Monday, March 9, 2015
Popular Culture
Response to Pop Culture Texts
Your initial response should be in full sentences, paragraph form and should: a. State the text you chose b. State the purpose of the argument. (1 sentence) c. Write a claim defending or challenging this argument. (1 sentence) d. Examine the implications of this argument on today’s society? (2-3 sentences) Then read your classmates posts. Pick two classmate’s to respond to. Your response should include- a. Whether you agree or disagree with their position and why. b. One question to further their thinking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The text I read was "Godzilla vs. the Giant Scissors: Cutting the Antiwar Heart out of a Classic" by Brent Staples. The intention of this piece was to discuss how people, specifically Americans can alter things to be in their favor. This piece talked about how the movie "Godzilla" originally had a different plot where the main story line revolved around the nuclear bombing of Japan. But when American companies had the chance to distribute this film in our nation, all of the antinuclear themes, and dialogue dealing with human suffering was left out to put America in a more favorable light. The initial essence of the movie had been cut out due to editing. I agree with Staples in that, higher authority figures can "play God" and filter the popular culture to whatever they want, but the original forms are becoming accepted more and more. This is a good change for society, because popular culture has been highly influenced by the media, and the media usually can't be trusted to give the unbiased side of things. Seeing the "uncut versions" of things could open eyes and be very beneficial.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with you Varun, that movie makers and entertainment providers can “play God” by not only producing films that alter actual events but also by influencing society’s ways of thoughts, actions, and beliefs. In the movie Godzilla alone, the one part of the movie that could actually serve to educate its audience was cut out to steer clear from any hostile feelings that could erupt in regards to America. TV and movies essentially can influence a certain generation’s perceptions of past events (wars) or recent debates (same sex marriage). A question to think about is what role to movie ratings play on which ages are exposed to what topics? And if they should play a big or small role?
DeleteI agree with you, Varun, that more often people want the full story in their films and in your statements about the power of filmmakers. I think that films based on historical events are often only half of the story, as filmmakers want to create added drama or portray a specific point of view in the story. Therefore, I think moviegoers often have to keep in mind that the two and a half hours they just watched isn’t the most accurate depiction of history. Do filmmakers have an obligation to be accurate in their work?
DeleteI chose to read “The Argument against TV” by Corbett Trubey. The argument surrounds the idea of a “TV Turnoff Week”, which was a challenge to all Americans to turn off their televisions for a week and do some other activity. Trubey argues that television, while it can entertain us and make us think, wastes our time and diverts our attention from the many other forms of entertainment we could divulge in. Even as I sit at my computer, Netflix open on another tab, I must agree with Trubey’s claim that television does take up a lot of our time that could be spent doing other activities. With TVs and online streaming becoming more and more popular, more of our time is spent catching up on shows and movies. DVR allows us to watch shows wherever we want, and Netflix allows us to watch it whenever we want. Though reading a good book and enjoying time with friends are certainly entertaining, there is something about television that draws us all in, and it would be worthwhile to take a step back and invest our time in other activities. Straying away from the television would give people more time to read, catch up with friends, and enjoy nature. There’s a chance you could miss what’s on television, but with all the media and technology we have now, it wouldn’t end up being that big a deal.
ReplyDeleteOlivia, I agree with your claim that with all of the resources we have nowadays, missing a little bit of what’s on television isn’t that major if you are spending your time doing other things like hanging out with friends and reading a good book. When I go to Cape Cod with my family we are very limited in our television channels; I think that because of this we’re more likely to do activities outside of the house and bond knowing that we really aren’t missing anything in the living room (not to mention our DVR is recording all our shows at home). I think that people are starting to realize that there is more to life than just television, but I can’t blame anyone for going on a TV binge every once in a while. Do you think that the TV Turnoff Week is useless now that other technologies have taken on the same overwhelming presence over our lives as television?
