Thirty Minutes Later: Are You Smarter Yet?

Each and all night millions upon millions of plenty turn on their tellys and tune in to their best-loved programs. Most volume rally that this fashion is perfectly normal and that cryptograph is either exceptionally good or detrimentally unskilled round doing so. Others actually look at that ceremonial goggle box stub and both(prenominal)times does ingest you smarter. I determine that the general statement tv founders you smarter is not take upicular enough when talking more or less such an issue. I think that some video recording programs wad help you gain some knowledge exclusively I do not believe that all television involves you smarter.So, does ceremonial occasion television make you smarter, dumber, or does it wear no affect at all? In St change surface Johnsons es hypothecate Watching TV Makes You Smarter he argues that observance television alters the mental maturation of young commonwealth for the damp (291). Meaning that when young stack m eet television it can aide in the development of their minds. In a nutshell, he is truism that ceremonial television can actually make a soulfulness smarter. In his essay, Johnson offices the popular show 24 to support his admit. He states that to make common sense of an episode of 24 you have to pay attention, make inferences, and track social relationships(279).Johnson refers to this as part of what he calls the Sleeper Curve. Johnson believes that the Sleeper Curve is the maven to the highest degree important new force altering the mental development of young nation today, and it is largely a force for good(279). He acquiesces that the media may indeed bear more negative messages but he doesnt think that is the altogether elbow room to evaluate whether our television shows be having a positive impact or not. In adept part of his essay, Johnson compares the clever line of merchandise of watching shows like Frasier, and The Mary Tyler Moore Show to the physical strain of watching Monday Night Football.With that comparison he is basically verbal expression that the mantrap doesnt have to think al close to the content of the show in disposition to follow the storyline the same way a person doesnt have to actually play football in order to enjoy a game. Throughout his essay, Johnson counterbalance goes as far as to say that even bad television has gotten better. To validate this point he talks about Joe Millionaire and The Apprentice.He discusses how in order how in order to win the show contestants had to outdo current obstacles, figure out weak spots in the game, and use everything they learned to complete the lastchallenge which usually contained a twist. This goes to say that on the surface it may seem like these shows are well-situated to follow but they contain surprises that may interrupt what the viewer plan was going to happen. Johnson states that traditional narrative excessively trigger emotional connections to the charac ters (291). He explains this by talking about the largely popular show Survivor, and how because our emotions are involved it becomes easy to vote some ace off the island as contradictory to someone else.I think that only certain types of television shows makes you smarter, so part of me agrees with Steven Johnsons argument. I think that people can learn things from certain gentles of shows. When a person watches show on the Food Network, the person result most likely learn how to prepare a new dish, or improve upon a technique that they are having trouble with. Another modelling would be when children watch Dora the Explorer. Some people might only see a show like this as way to keep open children quiet and occupied.What they would realize if they actually sat down and watched an episode or two is that children can earn m both things like shapes, colors, functions, letters and even some Spanish, all deep down the thirty minute runtime of the show. There may be some sitcoms o r reality shows out there that you can learn from but I have yet to find one that I learned a lesson from. The reason I entert fully agree with his argument that television makes you smarter is because I think only certain types of shows make you smarter. I think in his essay he is referring to all television shows and genres.I think he is referring to all genres in his argument because he doesnt say that any specific genre or show is excluded. I get dressedt think a person can learn anything from a football game, or an episode of Family Guy because, in my opinion, these shows have the sole decide of entertaining the people that watch them. Family Guy is an animated series about a family and all of the crazy situations they get themselves in to. By the way, one member of the family is a talking baby. In Dana Stevens essay, Thinking Outside the moron Box, she blatantly disagrees with Johnson.She even goes as far as to mock him saying, If watching television really make you smarte r, as Steven Johnson argued in an article wherefore I guess I need to watch a pass out more televisionbecauseI could make no sense of Johnsons piece(295). I think this comment used logos because she is saying that since she wasnt able to understand Johnsons argument maybe she doesnt watch enough television. Of course this comment was a sarcastic one. In order to make this point clearer she references the popular childrens show Teletubbies, saying that it is essentially a tutorial instructing toddlers the basics of vegging out (Stevens 296).She thinks that the show 24 teaches you nothing except to watch further episodes of the show. Stevens also states that Johnsons claim for television as a tool for brain enhancement seems deep and hilariously bogus (297). So, clearly Stevens is a part of the theme of people that do not think television makes you smarter. I dont think Stevens is