand the other person's point of view.
What Siegel could have argued for better, if he argued at all, is a need for limited immersion in the internet culture. Instead, he just rants about the Internet as a corrupt media, an enhanced societal enslavement and a failed democracy, and a culture that has fallen for corporate capitalism's trap. He could have at least offered a solution to today's internet culture, if there is so much wrong with it--after all, in the prologue he says "Things really don't have to be the way they are."
I read this book on Kindle for PC. Against the Machine is divided into three segments with three chapters each. It is fairly short, easy reading.
My very negative preview of Against the Machine was for the most part confirmed by my reading it for my Digital Culture class. It is for the most part poorly written, with a few coherent statements and positive suggestions scattered amongst lengthy commentary on how the internet and its promoters have destroyed our culture and anecdotes about how the internet has turned its consumers or "prosumers" into distorted reflections of itself. He is all about how the internet is people with no talent or originality selling their poor interpretations of things they did not create. Value in this digital society is determined by popularity, not quality or artistry, and value is also based on marketability rather than detached enjoyment. Between the lines of Siegel's ranting is a drawn-out elegy of the death of gatekeeping, regulated print culture, major media outlets and "real" art.
The good points Siegel does make, as I have pointed out, are few and far between, but I will point them out just so we don't lose faith in the author's humanity. He does have a point that he says that the individualization/customization of the internet is not always a good thing. While it surrounds us with the things we like, however, individualized media insulate us from things we do not like. The internet encourages the glorification of the self and the self's fantasies rather than bringing us closer to understanding other people. Siegel claims that this contributes to the hate, bigotry, and misunderstanding on political blogs, comments, and other internet posts. People just say what they want rather than trying to understand the other person's point of view.
What Siegel could have argued for better, if he argued at all, is a need for limited immersion in the internet culture. Instead, he just rants about the Internet as a corrupt media, an enhanced societal enslavement and a failed democracy, and a culture that has fallen for corporate capitalism's trap. He could have at least offered a solution to today's internet culture, if there is so much wrong with it--after all, in the prologue he says "Things really don't have to be the way they are."
I read this book on Kindle for PC. Against the Machine is divided into three segments with three chapters each. It is fairly short, easy reading.
December 2, 2008
Siegel is a little too reactionary for my taste, and I have to wonder if he's had some problematic personal encounters with Malcolm Gladwell... but those issues aside, it's the sort of extended essay on possible negative effects of the Internet that I've been wanting to read for a long time. He succeeds in his mission, as long as you manage to ignore the occasional bouts of self-indulgent stodginess on Siegel's part.
June 22, 2009
This book is extremely enjoyable, insightful, and thought-provoking, and is not the "whiny" rant many of its critics accuse it of being. As I expected, I did not agree with all of the points made by Siegel. But because his arguments and their accompanying examples were so well written, the book was very engaging and quite the worthwhile read. It compels me to converse with its authors so much so that I wish I really could.
For the most part, Siegel's claims about the direction in which our society is heading are true, and he provides plenty of examples to prove it. He enthusiastically illustrates many analogies, comparing for instance internet technologies to the evolution of the automobile, and does so fairly well. Siegel is successful in his argument that we are rapidly taking more things for granted because we are less and less concerned with being able to discern the subtleties of communication and human interaction.
However, Siegel's claim that the internet is to blame is only partially correct. I agree with him that the internet's faster pace of communication and its better accessibility to anonymity makes it easier to be less concerned with differentiating truth from non-truth, fact from opinion, and news from hype. However, our tendency to jump on the latest band-wagon has always been an aspect of our materialistic, capitalistic society -- even before the internet. Same goes for wanting to speak our opinion on things, even if our opinion bears no evidence to support itself. The internet and web 2.0 cultures just make all that happen more quickly. To use one of Siegel's own point against himself, I think he is confusing the cause and effect relationships of the internet.
The author very nicely summed up all his points in a clever way in his epilogue, which added a coherent sense of closure to his work.
All that being said, Against the Machine is an excellent read, and I recommend it to anyone willing to consider the non-popular side of an issue. Even if you completely disagree with his points after reading it, I think you'll find that you still enjoyed the debate.
-------
June 6, '09: I listened to an interview with the author on Kera.org(npr station), and it was very intriguing. I predict I'll agree with only 50% of what he has to say. But if the book is written anything like the interview he gave, I think I'll find myself wanting to have a real conversation/debate with him....which is a good thing. I feel my mind being exercised already!
For the most part, Siegel's claims about the direction in which our society is heading are true, and he provides plenty of examples to prove it. He enthusiastically illustrates many analogies, comparing for instance internet technologies to the evolution of the automobile, and does so fairly well. Siegel is successful in his argument that we are rapidly taking more things for granted because we are less and less concerned with being able to discern the subtleties of communication and human interaction.
However, Siegel's claim that the internet is to blame is only partially correct. I agree with him that the internet's faster pace of communication and its better accessibility to anonymity makes it easier to be less concerned with differentiating truth from non-truth, fact from opinion, and news from hype. However, our tendency to jump on the latest band-wagon has always been an aspect of our materialistic, capitalistic society -- even before the internet. Same goes for wanting to speak our opinion on things, even if our opinion bears no evidence to support itself. The internet and web 2.0 cultures just make all that happen more quickly. To use one of Siegel's own point against himself, I think he is confusing the cause and effect relationships of the internet.
