I read through that book when it came out but I didn't bought it for whatever reason. I assume that's a newer edition pictured there, as I recall a different cover.
Would it be correct to say that a lot of the contributions--while interesting--did not appear for the first time in that book and that rather, people were quoted in it from various previously released sources? I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing because it did seem to give lots of different perspectives. In fact, it would be neat if someone did something similar today, with as many different viewpoints as possible given on every subject, since a lot has been written since then.