Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Media Impact on Teenagers
Media Impact on Teenagers
Use of media in teaching and learning
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Steven Berlin Johnson “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” is the excerpt from Everything Bad Is Good for You that was posted in the New York Times Magazines in 2005. In this article, by glancing at the historical development of the television narratives, Johnson indicates the older TV shows such as Dragnet or Starsky and Hutch have only one or two main characters, just follow a single thread narrative; in contrast, the more recent shows such as Hill Street, The Sopranos are far more different with the earlier shows, most of them are with a number of primary characters and multiple threads, “a single scene in The Sopranos will often connect to three different threads at the same time, layering one plot atop another” (Johnson, 2005). Johnson also …show more content…
Due to this, parents might not want their children to watch any TV shows which contain those elements in order to protect their children from so-called bad culture. This article is facing to the parents who have that similar thought, and offer those parents “a change in the criteria we use to determine what really is cognitive junk food and what is genuinely nourishing” (Johnson, 2005). Most of the TV shows that Johnson uses in this article are familiar and known by the parents, such as 24, Survivor, The Sopranos, Alias etc., it was able to make the explanation much easier, and persuade them to his point. He also suggests that parents should take this as an opportunity but not a crisis, something they force their kids to accept is no longer a smart culture, it is only a sharing from …show more content…
Within the content, in order to prove the opinion of “Watching TV Makes You Smarter”, Johnson through analyzes the development trend of TV shows, compares the old and recent TV shows to come up with sound reasoning such as the recent TV shows require more attention and critical thinking to support his idea. The diction Johnson uses is professional, basic and not contains much ornateness, it gives a sense to the audience that the author is an experienced person, and his information is important to be referred. Also, he uses the first-person point of view, call himself as “I” and address the audience by using “you”, this strategy makes his article more like a communication between him and the audience, it not only properly delivers his arguments, but also lets the audience be comfortable to adopt his ideas. Johnson break his article into 5 parts, by starting his arguments with point out his idea, then go deep further step by step, provide evidences and examples, it is perfectly structured. Moreover, plus with using the charts to analyze the differences between movies, makes his argument more convincing. Overall, the tone of this article is informative and pretty
Not only educational shows accomplish these goals, but fictional television programs can often incorporate information that requires viewers to grapple with a topic using logical reasoning and a global consciousness. In addition, not to diminish the importance of reading, television reaches those who may never pick up a book or who might struggle with reading problems, enabling a broader spectrum of people to interact with cognitive topics. Veith has committed the error of making generalizations about two forms of media when, in truth, the situation varies depending on quality and content. However, what follows these statements is not just fallacious, but
Younger generations and the more vulnerable in society can be influenced in avoiding peer pressure, but for the individuals filled with wisdom, the shows can reflect based on American modern society. Everybody Loves Raymond and Full House are great shows who faces similar life obstacles a typical person living in the US has today. As a result, most modern family comedy sit-coms are reflecting our society’s generations and the more vulnerable. Based on the success of early family sit coms, American’s adapted to a fast pace lifestyle with the help of modern
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.
The first rhetorical strategy Springen uses in her argument is citing statistical data about the number of hours children spend watching television, the effects of watching that amount of television, and what the most highly rated television shows are among children. She cites in her essay that “American children 2 through 11 watch three hours and 16 minutes of television every day.” This data shows the reader the staggering amount of time children spend watching television each day. Springen further cites data concluding that when children watch over 10 hours of TV every week “they are more likely to be overweight, aggressive and slow to learn in school.” This data exemplifies to the reader the negative effects television has on young impressionable minds and bodies. Finally, Springen cites that among the top 5 television shows “for children 2 through 11…Survivor Thailand” ranks among them. This data shows that children exposed to television are also being exposed to programming that is far too mature for their age. By citing “bad” data about the way television negatively affects children, Springen persuades the reader in her argument to agree with her position that there is no good reason for her children to watch television on a daily basis.