The author very nicely summed up all his points in a clever way in his epilogue, which added a coherent sense of closure to his work.
All that being said, Against the Machine is an excellent read, and I recommend it to anyone willing to consider the non-popular side of an issue. Even if you completely disagree with his points after reading it, I think you'll find that you still enjoyed the debate.
-------
June 6, '09: I listened to an interview with the author on Kera.org(npr station), and it was very intriguing. I predict I'll agree with only 50% of what he has to say. But if the book is written anything like the interview he gave, I think I'll find myself wanting to have a real conversation/debate with him....which is a good thing. I feel my mind being exercised already!
April 7, 2016
What a book! I never expected to enjoy it, I just decided to start it. While it was hard to grasp some of things this author was saying, I did learn a lot of different things from his perspective, and others as well. Like the fact that the Internet is all just a popularity contest. It's all about getting the most likes. Its all about finding the right information to post so that you can obtain the most likes and get the most people looking at it. Its not about the news in every different area, its about the news in the subject in which you, the writer, you, the reader, is interested in. It's not about hearing the news in its entirety, its about learning about the things that you have an interest in and that's all. You can cater the information you receive to your ideal subjects. You can choose which information to receive and which to leave out. The Internet has become a place where the experts are fighting for the space to tell the truth, where they are finding there are tens of people out there who are writers (not the best writers, however, and not always telling the truth...only the truth as they believe it...or even worse, want it to be heard as). At its best, this book is about the author's perspective on what he believes the internet is and what it has become.
April 21, 2008
It is a shame that the important, true things that Lee Siegel argues in this book are obscured by his all out attack on the Internet's down side which does not recognize that for every rude, self-serving, ill-informed blog there is a reasoned opinion elsewhere on line; for every source of misinformation there is an authoritative source of solid fact; and so on. Siegel can be infuriating, silly or simply wrong, but that should not stop anyone who uses the Internet from reading his book carefully. What he gets wrong is not nearly as important as what he gets right in his diatribe/critique of the Internet.
September 13, 2010
Any book written about the Internet, web culture, and pop culture that was published two years ago is already three years out of date.
Even if this was published online five minutes ago, however, Lee Siegel would still be a massive tool who enjoys the sound of his own bloviation so much that it eclipses any possible shred of a good point he might have had.
Even if this was published online five minutes ago, however, Lee Siegel would still be a massive tool who enjoys the sound of his own bloviation so much that it eclipses any possible shred of a good point he might have had.
December 6, 2020
I was excited by this book, despite the negative reviews, I felt this book offered something. Maybe it was the way some of his most critical reviewers called him a ‘neo-luddite’. This made me hopeful that this book may add depth to my suspicion of technological innovation as the solution to all ills. Unfortunately, this was not to be.
I will start with the negatives, Seigel is a snob. Not quite an insufferable one but if he does not get why someone would like something then it is probably not worth liking in his book. He is worried by the ‘democratisation’ of the internet, or at least the people who call it that, and does not like reality TV, blogs, and a whole host of other things one could associate with the internet and the noughties. I kind of know where he is coming from, lowest common denominator click bait is annoying, but I do not think it is the crisis he thinks it is.
I always feel he slightly misses the point when discussing the economics of the web. He is right that our leisure has become the product but has a slightly weird conception of non-economic, ‘actual leisure’, which I am not convinced exists as he defines making a table as making your leisure time economic.
He does capture some truths in the book like the way in which the internet is able to blur truth. However, he seems to focus this on the wrong direction, attacking blogs and Wikipedia. While I have the benefit of hindsight it is interesting that the areas, he chose now stand up almost as old media because, when done well, they clearly reference their writing.
This book was at times kind of interesting, but I would not recommend reading it as it is a slightly outdated polemic against a concept (the web) that the writer clearly does not understand well, and he often strays more broadly into popular culture.
There is a joke amongst Africa correspondents that goes; what is worse than being stuck in an African train station? Being stuck in an African train station with Paul Theroux. I feel that there is a Lee Seigel version of this joke to be made about the internet.
March 30, 2020
Years ago I read the then seemingly naive book, Against the Machine: Being Human in the Age of the Electronic Mob, by Lee Siegel.
Near the end Signal asks the pleb does he feel like a god the way he can click the mouse and those in front disappear.
But Siegal's quip about the pleb feeling like a god by clicking his enemy away stuck in my mind.
What happened to my works on Kindle is the reverse of the the little amatur imagining he is a god, like Siegal thought..
My books were top quality.. The staff in the office at Amazon obviously liked me. But who are these people? And what happens if, say, the staff member who liked you retires, or drops dead, and a fresh faced
24 year old gets his job.. He sees my reviews and my books and like a god he wipes my life works away!
These guys are uncountable gods behind the closed door. We hand over our talent to these people but who are they? And being able to unplug you, just like that, is a new form of tyranny like nothing else.
