[gregates]

A good heuristic for whether a popular idea is worth paying attention to is whether you know more about the idea and why one might think it's true than you do about the person or people who are pushing it. If you know more about the people than the idea, there's a good chance that it's all marketing.

Atheism, I know what that is and why one might subscribe to it. "New Atheism"? The main thing I know about that is the names of the "Four Horsemen". I've read way too many articles in high-minded glossy magazines about it, that were mostly presented as profiles of people. I still have no idea how it's supposed to be different from atheism in substantive content.

[moate]

“New Atheism” was basically just package branding for a handful of conference speakers/academics. It, much like “New Coke” before it, was about marketing a product (the speakers, not Atheism broadly) and did very well for them. It was basically just a subculture of atheists and their acolytes.