In our society entertainment has become an immense part of our daily lives. We spend extensive periods of time watching TV, which in general has become a habit for many individuals, and a necessity for others. In the article Television as teacher by Neil Postman he argues that television does not help us learn what is necessary for further education, and that it shouldn’t be utilized as a main learning tool because it undermines the techniques applied in teaching centers. Some of these technics are obtaining a previous education before practicing the advanced learning, paying attention to the material being provided, and retaining the information given for future references. Nonetheless I agree with Postman’s point of view that Television is
Television is a highly entertaining way to pass the time whenever we may want to relax or may not have anything to do. Some believe that watching television is nothing more than staring at a box while others believe that it can help us become aware of things we may not have noticed before such as social issues or in some measure get our brains thinking. This paper will point out the similarities and differences of Antonia Peacocke 's essay "Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious" and Steven Johnson 's "Watching television makes you smarter" aswell as
In Steve Johnson’s article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” he argues that a region of the brain is stimulated that makes people think. He claims that TV makes you smarter, and I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, I agree that people tend to contemplate more when watching television. On the other hand, I still insist that viewing TV doesn’t make you any smarter, but in fact, it can actually lower one’s intelligence.
Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
It may be hard to admit, but television has become an intricate part of our everyday lives. People children often find themselves sitting in front of the television screen for a longer period of time than before and this has evolved immensely over the past few years. In this article, “The Trouble with Television,” by the author Marie Winn, mentions that addiction of television is negative effects on children and families. It keeps the families from doing other things and it’s a hidden competitor for all other activities. Television takes place of play and on top of that kids who watch a lot of television grow uncivilized. Also, the author mentioned that televisions are less resourceful for children and have negative effects on children’s school achievement and on physical fitness. Although there are so many other types of addictions but the author Marie Winn’s points of argument of watching television is a serious addiction that our children and families have negative effects.
Children in their adolescents years watch a great amount of TV each week and it is almost inevitable that they will start to be influenced by what they see on their television. They will see diffe...
In the book Everything Bad Is Good For You written by Steven Johnson, he describes the sleeper curve in relation to media and games. He also describes how games have become more complex. Johnson also shows us how different genres of television shows like reality shows and comedies have become more intricate. The author describes how today’s popular culture is actually making us smarter. He poses a theory that all the media that we fathom has been becoming more sophisticated each year which is actually making our minds sharper than we may think.
Television has come a long way since it was first introduced. Originally, it was thought that the masses that watch television enjoyed the more simple shows that would tell you exactly what was going on from start to finish. In Steven Johnson’s article, “Watching TV Makes You Smarter”, Johnson argues that this is actually not the case. In fact, Johnson argues that much more people enjoy shows that involve multi threading, or multiple plots that are all connected.
“Stop watching television and go do something productive!” My mother would shout angrily when I would watch the “The Simpsons.” As mentioned in the article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," Steven Johnson argued that 21st Century television shows develop complicated and more challenging narratives than those of an earlier time and offer viewers extra intellectual stimulation. Consequently television programming today reveals an astonishing narrative sophistication with unique plots increasing the viewer’s intellectual demands. In addition Johnson mentions that the sleeper curve in today’s television programming drives the viewer to pay attention, make connections, and keep track of the characters relationships. Moreover multithreading of many plot lines was different in the past. When shows followed only one or two lead characters; nevertheless now even in a show like ''Apprentice'' our mind connects with the emotions of not one but many characters. Now the viewers search the characters faces and the narrative weaves a collection of distinct subplots that are joined to decide the conclusion of the show. What is interesting to me is multithreading, flashing arrows, and social networking are now included in most television programming suggesting that it has gotten more cognitively demanding through the questioning of arguments, analysis of characters, narrative structure, and inferences. I agree with Johnson that television provides intellectual stimulation making viewers smarter. That’s why if my mother and I had known at an earlier time the intellectual benefits of television, we would have had a positive approach about watching television.
TV is mind numbing. In order to reach its maximum potential audience, so that the sponsors can sell more product, TV shows have to be brought down in intelligence to the point of having little or no intellectual value or relevance. Which causes smart people to get unintelligent. TV is always moving at a fast speed, there is usually action or a confrontation in every scene of a show so that viewers don’t lose interest. This tends to make people bored in real life which is a bad thing because then you will get lazy and board, which will cause you to watch more TV (do you see the cycle).
It has been a common discussion for us to dismiss television as a result of the negative things that most of the young viewers tend to copy and practice later on after watching. Johnson is mistaken when he says watching television makes you smarter and because he overlooks the fact that reality television does not teach us what is really going on in our society. For example, shows like “fear factor” (Johnson, 293) where people are being asked and deceived to do crazy things like overcoming their fear and would stoop down so low for the money. Johnson claims that “we need a change in the criteria we use to determine what really cognit...