At least the old school tyrants needed resources. And the more people they want to get rid off the more expensive.
But the modern digital tyrant can make you disappear with a click of a button!
Near the end Signal asks the pleb does he feel like a god the way he can click the mouse and those in front disappear.
But Siegal's quip about the pleb feeling like a god by clicking his enemy away stuck in my mind.
What happened to my works on Kindle is the reverse of the the little amatur imagining he is a god, like Siegal thought..
My books were top quality.. The staff in the office at Amazon obviously liked me. But who are these people? And what happens if, say, the staff member who liked you retires, or drops dead, and a fresh faced
24 year old gets his job.. He sees my reviews and my books and like a god he wipes my life works away!
These guys are uncountable gods behind the closed door. We hand over our talent to these people but who are they? And being able to unplug you, just like that, is a new form of tyranny like nothing else.
At least the old school tyrants needed resources. And the more people they want to get rid off the more expensive.
But the modern digital tyrant can make you disappear with a click of a button!
August 24, 2022
Interesting discussion of contact between people through media instead of face to face and eye to eye.
Easy in some ways but empty, at best, in others.
the internet is possibly the most radical transformation of price and public life in the history of mankind. p. 21
[let us] see more reality shows that are scripted. p. 24
talking through a computer, no matter how easy the format, is not talking with someone.
The less he needs the actual presence of other people, the more he will depend on goods and services to keep him company and populate his isolation. .
What is going to happen because of talking into a computer has probably already happened.
We are far enough into the experiment so that we are likely to redo the procedure.
The product showing the fastest and steadiest growth by computer speak has turned out to be lying.
Easy in some ways but empty, at best, in others.
the internet is possibly the most radical transformation of price and public life in the history of mankind. p. 21
[let us] see more reality shows that are scripted. p. 24
talking through a computer, no matter how easy the format, is not talking with someone.
The less he needs the actual presence of other people, the more he will depend on goods and services to keep him company and populate his isolation. .
What is going to happen because of talking into a computer has probably already happened.
We are far enough into the experiment so that we are likely to redo the procedure.
The product showing the fastest and steadiest growth by computer speak has turned out to be lying.
October 16, 2021
Solo puedo decir que me asombran las similitudes de la visión que existía en aquel entonces de los efectos de la tecnología sobre la sociedad. Hay varias opiniones que me dejaron (y sobre los que seguiré) reflexionando.
El párrafo final describe algo increíblemente parecido a lo que han vivido millones personas durante la contingencia mundial, lo cual merece abordarse más a fondo para desarrollar estrategias y contenerlo aunque sea un poco.
Volveré a leerlo en un futuro valiéndome de más fuentes para regresar con una reseña como tal.
El párrafo final describe algo increíblemente parecido a lo que han vivido millones personas durante la contingencia mundial, lo cual merece abordarse más a fondo para desarrollar estrategias y contenerlo aunque sea un poco.
Volveré a leerlo en un futuro valiéndome de más fuentes para regresar con una reseña como tal.
January 3, 2019
It opened my eyes on some topics. It explained why I dislike some things that I had not discovered on my own - talent shows on TV like American Idol which always seem to elect the most common talents, those who sound the most like other talents. It surprised me how well it applied to today's political climate also. I was disappointed in how he claimed all these things about the "Internet" where it was really just certain web sites he was talking about.
July 25, 2021
Interesting subject. A lot has changed since 2008. As a whole, I think we are more accepting of the Internet now in 2021, lies and all. Our news today is totally unreliable. If we weren't using the Internet much, COVID-19 forced us to start using it and now there is no going back.
December 14, 2017
Book club. Rant and rant.
May 4, 2009
Lee Siegel raises excellent critical theories about our latest and greatest tool, though much of the text seems to veer into personal rant. Some of his finer points include:
Including scathing critiques against the rampant "self expression" that he insists tyrannize the web:
Siegel steps in as Cassandra warning us of the dangers of an insulated "Youniverse" where personal instant gratification is the rule of the day. His most enlightening observation, how digital technology is currently changing our language and perception of the world:
In this digital revolution, at the dawn of the Informization Age, as Mike Davis noted in a recent interview with Bill Moyers, like Obama, we can't see the Grand Canyon. Davis recalls the first Western explorers were unable to comprehend the magnitude of America's vast earthly chasm, at the time of its Western discovery, we simply did not have the technology to measure it and certainly could not fathom the grandness of it.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/032...
Today, we use capitalist terms and concepts to conceive this new digital horizon before us. We scramble to gain perspective as the landscape transforms underneath our feet.
My Composition students appreciated turning the technology on its head. Most of my freshman were weaned on digital waves, so they appreciated hearing his skepticism, though many complained that Siegel's argument inclined towards repetition and, like most literary arguments, he leads us to a solution-less, and therefore, anti-climactic conclusion. Which makes me wonder why we, as writers, can't do more than pose great critical ideas. Must we always linger in the haze of abstraction? If we're going to pose a problem, shouldn't we bother to conceive a viable solution? Nevertheless, the text generated excellent and engaged discussions--what more can a teacher ask for?