DeleteOlivia, I agree that TV has overrun our lives and the growth of technology has only encouraged it in recent times. With shows available to stream instantly it's hard for people to unplug, but once they do, it's definitely beneficial. Like you mentioned, the activities that can be done instead of watching TV are endless, and the benefits equally as numerous. Should TV Turnoff Week be extended and made longer in order for people to benefit greater from it?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI chose to read, “The Argument Against TV,” by Corbett Trubey. The author stresses the idea that television has taken over the lives of Americans, keeping us from experiencing the world around us and reaching our full potential. While television is a popular form of entertainment that millions of Americans enjoy, it is beginning to consume the people of the United States. By gluing ourselves to the TV for hours on end, we are wasting time that could be used more productively, such as finishing school work and projects that are necessary in order to graduate. This obsession with television can also be detrimental to one’s health, both mentally and physically. Choosing to sit on the couch all day and watch television, rather than to hang out with friends or participate in sports and other after school activities, detaches us from society. Its not a healthy lifestyle either, as binge watching a favorite show takes time away from being active and staying physically fit. The more time we spend watching actors behind a glass screen encounter different situations and challenges, the less time we have to explore and experience the world outside of our living room.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree. I would also add that it is also mental. You discussed a lot of physical drawbacks of watching lot of TV, but it is very mental as well. Just watching a bit of TV here and there instead of working sets a precedent of avoidance of responsibilities. I actually would contend that the mental aspect of TV watching is worse than the physical one. I look at the issue as progressive. People can get mentally hooked on TV and then their health will suffer because of the mental addiction. The responsibilities are not the only ones on the losing end of this viscous cycle. America is trying to out-compete other global powers while cramming as much TV watching in as possible. What can replace TV that is actually productive, but does not necessarily feel like work?
DeleteI think that Preston brings up a really interesting point. We all say that TV is detrimental to ones health and I am not trying to argue against that. However, as high school students we can all contend that schoolwork can become exhausting and it is possible to become too involved in after school activites and be overwhelmed. I know personally I use television to unwind after finishing my schoolwork, and I have not seen a huge impact on myself because I've learned how to properly manage my priorities. Is televison really the issue here or is it just an aid to help people relax and step away from work?
DeleteI read The Argument Against TV by Corbett Trubey. The purpose of this argument is to persuade a change in society to stop wasting time being “entertained” in front of a TV. The author encourages a type of cognitive junk food that actually engages or sedates the mind. A claim that challenges this argument is that the whole point of TV is to indulge in an activity that gives an individual’s brain time to relax before they go back to their hectic lives. In society these days many people are going to school or working 40 hour work weeks or taking care of a family. For the most parts, our brains are working hard figuring out a math problem or whether to get medical insurance from one company or another. TV is that release for most people, a way they can relax and get away from the stresses and reality of their own life. It allows them a time to live an interesting life through their favorite characters or just simply laugh at the useless reality TV shows. We have enough forced activities in our lives that require engagement of the mind; TV and music are two things people use to get away from reality even if it’s just for an hour.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that TV is not all bad. However, your catharsis based argument I find to be illogical. TV is addicting and people get automatically hooked (ever seen a person with glazed over eyes staring blankly at the screen?). This allows them less time to complete the very things they are stressing about. In turn, the person will actually become even more stressed. Further, watching TV instead of doing assignments creates guilt when the person realizes that they just pushed off yet another assignment. I think TV, instead of being an impractical outlet for stress, should be a reward. It should be seldom enjoyed. This would create a better work ethic in order to gain that TV reward. Life is short, why waste it watching TV?
DeleteI feel the same way as you, Iram, because Trubey even says himself that individuals are capable of reading and doing many other activities than watching TV. We have heard it time and time again that TV is an unproductive waste of time, yet we do it anyway. We enjoy TV for exactly that reason, we want a break. Not all of us have the opportunity to live the lives of a 90210 star, and that is why we watch it. Do you think that TV is entirely bad for an individual?
DeleteI agree with you Iram because as stated by you and Skyler, most people choose to watch TV to get a break. We work hard all day so that we have the chance to watch TV and catch up on the newest news or shows. In a way, TV is an award itself from working hard the rest of the day. Yes, we could be more productive but taking a break is essential in order to relieve stress. How do you think watching TV affects the way we think/make choices?
Delete
DeleteIram, I agree with many of the aspects of your stance. While ideally a world without TV might be more productive and we may be more socially invested, I don’t believe that completely cutting yourself off from television is a good idea. Like you said, television offers an outlet for hard working and stressed out individuals to take a step back and relax. It is important for such people to take an hour or two out of their busy week just to unwind with their favorite show. This offers our minds a break, free of learning (though often television can intellectually stimulating if one is invested), which can be beneficial to our mental and emotional health and our stress level. Do you feel that, rather than turning off the TV, we should be encouraging more people to take an hour or two out of their week solely to enjoy television?
