“The relentless overload that’s wearing us down is generated by a belief that ‘good’ work requires increasing busyness—faster responses to email and chats, more meetings, more tasks, more hours. But when we look closer at this premise, we fail to find a firm foundation.”

Here, Newport expresses a central thesis of the book involving Slow Productivity Versus Pseudo-Productivity. He critiques the prevailing mindset in modern knowledge work that equates productivity with constant activity. Newport uses parallel structure to emphasize the various manifestations of this “busyness” culture: “[F]aster responses,” “more meetings,” “more tasks,” “more hours.” This repetition reinforces the sense of overwhelming demands placed on workers. By putting “good” in quotation marks when referring to work, Newport subtly questions the validity of this definition of productivity. The phrase “firm foundation” implies that Newport will offer a more solid, well-reasoned approach to productivity in the subsequent chapters of the book.

“It was from this uncertainty that a simple alternative emerged: using visible activity as a crude proxy for actual productivity. If you can see me in my office—or, if I’m remote, see my email replies and chat messages arriving regularly—then, at the very least, you know I’m doing something. The more activity you see, the more you can assume that I’m contributing to the organization’s bottom line […] As the twentieth century progressed, this visible-activity heuristic became the dominant way we began thinking about productivity in knowledge work.”

Newport explains the rise of “pseudo-productivity” in knowledge work. The author employs italics to emphasize “something,” highlighting the superficiality of this approach. Newport’s tone is matter-of-fact, presenting this development as a logical but flawed response to the challenges of defining productivity in knowledge work. This passage sets up the book’s critique of modern work culture and its emphasis on constant activity over meaningful accomplishment.