Like the car, the Internet has been made out to be a miracle of social and personal transformation when it is really a marvel of convenience--and in this case of the Internet, a marvel of convenience that has caused a social and personal upheaval. As with the car, the highly arbitrary way in which the Internet has evolved has been portrayed as inevitable and inexorable.
Including scathing critiques against the rampant "self expression" that he insists tyrannize the web:
But self-expression is not the same thing as imagination. 'Self expression' is one of those big, baggy terms bulging with lots of cultural change and cultural history to the point where it gestures toward a kind of general meaning without expressing a particular one.
Siegel steps in as Cassandra warning us of the dangers of an insulated "Youniverse" where personal instant gratification is the rule of the day. His most enlightening observation, how digital technology is currently changing our language and perception of the world:
We have undergone a complete 'transvaluation of values,' the phrase that the German philosopher Fredrich Nietzsche used to describe the process by which a new way of looking at the world slops into our familiar outlook. Nietzsche believed that Christianity, for example, had 'transvalued' earlier pagan and aristocratic values of heroism, power, and fame into meekness, humility, and eternal life. The early Christians did this while retaining pagan vocabulary, so that Jesus was still a "prince" and God as "mighty" as any Roman emperor; God's realm was as much a 'kingdom' as that of Nero. But although the former vocabulary remained, the new values had an entirely different meaning.
In this digital revolution, at the dawn of the Informization Age, as Mike Davis noted in a recent interview with Bill Moyers, like Obama, we can't see the Grand Canyon. Davis recalls the first Western explorers were unable to comprehend the magnitude of America's vast earthly chasm, at the time of its Western discovery, we simply did not have the technology to measure it and certainly could not fathom the grandness of it.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/032...
Today, we use capitalist terms and concepts to conceive this new digital horizon before us. We scramble to gain perspective as the landscape transforms underneath our feet.
My Composition students appreciated turning the technology on its head. Most of my freshman were weaned on digital waves, so they appreciated hearing his skepticism, though many complained that Siegel's argument inclined towards repetition and, like most literary arguments, he leads us to a solution-less, and therefore, anti-climactic conclusion. Which makes me wonder why we, as writers, can't do more than pose great critical ideas. Must we always linger in the haze of abstraction? If we're going to pose a problem, shouldn't we bother to conceive a viable solution? Nevertheless, the text generated excellent and engaged discussions--what more can a teacher ask for?
January 23, 2012
I was intrigued by this book when the author was interviewed on the Daily Show because, after almost ten years of very extensive involvement in internet communities, I've started to become uneasy not so much with the commercialization of the media but of the anonymity he speaks about. I find, on the whole, that people are willing to say appalling things when they don't have to attach their own names to it, especially when they don't have to respond in a real-time, face to face confrontation but can instead take their time and avoid open conflict.
All of which seemed to be what the author was going to discuss... but I got nearly halfway through before being bored to tears by his discussion of a number of entrepreneurs and thinkers whose ideas date from the dotcom boom, thus being almost completely irrelevant today given the fast pace of e-business. Worse, his "discussion" involved nothing more than a string of critiques, leaving it up to the reader to figure out what his own position might be in a vacuum rather than merely in response to other thinkers' positions.
His introduction confirmed what I suspected; he's approached the internet from a professional writer's point of view a generation ahead of this reader born in 1981, and so he's coming from a powerful outsider's position in which he's accustomed to having a much more lopsided interaction with his readers. When he related having created what we'd refer to as a "sockpuppet" to reply anonymously in his own defense to some (admittedly vile) detractors commenting on his columns I knew we were in trouble -- he apparently saw nothing shady about this at the time, whereas in the communities I'm used to your identity is your greatest currency, a reputation to be polished and added to, and diluting it with anonymous comments of your own is disingenuous to say the least.
His descriptions of the impact of the internet on modern life did resonate with me to some degree, especially the concept of using the same interface to access many spheres of interaction, from shopping to dating to porn-searching to emailing to... book-reviewing. I find that I need to establish discrete identities in different areas of the internet, and the bleedover can be disorienting. However this was just one bright spot in a sea of rather uninteresting (and uninformed, to some degree) arguments, so I ended up putting this one down.
Furthermore I've seen more informed and worthwhile commentary along these lines in the communities I mentioned above, which was enough to render this book as a kind of sidenote from an outsider not versed in real internet interaction.
All of which seemed to be what the author was going to discuss... but I got nearly halfway through before being bored to tears by his discussion of a number of entrepreneurs and thinkers whose ideas date from the dotcom boom, thus being almost completely irrelevant today given the fast pace of e-business. Worse, his "discussion" involved nothing more than a string of critiques, leaving it up to the reader to figure out what his own position might be in a vacuum rather than merely in response to other thinkers' positions.
His introduction confirmed what I suspected; he's approached the internet from a professional writer's point of view a generation ahead of this reader born in 1981, and so he's coming from a powerful outsider's position in which he's accustomed to having a much more lopsided interaction with his readers. When he related having created what we'd refer to as a "sockpuppet" to reply anonymously in his own defense to some (admittedly vile) detractors commenting on his columns I knew we were in trouble -- he apparently saw nothing shady about this at the time, whereas in the communities I'm used to your identity is your greatest currency, a reputation to be polished and added to, and diluting it with anonymous comments of your own is disingenuous to say the least.
