Amy Goldwasser wrote the article "What's the Matter with Kids Today," in which she answers nothing. Parents and the older generation are under the impression that the Internet is "melting their teen's brain." In her article, Goldwasser says that he Internet is an educational tool and teens and the younger generations are reading and writing more than ever. In my opinion, Goldwasser is right in saying the Internet is a great learning tool but she fails to mention the problems that can come from the Internet. You have to use the Internet the correct way for it to be an educational tool.
Goldwasser reports, "the average teen chooses to spend an average of 16.7 hours a week reading and writing online." In this statistic she is pointing out that the Internet creates a voluntary learning experience. Teens can get on the Internet today and look up and research any information they are interested in. Teens find these interesting articles and some create blogs, in which they respond in writing how they feel about the issue and creating a debate. From experience, I know that reading things are far more likely for me to complete when it's something that I'm interested in and that I voluntarily choose to read. When teachers assign readings in class it is usually something not interesting to you, but using the Internet can allow us to search the web about anything our mind can think of. Teachers are also using the popular Internet tool, YouTube, now in classes for visual references. I love when teachers use YouTube in class, because it helps me apply information learned to real life and gives me a visual to better understand the information. Teens use the Internet for multiple reasons, whether it be blogging, using facebook to stay connected with old friends, or researching a topic on YouTube and reading articles about it, the Internet is a successful learning tool. Goldwasser praises this tool by saying, "Teenagers today read and write for fun; it's part of their social lives. We need to start celebrating his unprecedented surge, incorporating it as an educational tool.."
Golwasser, however, does not mention the negative effects the Internet has on teenagers. In a generation of high speed we have instant messaging, text messaging, and facebook and mypace. In these technologies teens are trying to look for a faster way to communicate. This results in abbreviations and misspellings in order to speed up the process. For example, the famous LOL, GTG, BRB, 2day, ppl, cuz, and many more. Yes, teens are reading and writing more, but how are they writing. The poor texting and instant messaging grammar spills over into these students school work. I can't tell you the countless times i have written ppl in a paper instead of people, unconsciously. In the Internet communication it is not rare to see many punctuation mistakes also or no punctuation at all. I know from personal experience that my grammar and punctuation skills suffer greatly from lack of practice and extreme practice of common texting or IMing language. The Internet could also be used for negative reasons also. You can have facebook and myspace stalkers, Internet porn that teen boys are attracted to, and many other dangers out there.
Yes, the Internet is a great learning tool, but we need to teach our society to use it correctly. So many people abuse the great technology. Our bad grammar used in the cyber world is now spilling into reality. Overall Goldwasser is correct, but fails to mention the negative side to the Internet.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Thursday, October 8, 2009
example of metacommentary (8)
In Dana Steven's opening paragraph of her article "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," she uses metacommentary and other context clues to let the reader know she is summarizing the views of another author, Steven Johnson. In summarizing Johnson's article "Watching TV Makes you Smarter, Steven's references Johnson's ideas of more complex plots, multi-threading, and his overall thesis of watching TV makes you smarter. She introduces the paragraph with the author she is arguing against and the piece he has wrote that she is going to be referencing. She comes out saying she "could make no sense of Johnson's piece," and this lets us know she is arguing against him and is going to summarize his thoughts she disagrees with. This sentence in her article summarizes part of Johnson's argument; "As far as I can tell, his thesis is that television shows have slowly grown more and more complicated over the last two decades, so that now, like rates in a behaviorist's maze, trained viewers can differentiate among up to 12 distinct plot lines in shows like The Sopranos." As you can see she uses the metacommentary "As far as I can tell, HIS thesis is," in other words she is starting the sentence off with "I," saying that she is summarizing "HIS" thesis of the article. Another great example of metacommentary is Steven's use of "In other words," in her sentence "In other words, if I understand correctly, watching TV teaches you to watch more TV.." The use of "in other words" lets us readers know that Steven's is going to put in her own words and her thought, what Johnson has written in his article. The last sentence of her first paragraph is her view on the subject. "..Like Teletubbies, which is essentially a tutorial instructing toddlers in the basics of vegging out," in this Steven's in making her point that watching TV doesn't make you smarter by referring to "vegging out" as becoming vegetable like.
In my opinion, I agree with Dana Stevens point of view. When i was reading Johnson's article I was thinking the same things, "so in order to understand these more complex plots you must watch more TV?" "Plots have become more complicated, so what? That doesn't teach you anything new it just requires you to think." Although I agree some TV can make you smarter, but it all depends on what your watching.
In my opinion, I agree with Dana Stevens point of view. When i was reading Johnson's article I was thinking the same things, "so in order to understand these more complex plots you must watch more TV?" "Plots have become more complicated, so what? That doesn't teach you anything new it just requires you to think." Although I agree some TV can make you smarter, but it all depends on what your watching.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Metacommentary (7)
- In making a case for medical use of marijuana, I'm not saying that it should be prescribed for everything, but in certain cases it is acceptable.
