I liked "The World is Flat", even if I was rolling my eyes a third of the time. Friedman definitely lays it on thick. He presents common ideas as if they are breakthrough concepts, he takes three pages to build up a simple idea, and he repeats himself over and over. At the same time, he makes assumptions that are clearly open to debate without justification.

My difference with this reviewer, however, is that I also think there's plenty to enjoy and think about it this book. I think "The World is Flat" would have made a wonderful 40 page essay - perhaps the kind that gets printed in two parts in the Atlantic.

So my objection is that a 40 page essay was stretched into a 400 page book, whereas I think the reviewer would still object even to the 40 page essay I have in mind.