His descriptions of the impact of the internet on modern life did resonate with me to some degree, especially the concept of using the same interface to access many spheres of interaction, from shopping to dating to porn-searching to emailing to... book-reviewing. I find that I need to establish discrete identities in different areas of the internet, and the bleedover can be disorienting. However this was just one bright spot in a sea of rather uninteresting (and uninformed, to some degree) arguments, so I ended up putting this one down.
Furthermore I've seen more informed and worthwhile commentary along these lines in the communities I mentioned above, which was enough to render this book as a kind of sidenote from an outsider not versed in real internet interaction.
Read
October 7, 2008This book was really different from normal books I read, was also a suggested book from a friend of mine that reads more counter-culture books then I do which helps explain a few things. Not to mention I'm more for the machine then against like the author Lee Siegel, but you should always try to see more then your view of a subject.
The book is about the internet age and how it is changing and effecting everything. Being titled 'Against the Machine' should help point out he's not looking for the positive changes, but more of the negative ones. Some of his points are quite right I feel, concepts like how the internet is making the images of 'cool' a more and bigger part of life which isn't a good thing I feel. While I am aware that popularity has always been apart of life no matter the time, it has become bigger and more widespread of an issue. 20 years ago if you did something embarrassing you could leave somewhere and start over again. Yes this would be a major thing, but you could at least have a fresh start as long as it wasn't a criminal issue. But now it's not always that simple with people like 'the Star Wars kid' and Andrew "Don't Tase Me, Bro" amongst others. These people can't hide from this since it's all over the internet and there isn't many places to hide.
On the other side of the problem though is he does mention things that I just don't agree with, one being about the usage and mis-usage of Wikipedia. Siegel made a pseudo-argument about Wikipedia against the encyclopedia Britannica and how the Britannica was written by professors and other such people. The biggest problem was that first he tried to play both sides when he is obviously against it which makes it hard for him to see any good since Wikipedia can be altered. The problem is that the Britannica doesn't help with many pop-culture like subjects. Look up something like Internet Viral Video Stars and the Britannica will lead you to find out your on crack and no such thing exists, but Wikipedia will explain it. Yes the Britannica was written by professional people of higher education but that is no reason that I should feel that they would have all the answers and be able to dictate what I should and should not know. Wikipedia will help in subjects from the well known to the obscure and sometimes you really do need to know something lesser known at times.
All in all a interesting read with some good points, but he tries to make it like a debate with only his view point and not enough effort to tackle to subject beyond his own views
The book is about the internet age and how it is changing and effecting everything. Being titled 'Against the Machine' should help point out he's not looking for the positive changes, but more of the negative ones. Some of his points are quite right I feel, concepts like how the internet is making the images of 'cool' a more and bigger part of life which isn't a good thing I feel. While I am aware that popularity has always been apart of life no matter the time, it has become bigger and more widespread of an issue. 20 years ago if you did something embarrassing you could leave somewhere and start over again. Yes this would be a major thing, but you could at least have a fresh start as long as it wasn't a criminal issue. But now it's not always that simple with people like 'the Star Wars kid' and Andrew "Don't Tase Me, Bro" amongst others. These people can't hide from this since it's all over the internet and there isn't many places to hide.
On the other side of the problem though is he does mention things that I just don't agree with, one being about the usage and mis-usage of Wikipedia. Siegel made a pseudo-argument about Wikipedia against the encyclopedia Britannica and how the Britannica was written by professors and other such people. The biggest problem was that first he tried to play both sides when he is obviously against it which makes it hard for him to see any good since Wikipedia can be altered. The problem is that the Britannica doesn't help with many pop-culture like subjects. Look up something like Internet Viral Video Stars and the Britannica will lead you to find out your on crack and no such thing exists, but Wikipedia will explain it. Yes the Britannica was written by professional people of higher education but that is no reason that I should feel that they would have all the answers and be able to dictate what I should and should not know. Wikipedia will help in subjects from the well known to the obscure and sometimes you really do need to know something lesser known at times.
All in all a interesting read with some good points, but he tries to make it like a debate with only his view point and not enough effort to tackle to subject beyond his own views
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 18, 2012
É inegável que o advento da internet alterou radicalmente quase todas as vertentes da nossa sociedade. São alterações revolucionárias, que desestabilizam paradigmas instituídos e arrasam instituições tradicionais. As nossas vidas modificaram-se irremediavelmente. Se para melhor ou pior, isso é assunto aberto a discussão.
