Rating: 
Summary: Yes, something is definitely awry
Review: I agree with the other reviewer who suggested that there's something a little fishy about the spread of reviews. They seem to range from the strongly derogatory to the sickeningly sweetly in favour.It's about time the spin-doctors fessed up. This doesn't need to be another "Blair Witch Project" or "American Psycho" where the majority of the internet-based activity was from paid provocateurs rather than "real" people. About the book? I think it presents some interesting ideas... perhaps a little too much in the gee-whiz vein of the magazine background of the author, but generally worth a read.
Rating: 
Summary: Implications beyond the obvious
Review: The Tipping Point has that air about it of a book that you will refer back to in 2 years and realize how fundamentally it has shifted your thinking and your behavior. I strongly recommend this for marketing and PR professionals as a guide to thinking about how messages spread.
Rating: 
Summary: I LOVED this book
Review: dozens of fascinating stories and theories about why ideas travel the way they do: why one idea will die an obscure death, while another--maybe no better, intrinsically, than the first--will catch fire and inspire enormous change. we tend to think that ideas spread in some mysterious, unpredictable way, but it turns out that even national trends can often be traced back to just a few people with strange, unusual, wonderful qualities, or to tiny, clever adjustments in how a message is communicated. there's a terrifically interesting chapter on how Sesame Street was created (communications theorists scrutinized every minute of the show to see what held kids' attention and what didn't), another one on why attempts to prevent teenage smoking have all failed, and a third part about how even something we think of as entirely private and self-determined--suicide--can in fact spread through a society like a virus. can't recommend this book highly enough.
Rating: 
Summary: Condescending, badly-written, avoid, avoid, avoid. A void.
Review: As another reviewer pointed out, the central tenet of this book is no great insight for anyone who has much knowledge of mathematics or science generally. His points are on the whole so obvious that I fail to see why a book needed to be written to explain them. Essentially, if you want to start a "social epidemic" you should: a) make sure you attract people who are either persuasive, know lots of different people, or are "mavens" - enthusiasts in a particular field who have a lot of knowledge and therefore influence among non-enthusiasts. Imagine that - persuasive people are persuasive! And people who know lots of people help make connections between them! Well I never. b) make your message "sticky" ie memorable - precisely how is not specified c) make sure the "context" is right, in some unspecified way. All this is ridiculously obvious. As for the style of writing, take this nauseatingly condescending quote: writing about Paul Revere's ride , Gladwell informs us "news of the British march did not come by fax, or by means of a group e-mail. It wasn't broadcast on the nightly news, surrounded by commercials." Just fancy that! Lots more examples of similar waffle.
Rating:
Summary: chatty and plausible, but where's the evidence ?
Review: actually, I liked the book as a mental stimulant, but found the know-it-all tone both naive and pompous. Three personality types are posited, Communicators, Persuaders, and Mavens. What hard evidence does the author have to demonstate the validity of these categories ? Did he just dream them up because they sounded like good copy, or is his work based on well researched personality theory ? No mention is made of chaos theory, which provides a mathematical perspective on non linear phenomena (i.e. "tipping"). Whither the numbers? Next we are intoduced to the elusive concept of "stickyness". This chapter needs considerable thought and extra effort before it qualifies serious work. How is stickyness to be measured or defined in a mobile adult population (as opposed to children responding to distraction scales in artificial settings) ? Are we talking about long term memory potentiation, associational webbing, or what, exactly ? Does this somehow related to Weber's "charisma" ? Then onward to behavioral cueing, or "the power of context". A good intoduction to the subject, but again, doesn't refine its gradients. At what point does an environmental cue initiate a behavioral change ? How does a subject read an environmental cue ? Is a broken window all it takes, or do you need other elements as well, such as presence of debris, or lack of lighting ? So on and so forth. Suggestion from the peanut gallery: go back, know your subject better, spend some time with first rate sociologists, and rewrite the book.
Rating:
Summary: Intriguing, edifying
Review: This was a thoroughly interesting study. Gladwell presented ideas as epidemics and explained the parellels between the two, detailing the conditions under which concepts become fashionable (under which they explode to infect the masses). This refreshing author has led me to view trends in a whole new light, wondering how some such argot, fashion, or idea du jour crossed from an individual or small group into the conscience of the masses. When perusing non fiction, I most always seek a book to sate a curiosity. But on taking the sagacious advice of another, I came to this book, which studies a process that I've entirely taken for granted and didn't have the cleverness to query...the process in which ideas spread. You should read it, it doesn't take long and the knowledge imparted comes in quite handy at cocktail parties.
Rating:
Summary: A good solid read
Review: The subtleties and intricacies of human relations are illustrated (not scientifically explained) here through a careful detailing of successful and unsuccessful attempts to influence groups of people. Unlike many current affairs books, this one gets meatier and more engaging as it progresses. Professional communicators, managers and parents will benefit immediately from reading this. People may decry its obviousness or its common sense, but couldn't we use more common sense?
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Read
Review: For those that like to learn about how people act, react and think this book is a fascinating read. I'm not much on non-novels, I usually get about 1/3 to 1/2 the way through, get the point and skip to the conclusion chapter. But with this book,I couldn't put it down. Also, it is such an easy read that it is easy to retain the material. It keeps you thinking. I liked it so much I bought two more for my friends!
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Perspectives, Fascinating Stories
Review: I first heard about this book through a local radio show and was immediately fascinated with the way principles of epidemiology were being used to explain social phenomena. I found the stories and the discussion very engaging and the principles he argues for have changed the way I view things. I don't buy everything that is said in this book and do think that, at times, they are thinly supported; but the ideas the author sets forth are worth pondering over - especially if you are someone who is curious about how change begins and how it works, how ideas are spread through society and what role people have in creating change.
Rating:
Summary: Intellectual, but not academic, thank goodness.
Review: The Tipping Point, which explains social and cultural trends in epidemiological terms, is incredibly exciting. I read it all the way through in one sitting, and I usually have a hard time sticking with with social science. I'm sick of hearing from people who accuse him of a lack of rigor, and I suspect that most people who do so are frustrated academics who envy Gladwell's success. That's the thing about Malcolm Gladwell; he doesn't pretend to be an academic, and his writing is infinitely better for it. He is a journalist who obviously pays close attention to what's happening inside the university, and he takes what he knows about academic work and applies it to cultural phenomena. He's the only writer I can think of who explains social-science research in any interesting way, much less in a manner that ties together patterns of crime and children's television watching habits. If you've read his stuff in the New Yorker, you've probably had the reaction to one of his articles, "wow, that's cool" (for example, his recent article about the role of a religious Catholic in the development of the Pill, which is not included in the book)...what's to criticize about a book that makes you question your assumptions about the way cultural ideas move, and at the same time keeps a quick, exciting pace?
|
