Take the following as truth: In a book of essays with that title, the process of turning counterculture rebellion into profit-making opportunity that does absolutely nothing to challenge the status quo is described in various settings, such as Nike (which used William S. Burroughs to sell sneakers) and the films of Quentin Tarantino (always hip but scrupulously content-free).
Then the following statement: "Quentin Tarantino's films did not have much substance, really, and yet people still watch it. " is true, false, or inconclusive?