Against The Machine tem a virtude de fugir ao deslumbramento com as maravilhas do mundo digital. Aponta-nos riscos de isolamento, despersonalização, comercialização da sociedade, degradação cultural e derrocada de indústrias estabelecidas. São argumentos válidos, mas escritos por alguém que nitidamente se ressente do impacto da internet. Faz uma crítica pertinente aos deslumbramentos cegos que contém a possibilidade de nos conduzir a abismos éticos, económicos ou sociais. Infelizmente, o tom do livro vai decaindo de crítica válida à sociedade da informação para uma voz de resmungo perante a ameaça aos valores tradicionais, à antiga ordem estabelecida, às instituições que dominaram o panorama cultural durante boa parte do século XX. Isso nota-se particularmente no tom vitriólico que utiliza para descrever a cultura de remix, a blogoesfera ou a wikipedia como o inverso do conceito de inteligência colectiva.
Siegel não nega as vantagens da internet, mas claramente preferiria que esta fosse mais como uma tranquila biblioteca, onde a informação fosse produzida por fontes institucionais e transmitida numa possível versão moderna dos meios de comunicação tradicionais. As hordes ululantes que gritam a sua opinião que fiquem de fora, para não conspurcar a beleza do sistema. Como em tudo na vida, nem tanto ao mar nem tanto à terra. Siegel tem razão no que respeita à despersonalização do ser humano face ao ecrã, ao restringir das visões sociais sob os ditames cada vez mais comerciais da web, nas questões de validade intelectual sobre o crowdsourcing e produção de informação online, na importância da edição como forma de filtragem de informação pertinente. Ter uma opinião contrária face à tendência generalizada de adoração cega da sociedade da web é importante, nem que seja como aviso à navegação.
Infelizmente os argumentos válidos perdem-se no tom de quase total desprezo que Siegel utiliza para descrever os novos modos de cultura potenciados pelo digital. Refilar no meu tempo é que era e gabar os méritos das torres de marfim não nos ajuda a fazer sentido e a tornar pertinente a imensa explosão de potencial e criatividade que a internet provocou.
Against The Machine tem a virtude de fugir ao deslumbramento com as maravilhas do mundo digital. Aponta-nos riscos de isolamento, despersonalização, comercialização da sociedade, degradação cultural e derrocada de indústrias estabelecidas. São argumentos válidos, mas escritos por alguém que nitidamente se ressente do impacto da internet. Faz uma crítica pertinente aos deslumbramentos cegos que contém a possibilidade de nos conduzir a abismos éticos, económicos ou sociais. Infelizmente, o tom do livro vai decaindo de crítica válida à sociedade da informação para uma voz de resmungo perante a ameaça aos valores tradicionais, à antiga ordem estabelecida, às instituições que dominaram o panorama cultural durante boa parte do século XX. Isso nota-se particularmente no tom vitriólico que utiliza para descrever a cultura de remix, a blogoesfera ou a wikipedia como o inverso do conceito de inteligência colectiva.
Siegel não nega as vantagens da internet, mas claramente preferiria que esta fosse mais como uma tranquila biblioteca, onde a informação fosse produzida por fontes institucionais e transmitida numa possível versão moderna dos meios de comunicação tradicionais. As hordes ululantes que gritam a sua opinião que fiquem de fora, para não conspurcar a beleza do sistema. Como em tudo na vida, nem tanto ao mar nem tanto à terra. Siegel tem razão no que respeita à despersonalização do ser humano face ao ecrã, ao restringir das visões sociais sob os ditames cada vez mais comerciais da web, nas questões de validade intelectual sobre o crowdsourcing e produção de informação online, na importância da edição como forma de filtragem de informação pertinente. Ter uma opinião contrária face à tendência generalizada de adoração cega da sociedade da web é importante, nem que seja como aviso à navegação.
Infelizmente os argumentos válidos perdem-se no tom de quase total desprezo que Siegel utiliza para descrever os novos modos de cultura potenciados pelo digital. Refilar no meu tempo é que era e gabar os méritos das torres de marfim não nos ajuda a fazer sentido e a tornar pertinente a imensa explosão de potencial e criatividade que a internet provocou.
September 23, 2008
After reading an awful lot lately about the economic and cultural significance of life in the digital age (boosterism), I picked this little diddy up at the library recently in an attempt to get an opposing viewpoint. I mean, Lee Siegel IS one of the most important cultural critics in American today...it says so right there on the dust jacket!
I cannot speak to Mr Sigel's significance in the realm of cultural criticism - I'm not sure if I have ever run across (though I probably have at some point without realizing it) any of his writing for Slate, The New Republic, Harper's or The Atlantic; though I do have some fuzzy memory of some hubub about his posing as an anonymous poster in the comments section of the New Republic website (which he mentions in the introduction here) offering up defenses of himself against vitriolic (anonymous) comments regarding an article he had written. Or something of the sort.
Anyway, all of this considered, and using this book as my main reference point, I just wish he was a better writer.
The prose in this book comes off as stale and whiny, and this has nothing to do with whether you agree or disagree with the content. Siegel does make some valid points about the dangers of completely giving over our lives to the digital realm at the risk of narrowing our viewpoints, deluding ourselves with consenting opinions, and losing our public personas and identity...not to mention our social communication skills.
Some of his arguments made me think about things in a slightly different way, but they did not, on the whole, really challenge me intellectually. Isn't that part of what a "cultural critic" is supposed to do? And no, I'm not really *that* smart.
