# data[].attributes.headline
"So whenever a new technology emerges, we should ask: Who will win and who will lose out as a result"(2018)? This is a question written in the review from another book that, to the reader, mirrors Wachter-Boettcher's book: Tim Hartford Fifty Inventions that Shaped the Modern Economy. "This book is an uncomfortable read, and it should be. It’s painful to hold up the mirror and see just how badly we’re falling short"(2018). The review blatantly describes the books as uncomfortable to read. The writer in this review mentions that their own love of technology is due to the "reach" and "magic" that is described in the text. The review does not mention much weakness, but that is no surprise to me as the reader in this example seems to be enchanted by current technology. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"So whenever a new technology emerges, we should ask: Who will win and who will lose out as a result"(2018)? This is a question written in the review from another book that, to the reader, mirrors Wachter-Boettcher's book: Tim Hartford Fifty Inventions that Shaped the Modern Economy. "This book is an uncomfortable read, and it should be. It’s painful to hold up the mirror and see just how badly we’re falling short"(2018). The review blatantly describes the books as uncomfortable to read. The writer in this review mentions that their own love of technology is due to the "reach" and "magic" that is described in the text. The review does not mention much weakness, but that is no surprise to me as the reader in this example seems to be enchanted by current technology. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://timkadlec.com/read/2018/technically-wrong/

# data[].attributes.headline
"Technically Wrong includes incredible, heart-pumping, rage-inducing stories of racial discrimination, gender inequality, sexual harassment, and much more"(2017). This review was by another reader who was not in the tech industry. After reading this review, I began to make the connection between people reviewing the book who were not in the tech industry and people who were. People who were not seemed to focus more on the book's message and less on the lack of solutions mentioned in the end. The reader in this review mentions that the book is unputdownable, which I appreciated as I felt the same way. It was intriguing to read about. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Technically Wrong includes incredible, heart-pumping, rage-inducing stories of racial discrimination, gender inequality, sexual harassment, and much more"(2017). This review was by another reader who was not in the tech industry. After reading this review, I began to make the connection between people reviewing the book who were not in the tech industry and people who were. People who were not seemed to focus more on the book's message and less on the lack of solutions mentioned in the end. The reader in this review mentions that the book is unputdownable, which I appreciated as I felt the same way. It was intriguing to read about. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://webdesignernotebook.com/reviews/technically-wrong-book-needed-start-year/

# data[].attributes.headline
"A must read for anyone who designs digital experiences, and doesn’t want to be an inadvertent dude-bro"(2017). I especially appreciated reading this blog review of the book. The sarcasm and candor reminded me of the author, and I could tell why the blogger supported her so strongly. "The parting thought of this book is that good intentions aren’t enough. The implications and cascading consequences of seemingly minor design and development decisions need to be thought through, critically evaluated, and handled with grace, dignity and maturity"(2017). I especially liked reading the blogger's parting thought. She took the focus off of the lack of explicit remedies and put the focus on what the author meant with her writing. I think if we look at the text as an initiation of more or an introductory warning then the weakness becomes less noticeable. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"A must read for anyone who designs digital experiences, and doesn’t want to be an inadvertent dude-bro"(2017). I especially appreciated reading this blog review of the book. The sarcasm and candor reminded me of the author, and I could tell why the blogger supported her so strongly. "The parting thought of this book is that good intentions aren’t enough. The implications and cascading consequences of seemingly minor design and development decisions need to be thought through, critically evaluated, and handled with grace, dignity and maturity"(2017). I especially liked reading the blogger's parting thought. She took the focus off of the lack of explicit remedies and put the focus on what the author meant with her writing. I think if we look at the text as an initiation of more or an introductory warning then the weakness becomes less noticeable. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://blog.kathyreid.id.au/2017/11/01/technically-wrong/

# data[].attributes.headline
"Wachter-Boettcher wants us to take away a deeper understanding of just how powerful our work can be. But tech is also limited if you’re only coming at it from a technical perspective. People building tech need to include the emotional, social, political ramifications of their work, she said.“Because, the way that technology has evolved in the past decade or so particularly, the technical really touches everything else that we do,” she said, noting the current U.S. Congressional investigation into 2016 political campaign-smear ads Facebook ran on behalf of Russia"(2017). This review is unique because it includes an interview with Wachter-Boettcher. The interview helps to understand her motives behind the suggestions made in the book. She ends her interview by saying that public pressure is needed to initiate change. So then, was her book just the initiation? I am still left wondering what she wants us to do with her suggestions. However, I appreciated reading the interview included in this review. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Wachter-Boettcher wants us to take away a deeper understanding of just how powerful our work can be. But tech is also limited if you’re only coming at it from a technical perspective. People building tech need to include the emotional, social, political ramifications of their work, she said.“Because, the way that technology has evolved in the past decade or so particularly, the technical really touches everything else that we do,” she said, noting the current U.S. Congressional investigation into 2016 political campaign-smear ads Facebook ran on behalf of Russia"(2017). This review is unique because it includes an interview with Wachter-Boettcher. The interview helps to understand her motives behind the suggestions made in the book. She ends her interview by saying that public pressure is needed to initiate change. So then, was her book just the initiation? I am still left wondering what she wants us to do with her suggestions. However, I appreciated reading the interview included in this review. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://thenewstack.io/technically-wrong-toxic-tech/

