Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
negative effect of media in our society
wathing television makes people smarter
psychological effect from television
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: negative effect of media in our society
Over the last forty to fifty years, television has been a major topic of discussion. Specifically, many debate societal benefits to television watching. One widely accepted opinion is that watching TV makes people dumber. People have referred to it with terms like the “idiot box” and do not feel that watching TV has any benefit at all. They feel that it is a waste of time and people need to spend their hours more wisely. Others are of the opinion that TV is actually has societal benefits. From this perspective, they claim that the development of the structure of the programs now requires one to intellectually participate in watching television. Essentially, the argument is whether TV is a beneficial societal force or is it simply a convenient, yet detrimental, outlet for entertainment.
One major proponent of the view that watching television is beneficial is technology writer Steven Johnson. In a 2005 New York Times Magazine article, he praises the progress the television industry has made in recent decades. His basic argument is that as opposed to programming roughly 20 years ago, one must now be an active participant when watching TV shows. Referring to the show 24 as an example of such a phenomenon, Johnson says that “to keep up with entertainment like 24, you have to pay attention, make inferences, [and] track shifting social relationships” (Johnson, 214-215). Johnson is making the point that in order to fully understand an episode of a modern day TV show such as 24, one has to think. One has to be able to follow the many different plot lines simultaneously, while keeping track of the different characters and threads from previous episodes. He ultimately argues that it is these cognitive demands which make watch...
... middle of paper ...
... cannot be ignored. Time that used to be spent reading, sleeping, studying, and exercising is now devoted to catching up on an episode of Lost or ER. Moreover, parents have to do a better job supervising what their children watch. There is too much violence on TV for children to have that control themselves. TV itself may not make people dumber, but the things it takes people away from would have made them smarter. This, coupled with the disgusting lack of ethics on many shows, pushes the balance toward television being an overall detriment to society.
Works Cited
Johnson, Steven. "Watching TV Makes You Smarter." New York Times Magazine. (2005): Print.
Stevens, Dana. "Thinking Outside the Box." Slate. (2005): Print.
Gaddy, Gary D. “Television’s Impact on High School Achievement.” The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Autumn 1986), pp. 340-359.
In "thinking outside the idiot box", Dana Stevens responds to Steven Johnson's New York Times article in which Johnson believes that watching television makes you smarter. Indeed, Steven Johnson claimed that television shows have become more and more complex over the years in order to follow the viewers need for an interesting plot instead of an easy, linear story. However, Dana Stevens is opposed to this viewpoint. Stevens is not against television, he does not think it makes you smarter nor that it is poisenous for the brain, he simply states that the viewer should watch television intelligently. That is to say that, viewers should know how much television they should watch and what to watch as well.
In a Class Dismissed when the narrator says,” because we have seen television as just entertainment, we readily disregard its impact on our thinking”. When I heard that statement, I thought to myself that our perceptions of things are based upon what we see on TV, although I do view TV as entertainment as well. However, I never paid attention to how TV impacted my thoughts until viewing and reading in the material in this class. Because of some of the things that we studied and the familiar shows that we talked about I understand and noticed small things in TV shows and ad
American pop culture has come a long way in the last few decades: from the rock 'n’ roll boom of the fifties, to the hippie aesthetic of the seventies, to the electronic age of the nineties. Pop culture clearly fluctuates at a rapid pace and even though fads have come and gone, one thing has remained viable even in more contemporary times: the TV set. On top of that, never has the world seen a greater peak in technology than it has in recent years, and the television is no exception. Unfortunately, as fascinating as these advancements may sound, it is generally presumed that the television—as with much modern pop culture tech—has had and continues to have detrimental effects on Western culture. Given that the TV has been a predominant force for the last sixty years, it’s safe to assume that most have heard the pervasive statement of how television "rots your brain.” By contrast, the benefits of this technology are rarely discussed and when the topic does arise, it seems to be hastily dismissed as “phooey.” Despite these labels, some would argue that television pop culture not only provides a form of recreational relaxation, but also has the potential to enhance cognitive capabilities.
Television was an invention designed to entertain and inform. Created in the 1920s by John Logie Baird, TV has become an indispensable piece of furniture in most American dwellings. Every child, at least once in their lives have heard their mothers tell them that spending long periods of time in front of a screen will damage their brain. Two opposite arguments question all mothers’ hypothesis. Steven Johnson in “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” claims that over the years TV has become more complex. He considers that this complexity forces the brain to work. Dana Stevens in “Thinking Outside the Idiot Box” argues that there are many cons in the issue and that watching TV does not make anybody smarter. Instead,
In Steven Johnson's article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" he discusses the intellectual merits of television programs. The essence of Johnson's argument is that the complexity of certain current shows can get one to think at a higher cognitive level, and that shows have become more "cognitively demanding"of their viewers over the past few decades. Johnson's argument, that is in favor of watching quality television and the benefits that one can get from it, is reinforced by some good points the author makes. Johnson is effective in his argument and was very convincing. Viewing certain television programs can in fact benefit one's cognitive capacities, especially in children.
