Personally, I don't mind his style. It's entertaining, but he has a tendency to draw some ridiculous conclusions by drawing a few lines between here and there. I prefer his New Yorker articles over his books, though, which tend to merely repeat his thesis over and over.

He tends to be more of a stream of consciousness writer than an ideas man.

My recollection of reading him is he doesn't build an argument from premise to conclusion, but implies an argument by stringing together perhaps unrelated anecdotes and studies.