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

As one reads some of the other reviews, I've noticed a tendancy to say "but the author doesn't say this or that" and I think they are missing the point. There is a generally accepted rule that video games and tv are mindless. That they have gotten "worse", that they corrupt moral values and are "bad" for you. His position is that these arguments are false. He makes the cases (quite convincingly) that the complexity of tv and video games nowdays vs 20 or 30 years ago helps children to think in complex ways that children of the 60's and 70's did not. He thinks this is beneficial. He is not saying that playing them all day every day is better, in fact he says that children should be given a love for reading because reading books is important. I think where people go awry is when they talk about the other stuff he didn't mention. How society itself may be more complex, how spending that much time in front of a tv screen or computer screen takes time away from other things. That may all well be true, but that's irelevant to the issue at hand. There is a generally acepted negative view of tv and video games and he makes a counter argument. Period. I notice that most of the negative reviews do not dispute anything he says.

I have seen a few reviews here that utilize arguments against Johnson that he never makes. Ironically, the same opinions expressed here are exactly what Johnson is attempting to address. Perhaps it is a testament towards failing to approach this close-minded audience that they have not seen at least some light in his argument. Johnson even goes so far as to claim that he is making no to very little argument concerning the content of these media formats. He is passing very little judgement concerning whether watching a supposedly violent show like 24 is more valuable (content-wise) than reading the supposed literary greats. What he does attempt to do is analyze the cognitive content of these media forms. In essence he is not pursuing an analysis of whether your mental work out will make you a better person, but is merely examining the quality of that workout in terms of exercising the muscle (or in this case brain) matter it is intended to exercise. He comments on some of the exact issues questioned by people on these forums. He is not trying to say that today's media types usurp the greats of the past, he is merely indicating that the lower echelons have risen dramatically. Our greats (both in media and intellectuals) are still on par with those of the past, but the average is what has seen such a dramatic rise. So no, this is not what we should aspire to; raising our dredges above the dredges of the past, but the mere fact that the lowest denominator has risen does illustrate a positive trend. Should we be so unhappy that although greatness may not have risen, more people are capable of attaining something close to it? Is that a failure of society? This book was an extremely interesting read and made some very valid points. It is not a defense of the lazy couch potato by any means. It is a defense of the media that person is absorbing and how we should not dismiss new forms as unequal because they do not stack up to greats of the past. There is much to be seen here for someone interested in our current culture and it may help you realize that some of your own tendencies are actually a development resulting from this increased complexity.

Steven Johnson relishes his role as provocateur as he tries to convince his readers that mesmerizing video games, trash TV, and web surfing are making us smarter. Even the title of the book seems chosen to raise skeptical eyebrows. Of course, he doesn't mean *everything* bad, so it was a relief when I eventually discovered that he finds some junk TV to be utterly without merit. Nonetheless, Johnson's message is radical enough. The basic argument is that activities like video games and even reality TV shows require complex mental processing by the viewer which can improve general cognitive functioning. For example, many contemporary TV dramas, according to Johnson, require viewers to retain information over multiple episodes and piece together story fragments in order to follow the action. Reality programs require mastery of intricate social networks. Dealing with all this is supposed to make us smarter. The actual evidence for these benefits is thin. Johnson draws his main support from a phenomenon called the "Flynn effect" which refers to data showing that IQ in industrialized countries has increased about 3 points per decade over the last 60 years or so. He says this is due in part to recreational activities like TV and video games. Of course, it could also be due to rising ozone in the atmosphere or cosmic rays from alien spacecraft. The book is well written and thought provoking. Johnson presents a surprising and possibly important hypothesis that will undoubtedly stimulate serious social science research. It is way too early to tell whether he is right or not, but he has performed a valuable service by articulating such an interesting hypothesis so well. I recommend the book.

Undoubtedly, Steven Johnson's editors thought the title "Everything Bad is Good for You" would be provocative, but unfortunately, it serves to reduce a thoughtful and insightful look at culture and learning to a sound bite. Johnson's book, much like his previous effort, "Mind Wide Open" explores the connections between popular culture and how we learn. His conclusion, reduced to shorthand as "The Sleeper Curve" (a Woody Allen movie reference) is actually a serious look at the influences of culture as expressed on television and video games on our cognitive abilities. The book's central thesis is that rather than a race to the bottom, TV shows like "24" or "Survivor" and children's movies like "Finding Nemo" are actually challenging us and our children in more complex patterns of thought and problem solving. Even the tasks involved in a video game like "Grand Theft Auto" (sexual opportunities aside) are tapping our problem solving abilities in new and challenging ways. Few writers today have Johnson's ability to take complex social trends and make them understandable to the layman. Like Malcolm Gladwell's "Blink" and "The Tipping Point," Johnson is able to provide a glimpse into the newly developing field of Consilience: the mapping of concepts from different disciplines such as economics, media, sociology and neurology. A must read for parents, teachers and anyone old enough to remember what Marshall McLuhan actually wrote in "Understanding Media."

Very good book, written from the perspective of a teenaged gamer made good. Johnson played games as a kid, baseball strategy games, as well as Dungeons and Dragons, and one can detect a certain bias in his outlook. However, his statistical references and footnotes make this book a scholarly look at popular culture - in particular movies, TV and videogames - and is a nice refutation of the "our culture is going into the toilet" crowd. Johnson argues - to me, convincingly - that even though modern mass market entertainment may appear "dumbed down", it really isn't, and that at a basic physical level, our brains are being made to work harder, get more exercise if you will, and develop higher cognitive functions as a result. A very complex book written in easy to read language with convincing data to back up the arguments - disguised in a very palatable dialogue that doesn't seem like science at all. He even takes Marshall McLuhan to task on at least one of his conclusions - very daring, and in this case, pays off. Johnson does miss out on one or two things - the ascendance of message boards is glossed over, or perhaps incorporated into "Internet" "email" and "IMs" in the discussion of why males watch about 1/5 as much TV as they did as little as five years ago. As a fellow who grew up playing Advanced Squad Leader (arguably a set of rules even more dense than AD & D), I could relate to his argument that kids will learn horribly complex procedures in the name of fun (as he did with his baseball games and D & D sets) and may very well be better for it. Overall, even if one disagrees with Johnson's arguments or conclusions, the book is fun to read; brings back memories for those who grew up in the 70s and 80s, presents logical arguments, well constructed, easy to understand, and supported by corroborating evidence - including scientific testimony about how the physical (hi Shannon) human brain works. Would love to read a rebuttal, though Johnson has personally sold me over hook, line and sinker. If nothing else, a comforting book amidst doom and gloom prophesies about the fate of our intellect in the hands of TV producers. Well done, Mr. Johnson.