...ss, because intellectual benefits exist to watching television. The television viewer has to constantly think, respond, and answer questions that arise during the show. On the other hand for the most part this generation of the elderly, the religious, and of course our parents have always frowned upon anyone watching television. Since television makes viewers smarter, instead of being afraid of television this generation of television viewers need to embrace the benefits that come from watching television. In a sense it is exactly the same as reading a novel because as a viewer you need to pay close attention, remember characters, and connect multiple threads. Those television fanatics out there who have ever been disciplined because of watching television can now tell everyone the truth about television that it is truly an intellectually stimulating experience.
Everyone has their personal opinions and arguments on whether television can be beneficial for the mind or is just another screen for us to mindlessly stare at for hours. Watching TV Makes You Smarter by Steven Johnson, and Thinking Outside the Idiot Box written by Dana Stevens, both authors take on opposing arguments in their articles. Both articles have weak and strong points. From Johnson's obvious title, readers clearly know what his standpoint is, watching TV can make you smarter. Steven Johnson’s article is filled with information and research to back up his statement in a logical way, but his graphs, and examples of out of date shows are can be often confusing for the reader. For Dana Stevens, on the other hand, she does provide a valid argument; that television cannot make you smart, but lacks at not backing her statement up with research leaving the reader confused on why he or she cannot learn from television. Out of both articles, Steven Johnson does a better job at, informing, teaching and proving his point that, television can make you smarter to his audience.
As one can see, the argument against television is as strong, if not stronger, then the arguments for television. As a result, one can now better understand both sides of this controversial issue and make an informed argument for or against television. At this point, one is conscious to the many manipulations of television, advertising, and corporations. Being aware of these factors, one is now equipped to ask themselves "why do I do the things I do?". The answer being: Television.
There had been a very heated debate on the benefits and drawbacks of watching TV and weather or not TV was actually making us as a society smarter when Steven Johnson wrote his book Everything Bad is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture is Actually Makings Us Smarter. The book was published in 2005 as well as a portion of the book, Watching TV Makes You Smarter, was published by the New York Times Magazine in the same year. This only added fuel to the fire of the debate and served as a wake up call to many readers. The debate focuses mainly on the ideas that TV can make a person more or less intelligent. In this essay, Johnson overtly suggests that the consumption of TV programming in making us smarter. He tries to convince the reader of this idea of television making us smarter by appearing to be credible, by using sound logic, and seeming to be knowledgeable on the subject matter. All of these approaches may work on those who read and run but don't take time to digest the content, but for everybody else that slowed down to think about the information he presents his logic d...
Invented in 1923, television programs started off with airing sporting events, news hours, and cookie cutter programs (“History of TV” History). These programs usually taught morals and lessons at their closings and gave a false sense of reality. Today, you can see just about anything on TV, from someone being gunned down to wild and risk-free sex between couples (Gay couples too!). Studies have been done to see if these scenes seen by society can affect us negatively, as children have been analyzed through adulthood to see if violent and sexual behavior on TV has affected them badly. The results are children starting to deal with adult issues at an early age due to the graphic nature of television programs. Society now is more aggressive and losing it’s values. With this said, television programs have clearly evolved since 1923 and affected society negatively due to it’s violent and sexual content.
... for children. Children are exposed to 20,000 advertisements a year. The average child watches 8,000 televised murders and 100,000 acts of violence before finishing elementary school. By the time children graduate from high school, those numbers more than doubles. Furthermore, television is shown to influence attitudes about race and gender. Pro-social and anti-social behaviors are influenced by television.
For most of us, it has been said that everything related to watching television carries more harm than good. Is not a secret that today 's TV shows programs over the past years have becoming more engaged and entertained than never were. Nevertheless, the precept of a deteriorated pop culture is still among many of all there. Experts, scientist, parents and society altogether, through the last decades has been asking the same question, is watching TV beneficial in some way or not at all?
First we must all acknowledge that what we, as members of a society, choose to watch on TV affects us, as we are not simply passive receivers of the messages we encounter on our TV screens; television viewing is not simply a spectator sport. We may feel like mindless drones as we sink ever deeper into our couches and let ourselves be entertained by sitcoms, but when we finally pull ourselves up and off the couch, we do not simply leave the images and messages behind. They are now a part of us; all that we have seen and heard becomes a part of our memories and shapes our perceptions of reality, to what extent is arguable. We are constantly interpreting what we see and hear, even subconsciously, and the sitcoms that have steadily infiltrated our daily lives contribute to a shared version of reality. A culture is based upon these shared meanings, and provides us with a lens for understanding the world we live in.
In his famous work, Steve Johnson offers a critique of the notion that television is dumbing us down. Johnson tackled the subject in his article, Watching TV Makes You Smarter. Johnson himself writes,
Since the television made its big appearance in our society, there has been a lot of debate on whether it is good for us or not. Researches have come up with the conclusion that average person in the United States now watches over one hundred and fifty-one hours of television a month, which is well over 5 hours a day, and while there are many concerned people convinced that watching television has a negative impact on today's society. The question is “Do watching television make people smarter? You might well be surprised that watching television can actually make you smarter but that would be depending on the television show that the viewer spends their time watching.