Rating: 
Summary: Hard to read at times but overall a worthwhile book
Review: I tend to agree with the student's complaint that the book is like drinking sand, but overall it was worth wading through. Neil Postman's writing styles rambles quite a bit which is very distracting. Also, the reader has to assume that his seemingly random string of facts that he brings us to agrue his case are true. But once you get past that and stick with it, his occasional gems of insight show through (especially in chapter #9 entitled "Scientism"). Neil Postman's reminds me of an eccentric professor that you would have in college: while he is very perceptive and enlightening in the classroom environment, you soon realise when class is over that he is dressed as if he didn't know it was 1998.
Rating: 
Summary: A STUDENT'S VIEW OF POSTMAN'S TECHNOPOLY
Review: What was Neil Postman thinking? Having been forced to suffer through this book for a college class, I feel dirty and violated. It was one of the most boring books I have ever read and it was filled with some of the most ridiculous tripe my eyes have ever passed over. Avoid this book at all costs- reading Postman is like drinking a glass of sand.
Rating:
Summary: Social science as story-telling
Review: I heard Neil Postman on a radio interview for this book, several years before I read "Amusing Ourselves to Death," which I consider a better book. I went back and read Technopoly, because it is (for better or for worse) in many respects a classic in the field. After reading "Disappearance" and "Objections," I've found that Postman does a good job maintaining a basic premise or thesis throughout all of his books. In technopoly, Postman offers an interesting perspective on those who would "gaze on technology as a lover does on his beloved," known as technophiles, and those who are on the other end of the spectrum, I'll call them technocritics. This is a book that clearly defines the potential problems that we may incur if we blindly allow technology to answer society's most pressing questions. As a quantitative researcher, who recognizes that a qualitative approach is sometimes necessary to tease out the richness of data (perhaps later to be empirically tested), I really enjoyed Postman's perspectives in the chapter titled "Scientism." In this chapter, and throughout the whole book, Postman included wonderful little vignettes: "Freud once sent a copy of one of his books to Einstein, asking for his evaluation of it. Einstein replied that he thought the book was exemplary but was not qualified to judge its scientific merit." I see there are several other reviews, and so as not to make mine too long, let me end with this summation: Postman is a good writer and he's got lots of interesting threads of reasoning in this book. Not all of his arguments have a tremendous amount of backing, but you will gain valuable persepectives that you may not have thought of/about previously. From that standpoint, and the fact that his paperbacks aren't extremely expensive, I recommend adding it to your shopping basket.
Rating:
Summary: Good Riddance (He is dead)
Review: Neo-Luddite and misoneist Neil Postman lived in terror of the future because he could not contribute to it. In this book, which is his thinly veiled exposition on how great things were in the "good old days" (when slavery was common and a little scratch could give you an infection that could kill you, and the earth was believed to be flat, and human rights were only for the rich), Postman waxes moronic about how the abundance of information is somehow (he never actually gets to it exactly) harmful to society. What postman, in all his mediocrity, never understands is the parts of the "glut" of information are actually useful to people. Human understanding has reached depths of high complexity and with it go the requisite level of information. The processes of a single cell are enormously complicated, and that information is useful to a biologist, while possibly not useful to others. According to postman, all this information is just garbage - he can't see that all the information is simply a grouping of individual pieces of information - each useful to someone. Postman represents the most vile of human short-comings: the belief that your idea of the universe is all encompasing, and that no other information is relevant beyond that.
Rating: 
Summary: He's well versed and funny, but I wouldn't read this.
Review: Postman's Technopoly has some very interesting, well written ideas, but the problem with Postman is his refusal to recognize the advantages of technology, he's simply too one sided to be useful. When reading Postman, you get this feeling that he really wants everyone to go back to the Stone Age. It also rubbed me the wrong way when he talks about how technology has unexpected consequences, and then makes a huge deal about how we should restrict technology because of that reason. The flaw in this peticular argument is that everything has unexpected consequences. It's like saying you shouldn't leave your house because you might die in a car accident as an unexpected consequence.
In conclusion, he has some interesting ideas, but this guy isn't to be taken too seriously. His logic is questionable in some places and he's way too one sided to be useful.
Rating:
Summary: Utter Rubbish
Review:
This book is utter rubbish. It is carelessy written, its arguments are logically shaky to say the least, and it contains glaring factual errors.
I was all the more disappointed because I had previously read Postman's excellent book "Amusing Ourselves to Death". Furthermore, Postman's topic in "Technopoly" is a serious one and deserves a serious and lucid treatment which, alas, it does not get here.
As I read this book I became more and more exasperated by its shoddy thinking, but the "last straw" which made me bang the book shut in disgust was Postman's statement that a Turing Machine is a computer which can pass a Turing Test.
Rating: 
Summary: An essential tool for understanding change
Review: I read this book years ago, but its insights continually help me understand the changes taking place around us. Postman's essential point is that technological change-and he's talking about all such change, from the Stone Age on-inevitably brings about changes in culture. These changes are both profound and subtle, so Postman offers a wealth of examples from different eras. The bigger the technological change, the more dramatic the cultural shift is. He's not, repeat not, against technological development per se. He simply asks that you look at it and try to see the changes as they happen in the hope of mitigating the inevitable downsides. New technologies involve what he called "Faustian bargains"-they give you something, but they also take something away. I have to say that I was very taken aback by the number of people here who really didn't seem to address or, frankly, understand, the main point of this fine and valuable book.