Overall, what I took from this book is a few ideas that I might not have considered before, or might have forgotten to consider, and that I suppose is a good thing. But I think the arguments could have been much more convincing if they did not suffer from a sometimes bland and confusing ramble of writing. He spends an awful lot of time poking sticks at so called internet prophets and profiteers without offering any sort of engaging or coherent rebuttal. I found myself at times just wishing he was better at making his point, at least when I could figure out what said point was amidst all the noise.
-m
I cannot speak to Mr Sigel's significance in the realm of cultural criticism - I'm not sure if I have ever run across (though I probably have at some point without realizing it) any of his writing for Slate, The New Republic, Harper's or The Atlantic; though I do have some fuzzy memory of some hubub about his posing as an anonymous poster in the comments section of the New Republic website (which he mentions in the introduction here) offering up defenses of himself against vitriolic (anonymous) comments regarding an article he had written. Or something of the sort.
Anyway, all of this considered, and using this book as my main reference point, I just wish he was a better writer.
The prose in this book comes off as stale and whiny, and this has nothing to do with whether you agree or disagree with the content. Siegel does make some valid points about the dangers of completely giving over our lives to the digital realm at the risk of narrowing our viewpoints, deluding ourselves with consenting opinions, and losing our public personas and identity...not to mention our social communication skills.
Some of his arguments made me think about things in a slightly different way, but they did not, on the whole, really challenge me intellectually. Isn't that part of what a "cultural critic" is supposed to do? And no, I'm not really *that* smart.
Overall, what I took from this book is a few ideas that I might not have considered before, or might have forgotten to consider, and that I suppose is a good thing. But I think the arguments could have been much more convincing if they did not suffer from a sometimes bland and confusing ramble of writing. He spends an awful lot of time poking sticks at so called internet prophets and profiteers without offering any sort of engaging or coherent rebuttal. I found myself at times just wishing he was better at making his point, at least when I could figure out what said point was amidst all the noise.
-m
October 18, 2014
This book could have been a useful critique of the internet culture. Instead, its good points are hidden in the bile Siegel seems to have accumulated in writing for Slate and other online publications. I agree with him that internet stifles creativity, lacks discernment, and too frequently gives the ignorant the loudest voices. Frankly, though, there is a much richer vein to be mined here. Instead, Siegel sets up straw men about internet boosters' claims that blogs and user generated content enhance and defend democratic ideas. This is an easy target. A much more interesting analysis would be provide a Marxist critique of the internet: even on the most superficial analytical level the claims of internet equality cannot be supported by revealing who owns the means of production and who is providing the value. A more sophisticated analysis about exploitation, alienation, and consolidation would be even more enlightening. Siegel misses all this or covers it in tedious bile. This book would have benefited from a more compassionate perspective of how people are not helped by the internet and how the mantra of convenience is used to justify more sinister uses for technology.
For the TL;DR crowd: This book takes the view that given the choice, most people would do what everyone else is doing. Also, the internet needs better editing.
This book is a missed opportunity.
For the TL;DR crowd: This book takes the view that given the choice, most people would do what everyone else is doing. Also, the internet needs better editing.
This book is a missed opportunity.
March 16, 2009
Siegel mounts a bracing and effective critique of the Internet, web culture and its attendant effects (which he sees as largely negative) on our popular culture and democracy. In many respects, Siegel's argument updates and extends the critique of "market populism" developed by Thomas Frank and other writers associated with the political/cultural journal The Baffler in the 1990s, a time in which high-flying dot.com utopians appropriated the language of democracy, liberation, and revolution to sell their terrifying vision of extending the culture of advertising and commerce into all realms of social and personal life. In depicting "Web 2.0" applications such as blogs and social networking sites (like this one, which is run by Amazon.com) as exemplars of "connectivity" and democracy, the current crop of Internet boosters are putting old wine in new bottles, and the seemingly "participatory" nature of what is at heart an enormous consumer data-mining operation/popularity contest gives them an even more powerful and insidious medium through which to ply their wares. Populism and democracy are not the same thing, and history provides many examples of the former undermining the latter. To get an admittedly goofy but frighteningly plausible idea of where all of this might be taking us, check out Mike Judge's criminally underappreciated satirical film Idiocracy.
October 12, 2010
I enjoyed reading this book immensely. Siegel's prose is thoughtful, robust, and witty without being petty. He presents good arguments without stooping to 'zingers' against his opponents to support them.
Beyond the writing, I appreciated the ideas Siegel presents. I've not read many critiques of the internet, or even popular technology, and so it was refreshing to read someone with opposing ideas while myself, and everyone around me, seems happy to jump right into every new technology that comes our way.
Siegel disects online life and reveals that ultimately, it leads back to self. He draws a strong comparison (in the epilogue) to the similarities between internet usage and pornography (which will raise eyebrows, for sure) that gave me significant pause about my motives for being online at all.
I'm not one to dismiss the internet entirely, but I don't think Siegel is either. Though his book could use a few more positive examples of how the internet has helped our culture develop, his message is one that needs to be heard:
"We can either passively allow it [the internet] to obstruct our lives or guide it toward the fulfillment of its human promise. The choice is ours." (p. 11)
Recommended for high school level readers and up. Recommended especially for people who spend considerable amounts of time online everyday (like myself).