- But my argument will do more than prove that one particular industrial chemical has certain toxic properties. In this article, i will also prove there is danger in using this industrial chemical.
- My point about the national obsessions with sports reinforces the belief held by many athletes that they are celebrities.
- I believe, therefore, that the war is completely justified. But let me back up and explain how I arrived at this conclusion. Tons of money is being put into this war to give Iraq there freedom, and many innocent people are dying. In this way, I came to believe that this war is a big mistake.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Is Caffeine Addictive? (6)
Caffeine addiction has become a real and widespread problem. You may not believe it but researchers say that regular caffeine usage creates a physical dependence. Ronald Griffiths, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, has conducted many experiments and completed lots of research on this issue. He has proven that caffeine is addictive and can produce withdrawal symptoms, he considers it a mental disorder. Ultimately, what is at stake here is your health. Caffeine, like other drugs of addiction has health threats. About 80% of the world's population uses caffeine on a daily basis(Medicinenet.com).
Monday, September 21, 2009
Is Advertising Towards Kids Right? (blog 5)
Eric Schlosser writes in "Your Trusted Friends", about the issue of advertisement targeting children. Schlosser views this as a negative in his writings. He writes about the toys, playgrounds, and cartoon characters that fast food marketers use to grab the kids and lure them in. We know this is his position because of his multiple negative reasons of the advertisements targeting children. He does not give any reasons supporting the good from the advertising. In my opinion, I believe that advertising towards children is okay to an extent. You have to understand that fast food is a business and it wouldn't be there tempting us if there wasn't a demand for it from us the consumers. With that said all businesses are out to make a buck. Advertising and promoting are only created in order to increase the sales of the business. It's like saying that we can no longer advertise rated r movies because it will increase the younger generations who see the movie therefore creating more violence in teens. But, how are people going to know it's there if it is not advertised and promoted.
One issue Schlosser addresses is using cartoon characters to appeal to children. Schlosser says, "Studies suggest that until the age of six, roughly 80 percent of children's dreams are about animals"(190) So Schlosser is saying that the market uses animated animals and creatures to suck kids in at an early age and make them customers for life. Marketers use these characters in TV commercials that they know children all over watch, because TV watching is a top American pastime. However, Toys in Happy Meals is plaguing the issue of advertisement towards children also. Fast food companies create promotional links with popular toy manufactures, giving away a "prize" in each Happy Meal. Schlosser states that, " A successful promotion easily doubles or triples the weekly sales volume of children's meals"(194). Schlosser blames Playlands in part of sucking in the child consumer also.
Although it is true that these tactics of advertising towards children are extreme, what are we to do about it? Should we put laws on advertising towards children? Taking away Happy Meals, Ronald McDonald and the gang, and Playlands is taking many American childhood memories away. Americans have lost there sense of personal responsibility and want laws to control marketing and businesses. Some skeptics may say, "advertisements targeting children are a large factor to our child obesity rates." I say that because they advertise towards children doesn't imply causation of child obesity. You have to not succumb to the pleas of your children for Happy Meals 5 times a week. Putting laws on advertising and businesses for targeting kids will suck the fun out of life. My future kids will not know the fun of going to the local McDonald's on occasion to experience the fun of ball pits, Happy Meals, and getting the newest toy for eating all their food. Ronald McDonald has been around for ages and is just now being blamed for the current obesity issue. I do agree with Eric Schlosser that fast food should not be viewed as a "prize" in the eyes of children, but overall disagree with his negative views of advertising towards children.
some of the most famous cartoon characters created by the food industry
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Thinkings of Susie Orbach (blog 4)
In Susie Orbach's book Fat as a Feminist Issue, she is defending women from others pointing the finger at them and blaming there own self for being overweight. The ongoing debate is whether women are at fault themselves for overeating or if there is an underlying cause for their overeating and impulses. Susie Orbach agrees with feminist views on the issue.
Feminism views state that society has sex stereotypes that women feel obligated to fit into. For explanation on the stereotypes Susie Orbach is saying, "The media present women either in a sexual context or within the family, reflecting a woman's two prescribed roles, first as a sex object and then as a mother." In other words, women in society are pressured into looking good for men and to create a family. If this is unattainable for a women she is faced with failure and therefore makes a woman extremely self-conscious. The media provides women with the "ideal look" and defines what is beauty. Beauty also changes with time periods and requires women to change to conform to the definition of beauty. Most definitions of beauty today require women to be thin.