Rating:
Summary: Well written, poorly argued and self contradictory
Review: Having read several of Postman's books I find this to be the one of his most poorly argued. The same issues are presented as in his better books ("Amusing Ourselves...," "Disappearance of Childhood") but written as a manifesto of what technology --Technopoly-- has brought to society. Unfortunately his examples end up being self contradictory, often to hilarious effect by easily being read against his message. This is shows in how argues against "experts" and "specialization" while he himself is a prime example. Many other examples are show that he's no "wiser" than technophiles since he uses many examples at "face value" --since they were in print-- as more valid than those shown presented by computers. The highest irony would be anyone reading or writing reviews such as this one --which greatly contradicts his early, and strong dismissal of computers. Such approaches are not mentioned or conceived that there would any way for people to communicate or to respond to his work such as these reviews. Anyone reading reviews "praising" his work should ask HOW of IF they could do this BEFORE computers and the internet. Many of his strongest examples are misplaced. A prime example is to raise the TELESCOPE to the same level of importance as print and mechanical (pg 28). He cites the telescope, not the facts it revealed, as undermining religious authority. Even though, on the SAME PAGE, he admits Copernicus' work was done without it. He does not suggest that circulation of that information, as with Luther's writing, had far more impact on Christianity. He seems to suggest that, if not for the telescope, the earth would remain at the center of the universe thanks to the Catholic Church. Given that this book was written before the rise of the web it is clear that he should realize, especially starting his work with the Phaedrus, that he's not in a position to crown himself a "wise king." This is most clearly that many of his concerns are misplaced and address media that are still in period of flux. Bottom line Postman is as his best when writing about the past and media effects where he can undergird his opinions with the writings of others, such as McLuhan. When doing so, his presentation is clearer and more accessible than McLuhan. Unfortunately the more he pontificates about the future the more his ignorance of technology, discomfort with change, and his desire to return to the idyllic 1800's clouds his rhetoric showing (quoting the Phaedrus, pg 4) "... the reputation for it [wisdom] without the reality."
Rating:
Summary: Provocative, often disagreable, but definitely worth reading
Review: The overall message of the book is very profound and I think Western society would be better off if more people have read it. Postman is also a great writer who will no doubt keep you entertained. There is one catch: The book seems to have a number of claims that I thought were factually incorrect, plus a bunch of others that just seem to go overboard ideologically. Overall, the argument is far from "water tight". In the end, though, I was convinced and felt that the book was definitely worth the time. Plus, personally I enjoy reading books that keep you on your tows. Based on this, I recommend this book to those readers who can handle an author that they do not always 100% agree with, readers who enjoy mentally "debating" an author. If you tend to toss a book the moment you find a flaw in the argument (or two, or three), this might not be the best book for you.
Rating:
Summary: Dated but very relevant, sobering
Review: Cultural critic Neil Postman goes after what he calls technolopy which is essentially a "self-justifying, self-perpetuating system wherein technology of every kind is cheerfully granted
sovereingty over social institutions and national life." Postman is not by any means an luddite but he wants us to be aware of how technology has shaped our society,and epistemology. Often not for the better in many respects. We live in a society that does not use machines but is more and more used by them. It shapes our world view. Postman attempts to trace it's effect on us from the beginning. Overall he does a fine a job. Although a easy read many of the topics require closer scrutiny and thinking. Which is good, he wants you to think about whats happening not just accept what he has to say. In one chapter he roasts the medical industry's infatuation with new technology while the doctors neglect their patients. Patients invariably are reduced to slabs of meat on a assembly line. He makes the salient point that information is not understanding, which is usually ignored by most promoters of technopoly. Another chapter deals with 'scientism' which is science distorted into a intolerant fundamentalist belief system and its effects on our society. This chapter is his most humorous as he disects some the masters of the obvious(Dilbert like scientists who think they have discovered something profound but what most people on the street already know)Like people are afraid of death and that open minded people tend to be open minded. That's right Ph.d's have done studies to prove these notions! Perhaps a better title for this chapter would have been "the marching morons of science." The last chapter deals on how to resist technology in our daily lives. Which he sums ups in several points(not all of them are listed in this review). Though it's not enough in my opinion, considering technolopy's corrosive influence on people and cultures throughout the world. Things need to be addressed at the nation policy level if anything is to be really changed. * who do not regard the aged as irrelevant * who admire technological ingenuity but do not think it represents the highest form of human achievement. * who are at least, suspicious of the idea of progress, and who do not confuse information with understanding. * who have freed themselves from the belief in the magical power of numbers, do not regard calculations as an adequate substitute for judgement or as synonym for truth. The book is a good starting point to informing oneself on the minuses of technology. Though dated much of his observations are still relevant and a good antidote to high tech mavens like Kelly, Moravec and their ilk. Another good book is David Ehrenfeld's "Beginning Again" written from a profession biologist POV. Or better yet, get Wendell Berry's tract "Life is a miracle" which a rather thorough disection of technolopy's epistemology and what lies beneath it's pretty public facade.
| 