Beyond the writing, I appreciated the ideas Siegel presents. I've not read many critiques of the internet, or even popular technology, and so it was refreshing to read someone with opposing ideas while myself, and everyone around me, seems happy to jump right into every new technology that comes our way.
Siegel disects online life and reveals that ultimately, it leads back to self. He draws a strong comparison (in the epilogue) to the similarities between internet usage and pornography (which will raise eyebrows, for sure) that gave me significant pause about my motives for being online at all.
I'm not one to dismiss the internet entirely, but I don't think Siegel is either. Though his book could use a few more positive examples of how the internet has helped our culture develop, his message is one that needs to be heard:
"We can either passively allow it [the internet] to obstruct our lives or guide it toward the fulfillment of its human promise. The choice is ours." (p. 11)
Recommended for high school level readers and up. Recommended especially for people who spend considerable amounts of time online everyday (like myself).
April 9, 2008
A prophet, crying in the wilderness, warns us of the transvaluation of human experience, focus on self, and loss of knowledge (understanding as opposed to available information) occuring as a result of the burgeoning of the Internet, specifically the much-lauded Web 2.0 revolution. This piece is at sometimes a sermon, at others an eloquent reflective essay, and still at others a lament, with bristling anger barely concealed. Evidence is often scanty, but I am drawn to the important reflexive phimosophical questions Siegel raises here, and I think this book could and should be read in tandem with Jacoby's _The American Age of Unreason_. The two points are worthy of reflection and intelligent discussion: if America is becoming crasser, dumber, meaner, and even more narcissistic as a culture (Jacoby's thesis) then what role might our use of technology, most particularly the Internet, be playing in that process (Siegel's query). Among those he takes on: political bloggers, Wikipedia, all the Starbucks full of self-absorbed pseudo-intellectuals typing away silently at their laptops, Ipods in their ears.
January 31, 2008
I agree with all the conclusions of the book, but consider its argument fatally flawed. Yes, there's nothing good on the Internet, but Siegel's accusations--it's too commercial, too puerile, too crass, and the writing sucks--doesn't begin to deal with the problem. After all, every one of those charges can equally apply to publishing, comics, TV, theater, music and movies. Theodore Sturgeon said that 90 percent of everything is shit, and he was too generous. The problem with the Internet, is that it's 100% shit. If it were 10%, or 1% or even 0.001% good, neither Siegel nor I would have any cause to complain. But it's not. And I'm afraid it never will be. And the reason is much simpler than any of Siegel's arguments: the Internet is free (when it comes to content) and you get what you pay for. (Including what I just wrote.)
November 4, 2016
C'è una frase nell'epilogo di questo libro che mi ha colpito: "Se non sei chi sei, puoi essere chi vuoi". Vorrebbe significare che in Rete possiamo essere tutto o il contrario di tutto. Non è poi una grande scoperta. Nel game della vita ognuno di noi gioca la sua partita a modo suo. Tutti giochiamo con/contro tutti, partite singole, doppie o multiple. Quella più importante e forse decisiva è quella che giochiamo con noi stessi. L'autore di questo libro, che in fondo mi ha piuttosto deluso, non sembra avere molta fiducia in quella che lui chiama "ossessione", vale a dite la realtà digitale. Non ho ben capito se il suo "homo interneticus" deve resistere oppure no alla nuova era che stiamo vivendo. Dopo tutto, anche se volesse opporsi, sarebbe opposizione vana. Non siamo noi che dobbiamo cambiare il mondo. Sono gli uomini destinati ad essere cambiati dal mondo.
April 12, 2010
This is not technically a review, but a collection of words that bubbled out after I read this book.
If a person were to put all the interesting books filled with important questions about technology and society in one place, you would know to go someplace else to find this book.
There is something odd about the style of Siegel's writing. He presents some interesting ideas, like the application of Wittgenstein's "The world is all that is the case" to a discussion of isolation and the Internet age. Interesting, but the more I read, the more I asked myself if any of his ideas really mattered? Siegel manages to write well about the things that don't really matter enough to be considered.
In baseball, this is called a strike.
If a person were to put all the interesting books filled with important questions about technology and society in one place, you would know to go someplace else to find this book.
There is something odd about the style of Siegel's writing. He presents some interesting ideas, like the application of Wittgenstein's "The world is all that is the case" to a discussion of isolation and the Internet age. Interesting, but the more I read, the more I asked myself if any of his ideas really mattered? Siegel manages to write well about the things that don't really matter enough to be considered.
In baseball, this is called a strike.
June 23, 2008
Many excellent points beginning from old questions. Why do we idolize machines and the new? How does a technology change an epistemology? Why (o Karl) have we turned things into fetishes and people into things? And are we suffering from whiplash, just now, having embraced the internet in 10-some years when it took the printing press 300 years to make it from the rooms of scholars to those of readers? Also: what's the dealie with anonymous internet shit talking, stalking, living-through-screens etc.? Yes: a good and necessary discussion, but then the book begins to drag and drone and the marmish tone gives way.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews