Buy it now from Amazon

Everything Bad is Good for You

Steven Johnson

Riverhead Hardcover

• List price: $23.95
• Lowest new price: $7.60
• Lowest used price: $4.96

Average customer rating:

A skeptic is convinced

Johnson's argument, as initially counter intuitive as it would seem, is thoroughly backed up and virtually impossible to refute once you've finished reading it. Comparing the complexity of various TV shows of today (e.g., The Sopranos, 24) to TV shows of yesterday (Dragnet, Hill Street Blues), Johnson makes a very compelling case that much of today's TV is much more cognitively challenging than yesterday's. The fact that he didn't touch on certain shows (e.g., The Wire, Lost) actually makes his case even more compelling, as he was able to make his case without them.

His discussion of today's games provides more compelling evidence of his thesis. Anyone who even has a passing familiarity with a game such as SimCity or the like can tell you how mind bogglingly complex it can become, and without clear rules of the road for progressing, the player of such games must engage his intellect not only to solve problems, but to decide first on an approach to solving such problems.

Johnson also delves a little bit into the "why", and this might be the only place where I think his argument might be flawed. I don't necessarily buy his "most repeatable" thesis here, and instead thing that the proliferation of new forms of media (e.g., internet), and the expansion of other forms (e.g., the growth of cable and satellite TV) creates fragmentation due to the increased number of choices. Accordingly, producers of games and TV shows have to strive even harder to differentiate themselves from their competition, forcing them to be more creative while not playing to the lowest common denominator. However, it should be noted that the "why" of Johnson's argument is negligible; this book is more about the "what."

It's also important to note that Johnson doesn't necessarily argue that today's pop culture is necessarily better in an artistic sense, nor does he ignore some of the seamier aspects thereof. Furthermore, Johnson also notes the decline of reading, and laments the loss of certain intellectual skills that can be derived from following a narrative for several hundred pages.

However, after reading this book, even someone who initially approached it with skepticism like myself would be unable to refute his argument that much of today's pop culture provides significantly greater cognitive challenges to its consumers than that of even 20 years ago.

Recommended - especially to anyone who believes that pop culture today is solely focused on dumbing people down.

A must-read for anyone interested in learning and teaching.

As an instructional designer for online learning (a profession that didn't exist when I got my degrees) I see immediate connections between Johnson's conclusions and the real world of higher education. We know from a multitude of online research studies that people don't read the same way online that they do when reading a book. Yet we constantly see teachers trying to mold the new online medium into the shape of the old analog one. Doesn't work. Knowing how today's students' learning abilities have been shaped (and how popular culture has influenced it) is critical if we are to effectively educate students for the future.

Read the book to the end. Johnson makes a strong case for the value of learning via both the new, more complex (and more engaging) media as well as books. He doesn't promote the new at the expense of the traditional. It's just that the traditional doesn't need as much defending among those who have not yet fully transitioned into the digital realities of today. And since those digital realities are constantly evolving and new media constantly emerging, I'll look forward to Johnson's future analyses on this subject.

Robert Kalinowski's Review of Steven Johnson's Everything Bad Is Good for You

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R3J7RZQ33Q4XLN Robert Kalinowski's review was made as part of a critical review assignment for the Spring 2009 Economics of Technology seminar at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, taught by Art Diamond. (The course syllabus stated that part of the critical review assignment consisted of the making of a video recording of the review, and the posting of the review to Amazon.)

The Modern World Isn't So Bad

It has been typical of the mainstream (read "old guard") to look down upon new popular entertainment technologies. Movies, TV, video games, the Internet--all have received criticism about how they ruin the mind unlike, say, more classic entertainments like reading. While Mr. Johnson acknowledges various weaknesses of these media, his thesis is that they are not the mindless (bread and) circuses of the modern age. In fact, these entertainments are making us smarter.

In his section on video and computer games, for example, he notes some of the same results that Marc Prensky covers in more depth in his book, Don't Bother Me, Mom. I'm Learning. Namely, that for a game to be successful, it must stimulate the brain's learning response by keeping the challenge slightly above the ability of the user and provide help along the way when necessary. It is the complexity of the modern game with it's intricacy, embedded problems, and cooperative aspects that keep a gamer interested, not the supposed appeal of flashy graphics, speed, and puerile story lines.

In the section on TV, Johnson illustrates how the complexity of story lines has increased a hundred-fold since the beginnings of the medium. He points out that the most popular shows of today do things that older shows would never do: assume background knowledge of the audience, leave out crucial pieces of information to be discovered later (or forever left unanswered), follow a huge cast of characters through multiple intersecting plot lines that arc over an entire season (or more) as opposed to a single episode. (Compare Dragnet to Starsky & Hutch to Hill Street Blues to The Sopranos.)

He completes his argument by noting that modern technologies are rewiring the brain and, in many cases, that's a positive thing. Most everyone's basic abilities in things like pattern recognition and problem-solving have been increasing steadily for the past century. Many school-taught abilities may be stagnant, but many underlying fundamentals are improving, thanks to the challenges of modern media.

Of course, like anything, too much technology use can be a bad thing. So can too much reading, as my parents constantly reminded me when I was a kid, devouring books when they would have rather me be outside playing. The point is, instead of highlighting the worst of today with the best of the past--why is it that no one ever compares The Sopranos to the thousands of forgotten novels of the 19th century?--we should compare apples to apples. Not only, as Mr. Johnson points out, our best to their best, but also our worst to their worst. Modern technology still comes out ahead. When I see my mother downloading digital pictures of her grandchildren, when I see the positive social networking with distant friends and relatives I've done through Facebook, when I see the things that can be learned from 500 cable channels, I can't help but agree.

XBOX 360 is also good for you.

Johnson's arguments are compelling at times and presented in a way that someone who rarely reads could follow. The idea that the more computer games you play the better you will be at problem solving has some merit, but the book falls far short of giving overwhelming evidence it is good for you.
Some of the arguments are like some diets, it is hard to believe that you are actually going to lose weight by eating eggs and bacon all day. There is no doubt that playing computer games will enhance some skills, but not to the extent that Johnson is proposing. Overall it is an interesting read.