Summary Paper
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.
Steven Johnson wrote an article for the New York Times in which he argues that back in the days, television shows use to have a very simple plot which was easy to follow without too much attention. It was just an other way to sit back and relax. However, throughout the years, viewers grew tired of this situation and demanded more complex plot lines with multiple story lines that related to recent news topics. He takes the example of the television show “24”. “24” is known for being the first show which its plot occurs in “real-time”, it is also known for not censuring the violence of its topics. It is a drastic change from what Johnson states as an example “Starsky and Hutch” where basically each episodes was only a repetition of the last one. Johnson also believes that there is a misconception of the mass culture nowadays where people think the television viewer wants dumb shows which in response makes them dumber. Johnson does not agree, for him, television shows such as “24” are “nutritional”. He also states that sm...
... middle of paper ...
...th what Dana Stevens thinks. Television is not a nuisance nor is it a medecine. It is a hobby, a relazing leisure. It is a good thing that shows have improved in the way that they are more complex but I do not know if it really has an impact on us, viewers.
Steven Johnson in “watching television makes you smarter” believes that the complexity of the shows' plots has a cognitive value, nutrition for the viewers. Dana Stevens arguments this fact by also stating that television only “teaches you to watch more television”, the complexity of the new shows help you understand how the show will turn out. However, they do not help you for real life events that the shows try to depict. In my opinion, television is just a fun thing to do occasionally to relax and get your mind off of the regular life. It can teach you some things however you should take them in consideration.
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
The panoply of programs a television provides allows a viewer to search for new interests and inspires them to do new things. I, for one, can attest to this, as my knowledge of baseball was limited as a child, until one day I decided to watch a broadcast of the San Francisco Giants; now I am a baseball superfan with friends from all over the country who share in this interest, and also a softball player who exercises every day. I did not become a couch potato from my experiences with television, but rather, a happier, healthier
In They Say/I Say, Chapter Eighteen is talking all about food, and the long term argument that has been going on forever: What should we eat? There are many good articles in the chapter written by many reliable authors, but there are two of the articles that really stood out. The first one “The Supermarket: Prime Real Estate” by Marion Nestle, and the second is “How Junk Food Can End Obesity” by David H. Freedman. Both of these authors talk about the food industry, one talks about how the supermarket effects the choices people make in their diets, and the other talks about how junk food and the fast food industries might just be the way to go to help Americans become healthier.
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
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.
This is a summary of the article "America's Black Press, 1914-1918" by Mark Ellis from the History Today. The purpose of this article is to display how America's black newspapers and communities reacted to the United States involvement in the First World War. Ellis begins the article explaining that when the First World War began April 17, a considerable amount of Americans were unsupportive of America's neglect to remain neutral. Among the many Americans who repudiated the idea of alliance with Britain, the black community had a more convoluted outlook on the war.
Meyer compares poems to songs. He says that we have to listen several times a song before we hear it all and before we understand it. The title of a poem provides a sense of what the poem is about. It can tell you about the poem’s subject, tone, and genre. While reading poetry we need to pay attention to elements such as speaker, image, metaphor, symbol, rhyme, and rhythm. Also, Meyer defines doggerel as a “derogatory term used to describe poetry whose subject is trite and whose rhythm and sounds are monotonously heavy-handed”. It is characteristic of children’s game rhymes. In addition, by characterizing poetry as “undefinable” and “unmistakable”, Robinson says that it can have different purposes, subjects, emotions, styles, and forms.
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
Watching TV Makes You Smarter grabs the attention of any reader, regardless if he or she is a TV lover or not. Johnson can appeal to all audiences in his article. The author draws a sympathetic reader by incorporating scripts from television shows such as E.R and discusses shows like The Sopranos, and 24 that were popular at the time the article was written. The antagonistic audience is shown graphs and key examples of research that prove the author's reasoning. For the apathetic and ignorant, by the end of the article both are able to make their own decision on whether watching television can make you smarter.
... viewing quality becomes and the more channels we can get, the more people are likely to stay inside. Don’t get me wrong, I love TV, and I feel that it is one of the most important inventions that this world has been blessed with; but I feel that it is taking away from some of the “realness” of our lives. People are becoming less healthy, they are developing eye and other health problems, and they don’t know what is real and what is not any more. I hope that in the future television designers and makers can develop so new technologies that would improve and not worsen our environment. The television is a very helpful and important tool that has had a great impact on our society, but we need to be aware of how this tool has also affected out environment as well, so next time you watch you television, think about what impact you might be having on our environment!
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.
Throughout the years television shows have developed drastically with clearer pictures and better acting. The improvements have made the stories more complex and easier to relate to. Cohen (2017) argued that the complexity means that the viewer must be able to follow the storyline and juggle multiple characters and their lives. Understanding the complex stories makes an individual more “cognitively sophisticated.” The majority of shows require the audience to fill in gaps in the story by utilizing their deductive reasoning throughout the episodes.
watching television is an entertainment. I can also learn from watching television, but it never
Besides the positive fact that we are better informed and in touch with the latest news, we should be aware that accepting this enormous flow of information and allowing it to make our mind can be dangerous. The TVs infiltrate our lives, guiding us what are we supposed to wear, how are we supposed to look and act.