Godzilla vs. the Giant Scissors: Cutting the Antiwar Heart out of a Classic
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of this text is to show how popular culture is untamed, money driven, and can have a massive influence over the American public. The American public takes popular culture at face value without once questioning the back story or facts of what they are viewing. In today's society popular culture is more influential and prevalent than ever before. People blindly accept whatever they see on TV and in movies as fact. The population misses out on the deeper meaning and sometimes cut out truths.
I feel the same way as you because it seems like, now more than ever before people rely on popular culture and media for their information. I believe that this is partially due to the emergence of technology and how rapidly we can receive things such as news. Many people don't understand the money driven nature of popular culture and still use it as the guideline for what to do. Do you think without the development of apps like Twitter we would have this problem?
DeletePreston, I agree with what you said entirely. In this day and age, people are becoming extremely reliant on pop culture, taking what they see as the truth. I feel that this is especially prevalent in movies that are adaptations of true stories. Certain events are "twisted" in favor of adding entertainment value, and people see this and think it is the way that it in fact happened. Do you think movies based on true stories should remain entirely accurate to what happened, or should they be altered in favor of entertainment?
DeleteI agree with you, Preston. The American public often does not question what they are shown. This is especially true when they watch TV and are exposed to ads while their minds are numb. But, do you think that advertising in other places makes them question deeper meanings, makes them open their eyes?
DeleteSuch claims are certainly true, to an extent. Maybe I'm old fashion, but I prefer older values and some social norms. But the fact is, social values and expectations are evolving and will continue to evolve. Further reflection poses the question, are people much different than they used to be? Think about it; people relied on newspapers for truths, people were certainly money driven, and were sometimes just as naive. This has come to be known as a natural human norm, unfortunately. What do you see to be the primary difference between then and now?
DeletePreston, I agree that the media has the influence and power to persuade people into believing what they put in their movies and shows. Even though it can portray not fully true information or leave out details, the media is a place that people can discuss things that may not be appropriate in a personal scenario. Do you think that the deeper meanings can actually be provoked from twisting the story?
DeleteIt is true that the movie industry before was driven by money. It is also reliant on people believing everything related to pop culture. People should be taught to not believe everything that come from pop culture. Entertainment value always trumps truth. What are ways “we” can prevent bias within the media industry?
DeleteI read “He Doesn’t Like to Watch” by Julia Scott. In this interview, Kalle Lasn tries to persuade the audience that television in public places is harming the public’s mental health (with its advertisements and misinformation) and therefore it is justified to employ the device: TV-B-Gone. Individuals taking it upon themselves to turn off television in public places cannot be justified for the sake of promoting the good of the public. While Lasn isn’t wrong that television is a major detractor in interpersonal relationships, if people were to turn off television in public places, such as sports bars, there would be a massive outrage. Additionally, Lasn’s explanation for using the TV-B-Gone device is the same as saying it is right to use service jammers because people are too glued to their mobile devices, no “vigilante” should have the power to take that privilege away.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you because TV has become something that everyone is accustomed to. I think that public places are not exactly where people go to actually get invested into watching TV for an extended period of time, but for the most part public TV's are just to break the silence. I do not think TV is harming the public's health just because of its use in public areas because people are going to watch it at home anyway. Do you think that the way to lessen the reliance on TV is to start with the public or the individual's private TV time?
DeleteI agree with you Mackenzie, people should have the right to watch what they want to when they want to, and it is up to them to make that choice, not others. I also agree with what Skyler said about TV's in public being used to break the silence, because I know from experience that if I wanted to watch TV, I would just stay at home in a quieter environment and do so. Television can definitely detract from interpersonal relationships, but are there ways that common interests involving TV can help forge new relationships?
DeleteYou bring up several interesting points, Mackenzie, all of which I agree with. While I do think that television can take away from social interactions, it’s an aspect of American culture that cannot simply be removed from public areas. Ultimately, it is a personal choice as to whether or not people want to spend their time watching television. However, if, for example, a person wishes not to eat in a restaurant that has televisions in its dining area, then they can choose to eat somewhere else. The decision to turn off TVs in public areas should not be made by one person alone; a majority of those present should be in agreement. If the TV-B-Gone device is installed in public places such as stores and restaurants, would businesses suffer due to the fact that TV is such a popular and valued source of entertainment in the United States?
DeleteI agree with you Mackenzie, that people have complete control over choosing what they want in a public area and if someone were to take this right away, there indeed would be outrage. Groups of people watching TV together in a public area creates a connection among everyone because everyone is being informed of the same news or is watching the same show, which they consider their entertainment. Laughing with others and just sharing interests improves society as a whole a whole lot. In what other ways can watching TV improve people's relationships?
