10 thoughts on “HW for Thu 10/31”

1. In the article “Does social media make us more or less connected?” by Mark Engler. Engler discusses the idea on whether or not social media strengthens our communities or harming our abilities to connect in person. Many individuals have their own opinions on this topic however, Engler stated “on sites such as Facebook, it is common for someone to have hundreds of “friends.” Yet, in reality, the experience does not always live up to the hype. Despite this ever- present promise of community, many people feel isolated and alone. Although people may have hundreds or even thousands of online “friends,” they may have few actual people in real life they can rely on.” This emphasizes that the author believes people spend most of their time fixed on a screen “communicating” to people through their phones while they’re sitting in a room full of people they could be having a real conversation with. Social media gives many teenagers nowadays the feeling that they have so many friends and makes them feel better about themselves but in reality they’re lonely and depressed. Im sure if you spend many hours offline you feel like you’ll be missing something important but, is that really true? or is it the other way around? because I personally think if you’re on social media for many hours you tend to miss many important experiences/events in the real world. Many of us feel the need to update our Facebook status or tweet about what happened to us on the way to school every chance we get, and while they’re “communicating” through social media the question is are they communicating in real life? the simple answer is probably not, at least not as much as they would be without social media. Therefore, social media is in fact an addiction that makes people less social in the real world. Additionally, I agree with Engler’s statement and I believe that social media is detrimental to our society and the well being of many individuals to the point where life without social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and twitter is hard to imagine. Then again many individuals believe life has gotten easier and they are in fact more social since they’re able to communicate to family members in different parts of the world but is that really considered communication?  

   Reply

2. In the article, “Do Video Games Inspire Violent Behavior” by Greg Toppo supports the fact that video games does not influence violence. Greg has done his research and talked to many for his studies and nothing has 100% shown or stated video games are the reason for violence. In his article he states, “In a way, we are pointing fingers at the wrong people. When we worry that a violent game is going to turn our kids into killers, aren’t we the ones who can’t tell fantasy from reality? Kids already know the difference.” Greg Toppo is basically implying that video games are not in the position to be upheld for the blame. It is simply a fantasy view for people to enjoy and have fun. People should be able to distinguish from reality and entertainment. I agree with Greg Toppo because why would society blame video games? Society is so quick to blame something that sounds like nonsense. People who act in violence would not do it all over a video game. Movies and music promote violence as well in a way, but isn’t attacked. Isn’t there more to violence than video games ? Such as ones mental state, life situation, or anything more crucial than a fantasy game played through a screen and a controller? Then again, video games can always teach people the wrong things, no?

   Reply

3. In the article “Teens and Social Media: When is it Too Much? by Dr. Max J Coppes. He empathizes  the use of social media on teenagers. Likewise he talk about kids that are old enough to understand social media are also getting addictive. According to the article it says “teenage boys uses technology more than 70 minutes per day. Teenage girls have the highest usage at just over 140 minutes per day.” Basically Coppes is saying that girls uses technology more than boys, which I think that no matter if the teenager is a girl or a boy, both uses social media and even more than just 140 minutes per day, some teenagers spend most of their time using technology. Also in the article Coppes states “The emotional symptoms they experience are very similar to those seen in substance abuse” He points out that technology use is similar to substance abuse. But how can he compare a substance addiction to social media overuse?. I don’t think social media overuse have the same symptoms because substance abuse can cause you a damage, emotional and physical and it only has cons, in comparison to social media that has pros and cons, for example that it can be use to do homework and learn new things. 

   Reply

4. In the author-published article labeled “Is social Media Bad for You?” by Loren Soeiro. Loren Soeiro argues that social media such as Facebook or Instagram use leads to depression and loneliness. Soeiro points out “studies have also shown that higher social media use is associated with higher anxiety.” He further admits that the studies do not prove this claim. Although, Soeiro main claim proves that social media use results in bad consequences such as isolation, his claim goes back and forth with stating social media leads to many things but then again there is not so much background information to prove this information. In The article, Soeiro issue is with the assistive amount of social media use causing people to be isolate and so o. As an working college student the media is part of my everyday life. when it come to work and school  the internet is a daily necessity especially because everything is so revolved around he internet How do you know how someone feels? Everyone is not the same, social media may feel better about themselves, you can’t be the one to say that someone is unhappy.  How can you say this? There is a possibility that people already have depression and anxiety from other things and they just us social media to take their mind off what they are going through. Overall, you cannot determine how a person is really feeling because of social media although is might relate, it may not be certain.

