Television is major component of American culture. A household without one is a rarity. Even those who forgo owning a television often keep up with shows on websites such as Hulu. For over fifty years, they have been watched by people looking to escape their own lives and watch and enjoy the lives of others in the television. However, television has a bad reputation for turning brains to mush and dumbing down its content for the lowest common denominator. Television may not be as problematic as it is made out to be.
In Steven Johnson’s article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” he asserts that televisions are beneficial to the development of cognitive reasoning skills. Shows with complex story lines and multiple plots within one episode encourage viewers to pay attention and make sense of what is happening on the screen. He uses the example of the show 24, in which there are twenty-one characters with arcs and nine narrative threads within forty-four minutes. He argues that television programs are becoming more stimulating, not less, as many would have you believe. Moral clarity rather than quality is going down in television: antiheros are becoming more prevalent and morals are becoming darker. This is making television more ambiguous and hence more interesting for a variety of viewers.
On the other hand, Dana Stevens argues in “Thinking outside the Idiot Box” that even the most intellectually stimulating shows only teach viewers to watch more television. The complex plots and characters only prepare us for more plots and characters on the television, and hence have no real life benefits. In response to Johnson’s claims that 24 is enlightening viewers to social relationships, Stevens discusses the endorsement of torture and the...
... middle of paper ...
...e compared, it is easy to see that complexity has been on a steady rise for decades, and that the average viewer now becomes bored with the simplicity of earlier shows. Stevens disputes this, saying that personally she still prefers old shows. This is single person’s preference, and specifically a person who has been making personal attacks at Johnson. Her preference is easy to disregard after noticing her inherent bias.
In conclusion, television is not inherently good or bad. Both authors admit that there are excellent shows and bad shows. It is about what you watch and why: watching a sitcom because you find it funny is fine. Watching 24 because you find it interesting and controversial is fine. It is important to allow people to make their own choices, because without that choice the world would be a whole lot duller. Respect other’s choices and enjoy your own.
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
In an article ' The Plug-In Drug ' the author Marie Winn discusses the bad influence of television on today's society. Television is a ' drug ' that interfere with family ritual, destroys human relationships and undermines the family.
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
In Steven Johnson’s article, Watching TV Makes You Smarter, Johnson illustrates the development of media over time and the change people are trying to make to television. Johnson argues over how the population watches bad TV shows over the good and how it is healthy for the human brain. Johnson compares older TV shows and present day TV shows to show the difference in
One of the largest “booms” that this country has witnessed is in the area of the ultimate “entertainment” source, the television. The growth in popularity of the use of the television is harming Americans in every aspect of their lives,
As many people know modern television produces many good and bad consequences to the viewer. However, as a whole, the positive effects of TV clearly out weight the negative ones. In Barbara Ehrenreich’s passage, The Worst Years of Our Lives, she asserts that what’s being televised, immobilizes the viewer from actually doing the activities portrayed on TV. Yet, all the events on television have been imitated from what is going on in real life. Television is not something that drains a person from everyday activities, but something that encourages them to try new ones and escape the crazy, stressful moments of life. Not only is TV something that exemplifies new hobbies that can be taken on, but it is also a moment where a family can come together and laugh at all those funny moments in Full House and The Simpsons. Lastly, and possibly most importantly it informs people on what’s going on around
Marie Winn, in her essay “Television: The Plug-In Drug,” argues the negative influences of television that affects individuals and families (438-46).
Since its invention, television has been one of the most influential forms of media to date. As TV sets grew in popularity and became a standard household item, they also became a learning tool for audiences as well. To some extent, television provides an essential framework of knowledge, and our view of society and reality, in general, is shaped by the perceptions of what and even who we watch. The issue with this is that the lines between “reality television” and actual reality become blurred, and it becomes increasingly difficult to make distinctions between both. Throughout this paper, we will examine the extent to which media represents the world in which we live.
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.
Presently 98% of the households in the United States have one or more televisions in them. What once was regarded as a luxury item has become a staple appliance of the American household. Gone are the days of the three channel black and white programming of the early years; that has been replaced by digital flat screen televisions connected to satellite programming capable of receiving thousands of channels from around the world. Although televisions and television programming today differ from those of the telescreens in Orwell’s 1984, we are beginning to realize that the effects of television viewing may be the same as those of the telescreens.
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.
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.
When it comes to the topic of television, most of us would readily agree that watching television is a waste of time. Where the agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of “are there shows that increase our intelligence?” and what pleasure do some television show bring to us? I would say there are some great shows that increase our intelligence. Shows like “Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?” this kind of show puts the brain to work; thinking. There are some other shows that tend to convince us that watching television seduces our mind. I find Johnson’s argument about his article “watching television makes you smarter” confusing because he was not actually picking sides in the article and Steven’s “Thinking Outside The Idiot Box” argument about how “it’s really good at teaching you to think… about the future episode” (Steven, 296). Although I agree with the author of “Watching Television Makes you Smarter” Johnson to an extent, I cannot accept that he overlooks how much time people spends each day watching television.
Television is everywhere these days, not just in our living rooms but in bathrooms, kitchens, doctor's offices, grocery stores, airplanes, and classrooms. We have access to TV virtually anywhere and as American's we are taking advantaged of it. Adults aren't the only ones watching TV; children today are watching more TV than ever before. TV has even become known as "America's baby-sitter." (Krieg). Meaning that parents are now using the television as a way of entertaining their children while they attempt to accomplish other things such as cooking and cleaning.
First, TV can have its good side on a person’s life. TV programs that show role models can make kids change their lifestyle in a good way (Boyse). TV can teach preschoolers the alphabet and kids in grade school can learn about nature or wildlife (How TV Affects Your Child). Shows that show a good point can be good for a child’s behavior (Boyse). A study discovered that kids ages 3-5 that view TV had slightly higher reading scores (Boyse). Television can be entertaining and educational, can open up new worlds for kids, give a chance for children to travel the globe, learn about different cultures, and gain exposure to ideas they may never encounter in their own community (Boyse).