>DOUG! it isn't supposed to be and he doesn't claim it to be. please
>don't criticize people on ethnographical methods if you don't
>understand how it works and only know statoid econodrone methods or
>something.
So, Wolfe chooses a sample of people who are more affluent, more white, more married than the U.S. pop - and 100% suburban - and then interviews them using questions he doesn't publish and selectively reports answers from transcripts he doesn't publish either, and this is supposed to tell us something about how "America" thinks. It's crap, I say. It tells us more about the author than anything else.
A lot of "ethnography" seems like journalism with pretentions to scholarship.
Doug