Orbach responds to this with, "Fat is a social disease, and fat is a feminist issue. Fat is not about lack of self-control or lack of willpower. It is a response to the inequality of the sexes." This is saying that women who are overweight are not to blame themselves. It is a "social disease" and they are influenced by society to be the perfect women. If women view themselves as fat it isolates and invalidates a woman. Susie Orbach argues, "fat expresses a rebellion against the powerlessness of a woman, against the pressure to look and act in a certain way". Women who feel the goal of being thin is unattainable the rebel and produce an image that is the opposite. Women want to be viewed for who they are and not what they are suppose to look like.
Feminism views state that society has sex stereotypes that women feel obligated to fit into. For explanation on the stereotypes Susie Orbach is saying, "The media present women either in a sexual context or within the family, reflecting a woman's two prescribed roles, first as a sex object and then as a mother." In other words, women in society are pressured into looking good for men and to create a family. If this is unattainable for a women she is faced with failure and therefore makes a woman extremely self-conscious. The media provides women with the "ideal look" and defines what is beauty. Beauty also changes with time periods and requires women to change to conform to the definition of beauty. Most definitions of beauty today require women to be thin.
Orbach responds to this with, "Fat is a social disease, and fat is a feminist issue. Fat is not about lack of self-control or lack of willpower. It is a response to the inequality of the sexes." This is saying that women who are overweight are not to blame themselves. It is a "social disease" and they are influenced by society to be the perfect women. If women view themselves as fat it isolates and invalidates a woman. Susie Orbach argues, "fat expresses a rebellion against the powerlessness of a woman, against the pressure to look and act in a certain way". Women who feel the goal of being thin is unattainable the rebel and produce an image that is the opposite. Women want to be viewed for who they are and not what they are suppose to look like.
picture(cm1.theinsider.com)- Shows how Faith Hill is altered and airbrushed to create a skinnier version for the media. This is an example of showing celebrities as "perfect" and creating ideal beauty for women to look at and size themselves up as not good enough.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Blog 3 (pg181 #1)
Yves Engler wrote an article called "Obesity: Much of the Responsibility Lies with Corporations", in which he blames the capitalist economic system for largely rising obesity rates in America. He mentions the diet industry as one of the biggest of obesity risers. Doctors are prescribing deadly drugs that are used for weight loss. More and more Americans today are turning to plastic surgery to correct there obesity. Somehow spending tons of money on dieting and surgery are okay with Americans today and is accepted. Another point he makes how capitalist economy is serving up obesity is by spending large amounts of money on advertising their products in unfair ways to America. Children are a big target in this advertising by using cartoon characters and catchy songs. Also the food companies are promoting their larger sizes to be filling and not expensive. In the article Engler observes, "as of 1996, a quarter of the $97 billion spent on fast food came from items promoted on the basis of either extra size or larger portions." This means that America today has adapted to larger portion sizes. It is a fact that the more food you have in front of you the more you are going to consume.
Engler supports that, today so many young adults are not involved with sports or physical activity. A reason for this is the cutbacks on budgeting for gym classes or sports in the school systems. There is no one there to motivate them and show them that sports and physical activity is fun and good to be involved with. Also a point he makes is that work in America today is becoming more stressful. Automation is everywhere. This means that the number of hours worked should be reduced, but that is not the case. As Engler says in his article, "in the United States, where people are working 200 hours a year more than they did in the early 1970's." This means that there is no time for leisure activities, and more of a higher stress level. We all know that higher stress levels means higher food intake. Also today, industries have taken over cities in a way to rise obesity rates. They are building houses, fast food, and other industries over top of outskirt fields that could be used to grow vegetables or build parks. The rate of people who walk and ride their bikes has drastically decreased. This is because of unsafe roadways and lack of sidewalks or disconnected sidewalks.
In my opinion Engler is very persuasive in his argument. He pointed out some very good facts that I myself might not have ever realized if it weren't for his article. I can understand his point on how the capitalist economic system plays a major role in obesity rates and I agree with him.
Engler supports that, today so many young adults are not involved with sports or physical activity. A reason for this is the cutbacks on budgeting for gym classes or sports in the school systems. There is no one there to motivate them and show them that sports and physical activity is fun and good to be involved with. Also a point he makes is that work in America today is becoming more stressful. Automation is everywhere. This means that the number of hours worked should be reduced, but that is not the case. As Engler says in his article, "in the United States, where people are working 200 hours a year more than they did in the early 1970's." This means that there is no time for leisure activities, and more of a higher stress level. We all know that higher stress levels means higher food intake. Also today, industries have taken over cities in a way to rise obesity rates. They are building houses, fast food, and other industries over top of outskirt fields that could be used to grow vegetables or build parks. The rate of people who walk and ride their bikes has drastically decreased. This is because of unsafe roadways and lack of sidewalks or disconnected sidewalks.
In my opinion Engler is very persuasive in his argument. He pointed out some very good facts that I myself might not have ever realized if it weren't for his article. I can understand his point on how the capitalist economic system plays a major role in obesity rates and I agree with him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)