DeleteYou're right, Mackenzie, in saying that even though TV can take away from actual communication, it's already such a big part of our culture that if people turned off public TVs, there would definitely be some conflict. Also, in our culture, one person isn't usually able to make a decision by themselves that might affect a larger group. The TV might actually serve to unite people and get them talking about interesting topics. How do you think people would be able to move away from public TVs without someone going up and outright turning it off?
DeleteI read "The Argument against TV" by Corbett Trubey. In this essay, Trubey is trying to persuade the readers to eliminate the use of TV in their lives because it does more harm than good. As much as I agree with his sentiments that there are better things to do with our lives than watch TV, I do not think it is as bad as he is making it out to be. Television is a way for people to stay connected in today's modern world, whether it is tabloid junk or legitimate information. I think "everything in moderation" applies well to this issue, because I do not think it is realistic to expect people to spend every moment of their free time doing something productive. It is okay to relax and just give your mind a break.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your application of "everything in moderation" here because yes, you really shouldn't be watching a screen 24/7 but that doesn't mean you have to deny yourself an hour or two to relax and enjoy a show. Corbett Trubey's call for elimination of TV watching is a bit extreme. Moderation can definitely be applied to almost everything, even healthy habit like eating fruit or something. Too much of anything can cause problems so TV shouldn't be seen as anything too different from any of the other everyday habits we have. Why do you think that we overindulge on TV to the point where some see a need to eradicate it when we know its not good for us?
DeleteSkyler, I agree that too much TV is a problem due to some of the harmful effects mentioned in the article. If people take some time to watch TV and some time to do productive things, such as study or do chores, than they can get the time they need to relax as well as accomplish something. Rather than staying on the couch and spending hours in front of a glowing screen, people can do both and still get the relaxation they want and enjoy their free time. Will there be any severe long lasting effects of TV overuse?
DeleteSkyler, I agree with you that it might not be as realistic to expect people not to relax once in a while and TV is able to become this outlet. If we immediately stopped watching TV as much, I think it'd be hard for a lot of people to adjust even though Trubey was saying exactly that. He wanted people to participate in TV Turnoff Week and do more productive things with that extra free time, like "earning a PhD, achieving master DJ status, or cultivating a garden". The reason so many of us watch TV is that it's a way for us to relax and sometimes that's needed in such busy lives. Do you think advancing technology will make it harder or easier to stop watching as much TV?
DeleteSkyler, I agree that TV can be a great resource when used in moderation, but many Americans abuse this source of entertainment, and as a result are wasting valuable time. I think that eliminating TV is not necessary, as it offers a viable source of entertainment, and in some cases information, in terms of current events, sports, etc. Do you think that TV is worth the amount of time that Americans spend watching it, or is it another source or easy entertainment?
DeleteI too agree with your sentiments towards television. As much as we know television is not the most productive use of our time, it is still a part of our culture and isn't going anywhere. Also, television is arguably the most widespread medium to learn about pop culture. Now comes the question of how much tv is too much? Do you think setting limits on broadcast times for fictional programs would negatively impact our society? If so, how?
DeleteI chose to read the article "He Doesn't Like to Watch" which focuses on the effect of televisions and peoples reliance on them. The author of the article, Julia Scott, proposes the need for the TV-B-Gone devices to replace the once popular "TV Turnoff Week." She states that these systems that cost approximately 15 dollars and have capability to shut off any television in the room that you are in. Undoubtedly, we live in a world that revolves around the use of electronics, and although this has become a major issue I do not believe this is the correct way to attack the problem. When I was in 6th grade, I remember participating in TV Turnoff Week, which at the time I believe was a big deal. We were given extra credit if we spent a complete week not turning on the television. I remember taking this seriously and for a week considering if I watched too much TV. The benefit of this program was that it was not forced rather it was optional if you were willing to explore life without your eyes glued to a TV screen. The fact that people watching sports games or news shows had the screen shut off without their consent is something I believe is unnecessary and frankly rude. There needs to be a change to stop peoples reliance on electronics, however I do not think that using a device to shut off business owned televisions without approval is the correct way to do so.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you Emily that turning TV off while someone is watching is not the best solution to our society's high TV/technology usage. As you said, its kinda rude and even intrusive. If we are using technology to monitor others' use of technology what does that say about our society? I think that it should be up to each family to regulate TV use as family norms often influence developed habits. I remember the TV turnoff week and I actually didn't mind it as it helped me understand the importance of prioritization and moderation. Do you think that parents should be held more accountable of how much TV and technology they let their children use?
