Dialectic of Enlightenment

Their analysis feels both broad and specific, but I'm curious how they chose which ideas to focus on and which to set aside. Did they see certain enlightenment ideas as more problematic than others?

The discussion on how mass culture manipulates society feels very current, but I wonder if the authors anticipated how persistent these trends would become in the digital age.

The structure of the book is quite layered, blending dense philosophy with social commentary. I'm interested in what led them to approach the topic this way—was it a deliberate choice or an organic development?