   Reply

   Reply

5. In an article titled “Rise in teen suicide connected to social media popularity” by Associated Press reports that suicide amongst teens who mostly spend their time on social media. The authors refer to a study by the centers for disease control which found “ An increase in suicide rates among US teens occurred at the same time social media use surged and a new analysis suggests there may be a link”. In other words, suicide rates in the U.S are rising, and most of them suicide are connected to social media. Many teens who spend most of their time on social media they get bully by others who are also using social media this kind of bullying known as cyberbullying. The Associated Press points out “Recent teen suicides have been blamed on cyberbullying, and social media posts depicting “perfect” lives may be taking a toll on teens’ mental health”. For example, in social media people only show what other people want to see like having “ perfect selfie” with using filters that makes you look “ perfect”. But people never show their true selves, if someone shows their true self often they get bully. Teens who use social media are the most depressed than teens who don’t use social media. Associated Press adds “in 2009, 58 percent of 12th-grade girls used social media every day or nearly every day; by 2015, 87 percent used social media every day or nearly every day. They were 14 percent more likely to be depressed than those who used social media less frequently”. For instance, people who post a lot of pictures of themselves other people can comment on their picture saying negative things. After they read negative comments about themselves, they feel about themselves. What about the people who use less social media but still would get bully?. Social media should be careful about what they let people do on their social platforms.

   Reply

6. In the article “Anime voice actor Vic Mignogna loses big as judge drops final claims that Dallas-area studio and colleagues defamed him” by Sharon Grigsby. Grisby discusses about the court hearing of Vic Mignogna and how Vic had basically lost the entire hearing. There is a piece in the article that states “The first batch of dismissals came Sept. 6 as Mignogna’s astonishingly disorganized — and at times ill-prepared and illogical — legal team tried to make its case before Chupp.  Eleven days after that hearing, the judge summoned attorneys for both sides to his Tarrant County chambers and ordered mediation.”. This is a very weightless claim to make if you are not providing evidence to conclude such a claim. What makes them ill-prepared and illogical? It seems that the article is not only addressing the situation but also bringing in a hot take that is completely ignorant to only one side of the story. I have been constantly getting myself updated with the status of Vic’s legal team, and they had seemed to be very prepared for the outcomes of the court hearing. In fact, Ty Beard expected for the judge to dismiss Jamie Marchi’s case because it did not have a level of evidence that can be used against her. The legal team was predicting that this hearing would be a very hit or miss situation, so to just call them unorganized and illogical without any prior knowledge or backup makes Grisby seem as if they are writing to only understand one side.