DeleteI agree with you Emily that turning off TVs should be optional. Not only do TVs show “non -junk food” shows such as the news and sports, but also if people are forced into the non-TV mindset they are more likely to not explore the clear benefits. When I am forced into something rather than doing it with my own freewill, I am not open to the benefits. This could be due to stubbornness or even resentment. I have my mind made up that I want to watch TV but just am not allowed to. Once I can, I will go back to watching because I didn’t make the decision myself to stop watching. A question to think about is will incentives, such as free admission to parks or aquariums, which serve as an alternate to watching TV as well, benefit society?
DeleteI completely agree. Unless someone is doing it willingly, they aren't going to have a good experience or learn anything beneficial from taking the TV away. It's something that we have gotten so used to that taking it away from someone without consent would totally change their everyday routine and lifestyle. Would this be a completely bad thing? No, but they need to learn it themselves, not by being forced into it.
DeleteHow long do u think the average person can go without watching TV?
I chose to read “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” by Steven Johnson and focused particularly on the Televised Intelligence section. The purpose of this argument was to show how TV is not always detrimental to one’s mind as we are lead to believe as the increasing complexity of the programs’ plots is actually requiring more thought process and comprehension. I agree with this argument because while there are definitely shows that can be considered a waste of brain activity to watch, there are countless others that allow the realization of fun and exciting learning opportunity. Its difficult to find a children’s show that doesn’t revolve around some kind of teaching focus whether it be counting, the alphabet, and even how to act in certain social situations. I have personally learned a lot from some of the shows I watch like Scorpion and CSI because they allow exposure to different cultural and educational fields we aren’t always exposed to and have an interest in. The numerous storylines that can be compiled into a 44 minute time slot is actually amazing and adds a new level of comprehension skills to our society. I think that if one finds a balance between the show choice and off-screen time then they would be perfectly fine.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Mary-Kate, that not all television programs and shows are detrimental to one’s mind. In some ways, the shows we watch on TV allow us to experience varied aspects of the world around us that we would never be able to encounter in our own lives. However, just because these shows provide an opportunity for us to expand our horizons, doesn’t mean that we should spend hours on end glued in front of a television screen. Watching actors combat challenging situations on a TV show does not prepare or teach us how to move through the struggles we will face throughout life. Like you said, there needs to be a balance between on and off screen time. Living in a world that revolves around technology, what actions should be taken In order to encourage Americans to cut down on TV time?
DeleteMK, I agree with you that some television shows actually can require more thought than some may believe. TV isn't just filled with fluff, there are shows about history, forensics, mysteries, and even some dramas that make people think about what is going on. Personally, watching TV shows about forensic sciences have exposed me to a new interest area which led me to picking forensics as one of my electives next year- something I would not have known I have an interest in if I had not seen the show. Do only certain shows provoke thought, or is it up to us to decide what we invest our thoughts in?
DeleteI agree with you in that many of today's shows are becoming more and more interesting and realistic, so it allows you to learn more and more. The type of shows that interest the general audience isn't slapstick comedy anymore with a straightforward plot. they are shows that can push the limit of what TV can do. If you find the time to balance watching TV and doing other things, I believe it can be more beneficial than not watching at all. However when it comes to kids shows I don't think it can be very beneficial, many channels such as Cartoon Network don't deal with teaching anything. So do you think children should have readily available access to TV?
DeleteI agree with you completely. There are many different types of television, and most of them offer some educational benefit or exposure to a culture we wouldn't otherwise have access to. I have been able fins shows that teach languages, science, behavior, and more. Do you think that in some cases and on some topics TV surpasses a traditional education because it is able to say what it wants without being censored or adhering to the Board of Ed?
DeleteMary-Kate, I completely agree with the points you've brought up here. Many of the popular television programs we are exposed to today offer us complex story lines and characters partnered with elaborate and controversial “big pictures” that most definitely prompt their viewers to think and analyze. Although I’m sure all of us have gotten caught up in a television series or two that offer no true intellectual stimulation, it is more common nowadays to be invested into multiple thought-provoking shows that challenge us to contemplate intricate concepts. I personally am a big fan of the show Criminal Minds. While this show is most definitely entertaining, it also engenders viewers to analyze the information presented and come to sound conclusions while still following the story line and observing the character development throughout the show. Often these shows spark moral controversies for their audience to consider as well. Do you feel that such programs serve an important role in expanding the minds and learning capacity of people in today’s society?