totally watching television. I think instead she is against people watching television all the time a nd thinking it will make them smarter. She thinks that adults should monitor the amount of television they watch, the same way they monitor the fare f alcoholic drinks they consume at a bar.Stevens ends her essay by giving readers a way to test Johnsons theory study Television Turnoff Week (298). Even if the participants IQ doesnt drop from not watching television, it would still give peoples minds a break from watching television and give them the luck to tune back in with real people, real problems, and real life. She also mentions a handheld device that can switch off any television set within twenty to twenty-five feet. The difference amid this remote and any other remote already on the food market is that this remote would have the ability to tame all television sets within its radius.Like with any new technology there are both proponents and opponents. Proponents think that this device will restore peace and calmness to public places such as airports and bus stations. Opp onents think this just another way for people to try to control their lives. I think the device is very encroaching(a) and controlling. If people want to watch television for twenty-four hours straight, they are adults and they should be able to do that. This device relates to the debate about television because people that think television is watched too oftentimes would want this remote to be used. entirely for people that think television is useful as well as entertaining, the use of this device would seem like an invasion of privacy. I am personally on the fence of this issue. I think some television programs have educational value. I also think people should watch less television, and perhaps pick up a book- which are turn out to make you smarter. I think shows such as Wheel of Fortune, Family Feud, and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire make you smarter because you cant help but absorb yourself in the show and try to get the answers right.Even if you get the answers wrong, or neer use the information you gained, you sill learned something. On the other hand, I dont think reality television shows can teach you anything at all. Think of your preferred reality show, now take a few seconds to make a mental list of the things you have learned from watching that show. If you can think of anything at all, the list is probably very short. This is ok because the sole purpose of television is not to educate people. I think television is supposed to be watched for entertainment purposes.If you were to take a diadem of the television shows people watch on a regular basis, most of the answers would probably be Scandal, Teen momma, and NCIS. These shows I would have to say contain very little to nothing to teach a person. Some shows can even encourage bad behaviors and influence people to do bad things. Lets take the popular MTV show Teen Mom for instance before the show first premiered, when teens would get big(predicate) they didnt think it was cool, or cute, an d they definitely were not posting pictures on Facebook with their fraught(p) friends.When teenage girls saw all of the fame the booster cables of the show were getting, it somehow registered in their minds that if they got pregnant at a young age they would somehow become the star of a show, get paid for it, and live a happy life. What they dont realize until its too late is that most of the rack on reality shows are staged and fake. One of my personal favourite(a) shows was Jersey Shore, which was a reality show about a group of strangers living in a house together for a number of months.The show followed all of the drinking, smoking, drama, and sex that went on in that house. What young teens seemed to freeze was that the people on that show were of legal drinking age that were held accountable for their own actions, so when they went out assay to mimic the cast members behavior they and their parents ended up in trouble. This supports my claim that some television programs are for entertainment purposes because when things are imitated that shouldnt be the consequences are much worse in real life than they are on the show.I also feel as though the time people spend watching television could be spent doing more productive things such as exercising, working, reading, or having and actual conversation with someone. If people sent half as much time doing things like that as they do watching and recording their favorite shows I think people would be a lot better and happier. In my opinion watching television is like a ambiguous sword. Watching television sometimes for entertainment purposes is a good way to relax and connect with friends and family.I think the trouble happens when people become consumed with their favorite shows and totally disconnect from the real world. I admit. There have been a few times when I have been doing something and I just dropped everything because I knew the season premiere of my favorite show would be starting son. But s ome people drop everything for every episode of their favorite show. That kind of behavior can actually hurt relationships because no one wants to be constantly tuned out by a show that will most likely come on multiple times within the close few days.I think until someone does some sort of definitive question on whether or not watching television makes a person smarter, this will be an ongoing debate. Things like remote devices that can control any television arent going to change peoples opinions. If anything it will only make them feel angry towards the people trying to control a part of their lives. Television just like anything else in the world has its positive and negative points. I just dont think one of those positives is making people smarter.