# data[].attributes.headline
"It’s a compelling, if not entirely unique, argument. But what to do about it? Wachter-Boettcher’s prescription for change is a familiar one: Resist"(2017). This review brings up the same concern. What do we do about the arguments presented in the author's writing? Another point this review makes is that these arguments are not new, they have been discussed with more nuance in other research and books. "Her discussion of “algorithmic inequity,” for example, leans heavily on previous investigative work by ProPublica and on Cathy O’Neil’s more detailed discussions in Weapons of Math Destruction"(2017). This is an interesting review as it does bring up other works with the same topic. The weakness in the text outlined in my review seems to continue in various reviews: the suggestions for how to solve the problem are not clear or extensive enough. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"It’s a compelling, if not entirely unique, argument. But what to do about it? Wachter-Boettcher’s prescription for change is a familiar one: Resist"(2017). This review brings up the same concern. What do we do about the arguments presented in the author's writing? Another point this review makes is that these arguments are not new, they have been discussed with more nuance in other research and books. "Her discussion of “algorithmic inequity,” for example, leans heavily on previous investigative work by ProPublica and on Cathy O’Neil’s more detailed discussions in Weapons of Math Destruction"(2017). This is an interesting review as it does bring up other works with the same topic. The weakness in the text outlined in my review seems to continue in various reviews: the suggestions for how to solve the problem are not clear or extensive enough. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2017/10/17/technically-wrong/

# data[].attributes.headline
In one of the reviews that left the reader puzzled, another mention of future suggestions and lacking of a solution is mentioned. "While these suggestions are good, we are going to have to do more if we want to make real change. A few people shooting off letters to their congresspeople about specific products is simply not going to do it. We need to organize and mobilize"(2018). https://toniferro.wordpress.com/2018/03/04/book-review-technically-wrong-by-sara-wachter-boettcher/

# data[].attributes.subject
In one of the reviews that left the reader puzzled, another mention of future suggestions and lacking of a solution is mentioned. "While these suggestions are good, we are going to have to do more if we want to make real change. A few people shooting off letters to their congresspeople about specific products is simply not going to do it. We need to organize and mobilize"(2018). https://toniferro.wordpress.com/2018/03/04/book-review-technically-wrong-by-sara-wachter-boettcher/

# data[].attributes.body
The website above is where the review was found. This review coincides well with The Dataist review in 2018. There points made in the book are important but the suggestions as to how we resolve the dilemmas are not clear. There was little time spent on explicitly telling readers how to go about making changes. This further eludes to the magic component of the tech industry.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Perhaps the most interesting point for me was when she was addressing “meritocracy” — a phrase that at this point automatically conjurs in my head a petulant white dude who next will be telling me about his current trendy workout habits and how because I don’t love IPAs I will never be a true beer connoisseur"(2018). This is a section of the review from the Hedgehog Librarian. Another positive review and praise for being a quick and easy read. The writer in this review agrees with all arguments as well as the urgency set forth in such a topic. I like that the reviewer notes such an important aspect of the book: meritocracy. It appears that this reader learned something he/she had not known before. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Perhaps the most interesting point for me was when she was addressing “meritocracy” — a phrase that at this point automatically conjurs in my head a petulant white dude who next will be telling me about his current trendy workout habits and how because I don’t love IPAs I will never be a true beer connoisseur"(2018). This is a section of the review from the Hedgehog Librarian. Another positive review and praise for being a quick and easy read. The writer in this review agrees with all arguments as well as the urgency set forth in such a topic. I like that the reviewer notes such an important aspect of the book: meritocracy. It appears that this reader learned something he/she had not known before. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://hedgehoglibrarian.com/2018/01/28/book-review-technically-wrong-by-sara-wachter-boettcher/

# data[].attributes.headline
"Wachter-Boettcher urges readers to hold engineers and venture capitalists accountable for the harm they cause by failing to incorporate diverse voices in the design process for creating the everyday tools of the 21st century"(2018). This review is from publisher's weekly and takes a supportive approach to the arguments set forth in the book. The solution is emphasized in the review however I am still lost as to how this can or will be accomplished in reality. 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Wachter-Boettcher urges readers to hold engineers and venture capitalists accountable for the harm they cause by failing to incorporate diverse voices in the design process for creating the everyday tools of the 21st century"(2018). This review is from publisher's weekly and takes a supportive approach to the arguments set forth in the book. The solution is emphasized in the review however I am still lost as to how this can or will be accomplished in reality. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-393-63463-1

# data[].attributes.headline
The Dataist writes: "I felt Wachter-Boettcher's analysis was somewhat lacking and didn't really get at the realities of working in the tech industry"(2018). This review was written with more of the weaknesses that are outlined in my review. The writer believes that the author makes pertinent points, but also notes that her solutions seem simplistic. The writer of the review has worked in the tech industry and mentions an explanation of "lean software development", that changed things. I suggest reading about lean software development if anyone is interested in how the tech industry changed within. I do notice that changes within companies were not well researched in the book itself. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Dataist writes: "I felt Wachter-Boettcher's analysis was somewhat lacking and didn't really get at the realities of working in the tech industry"(2018). This review was written with more of the weaknesses that are outlined in my review. The writer believes that the author makes pertinent points, but also notes that her solutions seem simplistic. The writer of the review has worked in the tech industry and mentions an explanation of "lean software development", that changed things. I suggest reading about lean software development if anyone is interested in how the tech industry changed within. I do notice that changes within companies were not well researched in the book itself. 

# data[].attributes.body
http://thedataist.com/book-review-technically-wrong/

# data[].attributes.body
"Wachter-Boettcher's sensible practice has become to focus on the goals and to eliminate the demographics and photos, as they can be misleading while introducing stereotypes"(Anderson 2018). This review focuses on the strengths outlined in my review. Anderson agrees with the arguments made by the author in the text.
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/01/11/book-review-technically-wrong-sara-wachter-boettcher/