I'm only two and a half chapters in, and I'm already getting tired of it. I think that your observation about his 'updating' is spot on. Also, I really can't stand the way that he keeps extolling his own expertise. I understand doing so in the foreword...MAYBE even the first chapter...but he keeps going and going and going.

Repeating something over and over is called anchoring. That's why, by your own admission, it's committed to your memory.

As for me, I didn't take as much issue with writing style as I did with the examples provided-especially with anecdotes from his personal life. He's a pathetic, unlikable autist with a huge sense of intellectual self worth.

However, his choice of calling the "influencers" the way he did is totally justified in the context of his argument. The main point of his book was that it's COMPLIANCE, not the influence itself that is our enemy. Therefore, calling them compliance practitioners makes perfect sense.

Furthermore, repeating a point over and over again is a good way at making it stuck. Many writers of non-fiction do that and, to be honest, he didn't go even half as far as some of them.

He's actually a very nice man. Humorous, caring and the best at what he does. He teaches at the university where I received my degree.

While I did not like this book, I think it should be credited that the man is an expert. I have read some of his articles and he has no problem being concise and intelligent. He has made this easy for the public to understand and relate to. By the way, I gave the book two stars, so I'm not defending the book. Just the person.