Negative Positive
Title: Double-speak
Review: I just heard the author speak on NPR and he is phenomenally dishonest. He claims to seek "clarity" and "objectivity" in language, and yet every turn-of-phrase he wants to promote ("gaming" instead of "gambling"; "energy exploration" instead of "drilling," and so on), betray his right-wing political biases. The irony is that he bases all his Orwellian newspeak on carefully skewed polls. Where's the "objectivity" in that? The key is in the subtitle of this book. He is mostly concerned with the political impact of his proposed terminology, and he crafts that terminology to manipulate public opinion in favor of conservative agendas. It would be much more palatable if he were simply honest about that agenda, instead of professing his supposed apolticism.
Is the review positive or negative? 