4 Stars for the Book “Die Google-Falle”
I was aware that my book, “Die Google-Falle” (“The Google-Trap”) will have a polarizing effect on the public – even whilst writing it. I was also certain that there will be critics – but I am still surprised by some of the too subjective and unfair reviews.
It gives me great pleasure that one of the most important reviewers on Amazon, Dr. Werner Fuchs (who has written more than 1486 online reviews), gave me a good critique and concluded with a rating of four stars. I consider this a distinction, allowing me to conclude how important the topic online-privacy is and how urgently a Google-warning and list of its true colors was needed.
Dr. Werner Fuchs’ review:
There is no protective measure against conspiracy theorists
Whether we consider the moon landing, the death of a princess or 9/11, whoever scents a conspiracy, cannot be reached by rational arguments. But there are also conspiracy theorists that intend to amend a conspiracy theory to others, allowing themselves to maintain a certain view of the world. These types of critics gave Gerald Reischl’s book just the minimum rating. Their alacrity made them even write an Amazon-discussion – yet they are unaware of the significance of objective research required for writing a book. And even though these online-rants seldom have any significance, I strongly oppose censorship in any form. It is simply the price that we have to pay for a diversity of opinion. And now to the actual review.
The journalist and author Gerald Reischl dared to question Google. He was aware that this will most probably spur a lot of discussion. Whether one considers a sports-club or company, a true fan is characterized by his lack of neutrality and objectivity. I also suffer under this condition – the ZSC Lions ARE the best ice hockey club, there is no question about that. But Gerald Reischl doesn’t solely want to highlight the downsides of Google. He simply looks at those aspects of the company that haven’t been considered before, concludes on what they really mean and publicized his results. And if he isn’t the first to do so, that’s even better! Since Google has chosen my birthplace and hometown as its European capital, I have been affected by the overwhelming Google-euphoria. All Google critics are criticized. But I am also affected every time I find out how little the Google-fans know about the company. One does not have to be a paranoid privacy-advocate to consider the potential dangers of the concentration of (economic) power. One does not have to disconnect from the Internet or eradicate all mobile phones after reading this book – in fact, nothing has to be done. But one may see the online world with other eyes. And this is precisely what is expected from serious journalists.
I have asked myself how the book’s contents could be presented in a more attractive fashion to the young audience that should read it – even though Gerald Reischl is excellent at writing in the casual tone of modern journalism, his book is not one of the most entertaining and exciting I have read in the past weeks. The lack of pictures, modern layout features and changes in contextual rhythm make the book a rather tedious journey through 190 monotonous pages. This creates a potential danger that the most important messages of the book will never reach the internet-users that will define a lot of our future.
Conclusion: Next to all optimistic enshrinements of Google, controversial books like this one from Gerald Reischl are absolutely necessary. Some may put it off as all-words-and-no-content, but I liked it, even though its message could be mediated through a better presentation. But the lack of good literary presentation cannot be equated with a lack of content.