   Reply

7.      In the article “blame game: violent video games do not cause violence” Andrew fishman discusses a set of studies that were used to examine the behavior of people while playing video games. In the first study there were 2 games demonstrated, that both had significant differences in the level of difficulties. While one game just required 2 buttons, the other one required the mouse and 20 different buttons. In the second study researchers researchers used 2 shooting games with different levels of violence, one where guns were used and  after a shooting the opponent sufferers bloody deaths and another where only a paint ball gun was used and after a shooting the opponent just disappeared.both games were very similar. After running test on the level of aggression Used while playing these games researchers found no differences between the 2 groups. This study shows us that the video games aren’t what’s making people violent, it’s the level of difficulty. The harder a game is to win the higher levels of Aggression used to beat the game. Many players act out only because the game requires more energy to beat, not because the game is violent. When given 2 very similar games, no contrast were made because it’s not the game causing the violence.
                 in another article “Why I Don’t Trust the “Video Games Cause Violence” jamie begins to analyze what studies on “violent behavior” depicts. Many of the actions that studies consider violent aren’t a good definition or example of what the true nature of violence is.A lot of the games used on subjects do not have high eternal validity “blast other people with obnoxious but non-harmful noise, rob them of opportunities to win prizes in a competition, or even put too much hot sauce on people’s food.” Games like this lack any type of physical contact and yet their being used to generalize all games as the cause of violence. Many of the responses given in a game would not actually happen In Real life, so it would be unfair to use games like this to call people violent. Although some violent games may lead to violence related thoughts ,these thoughts are short lived due to the fact that there are so many things in society that prevent non-violence, like laws that distribute consequences if aggressive actions were to take place.
            There are some people who claim video games  are the cause of violence but a majority of them take this side mainly because they choose to ignore  other things that actually cause violence such as Poverty,abuse..etc. In the article “Playing video games does not make you a mass shooter,””Okane discusses how the public is more likely to blame video games for violence when it’s a white person “White people don’t play video games more than people of color,”. This is why these games are pulled into conversations as a “baseless excuse.” “While 165 million Americans play video games, billions play them worldwide.” Many other countries play video games but they do not connect it to mass shootings and violence but our country insist because they rather turn a blind eye to the actual causes.
          

   Reply

8. In the article “How Social Media is Playing a Great Role in Our Daily Life” by Crystal J. Briscoe he discusses that people do not look at newspapers anymore or news sites. They trust apps and social media’s to give information about what is happening around the world. People are discovering new friends online and on their free time they are use their phones using many apps. An example from the Article, “Social media such as LinkedIn allows people to create professional networks that help them search for jobs or get tips on how to enhance their careers. With such networks, people are spending less time looking for jobs through newspapers and are turning to social media.” Social media helps you find jobs easily. You can apply to different jobs as much as you want. Social media helps you become famous and make money. Such as  you tube or Instagram they pay you for your pictures or videos depending on your followers and viewers. Crystal believes social media benefits us in communication, marketing, jobs and making friends. Social media helps me talk to my grand parents that lives far away and it feels good to talk to your loved ones because you miss them all the time. Social media helped me find a job before. It benefited me in many ways. I agree with Crystal and his point of view. One question i have for the article is does social media make us blind from the reality we live in? 

   Reply

9. In the article, “The real problem with video games,” Seth Schiesel claims that video games may cause an unpleasant issue but, its not violence. Throughout the article, he mentions the recent Parkland shooting, where he states that Donald Trump suggested that, “video games are creating monsters.” He questions whether Donald Trump statement is accurate. Schiesel did not agree with this part of Trump’s statement. But he did agree that “bad things” are happening due to video games. He suggest that the problem is not violence because a recent study found that 37% of attackers are likely to exhibit violence due to “poems, essays, and journal entries.” This study is demonstrating that the attackers are not attracting violence from video games but rather from their own thoughts. He supports this study by stating that,  “decades of research, after all have failed to find any significant relationship between playing violent video games and behaving violently in real life.” So, then why continue questioning the issue? But, Seth further explains that the problem is more about the “culture” and not the “content.” With this he is stating that the problem comes before even logging in to play the game. It’s not about what you can obtain from playing games, its about what you’ve already learned from the outside world. The outside world contributes the effects video games can have. He goes on to say that, “the bigotry, social abuse, sexism, and other toxic behavior to which players too often subject one another when gaming together online.” He suggest that the comments given to each other is the real problem and this causes emotional abuse. As a result, video games don’t exhibit violence but contains a larger problem; emotional abuse. 

   Reply

10. In the article “Information and information: Why technology isn’t killing Creativity” by James Ingram supports the idea that technology has a beneficial impact on helping an individual to be more creative. Ingram also argues that technology is needed to improve the brain to develop and learn new ideas. He states “Technology doesn’t only enable creativity, but nurtures it”. Which I totally disagree to because I don’t believe that technology helps or encourage the development of creativity. Creativity is build within taking in new information or it can be a natural talent like painting which can be achieved by practicing hard. Searching on Google can copying someone else’s talent and trying to make it your own is not called “creativity”. Therefore, technology ruins the idea of creativity and how it should be shown to the world

    Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.