DeleteI read, “The Argument against TV” by Corbett Trubey. The purpose was for Trubey to explain how watching TV for pure entertainment in a waste of time and should be eliminated from people’s lives. I disagree with this because watching TV isn’t as bad as Trubey is making it seem to be. During most of the day, our minds are constantly thinking and we are being productive and by watching TV, we give ourselves a break. It is impossible to eliminate watching TV because TV is one thing that gives us a peace of mind. TV also helps us stay informed and that is essential to society.
ReplyDeleteYaaaaaz Reeya! I agree haha, I don't think TV should be eliminated completely from our lives either. Like you said it's a good way to allow our minds to take a breather and relax. On the other hand, I do see how some TV shows could be destructive and invaluable to our lives, such as shows with a lot of violence or reality TV shows. If I had to compromise with Trubey then these kinds of shows should be replaced with shows that have more value and add knowledge to our lives.
DeleteHow do you think society would change if we had no TV?
I fully agree with you Reeya, while TV may seem like a pointless activity, it allows many people to relax and enjoy some quiet time. I think that your arguments based on the hectic lives of people today also ring true where TV should be considered a relaxing stress reliever; however, do you think that there is an extent to the amount of TV watched where relaxation becomes binge-watching?
DeleteReeya, I agree with you because I also believe that the issue is not as extreme as Trubey is making it seem. I feel like we need to have TV in our lives because it provides us with a break in the day that we otherwise would not have. Watching TV can help us de-stress and relax without doing any mental work. We may be watching it too much, but I feel as if getting rid of the television would be impractical. One thing to consider is how will children’s behavior change towards their parents if this pattern continues?
DeleteI read, "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" by Steven Johnson. The purpose of this argument was to convey the point that society as a whole is moving in a more intellectual direction, seeking entertainment that is more complex and intricate than before. I agree with this argument, as TV shows are quickly becoming more complex and more detailed than ever before. Hit shows such as Lost or 24 have detailed plots which captivated the audiences and kept them coming back for more. Many regard television as "dumbing down" our society, but this shows to be the opposite. while we may be moving in a direction of more complicated shows, we unfortunately are moving towards less moral shows, as shows covering topics such as drug abuse or teen pregnancy are on the rise. I feel we should continue to move forward with these though provoking shows, but shouldn't lose touch with the morals contained within them in the process.
ReplyDeletePat, I agree with you that members of society do appear to be shifting towards shows that are not only entertaining but also more intellectually stimulating. Some of the biggest shows on Netflix such as House Of Cards are critically acclaimed for how entertaining they are, yet they teach the viewers a lot about the way that our American Government truly functions. Do you think that some shows, while they may be thought provoking at times, do not point to our society moving in a more intellectual direction?
DeleteThe text I chose was "The Argument Against TV" by Corbett Trubey. The purpose of this argument was to inform the reader of the dangers overexposure to television can play in today's society. I agree with Trubey because too much television throughout one’s lifetime can "brainwash" a person and make them more of a consumerist and change their thoughts. If, like the average American, people are watching a total of 9 years of television, they could be wasting time better spent elsewhere. Like mentioned in the article, there are many things one can do with 9 years, and it's better to get out there and not let them go to waste.
ReplyDeleteJeff, I disagree slightly with your statement that too much television can "brainwash" a person because I think it should be specified and said that certain programs and language heard/seen on TV can brainwash an individual. 9 years of our lives watching television seems excessive so instead we should try to cut it down and only watch TV when we have free time and we are using it as a "gift." Do you think will all of our advanced technologies, TV's will even exist in the future?
DeleteI read “The Argument against TV” by Corbett Trubey in which he persuaded his audience to participate in TV Turnoff Week so they’d be able to get outside and enjoy real life without wasting time. The harsh reality is that we are all affected by TV in some way, shape, or form and many of us mindlessly sit in front of it as a form of “relaxation”. If we used this time to do other things, we would certainly be more productive and able to advance in many fields. I remember that in sixth grade, we participated in TV Turnoff Week and I was surprised at all the free time that I had. Participating in this surely wouldn’t be detrimental and we might even be able to better our social skills without having to use social media.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Zoha. TV does mold our minds, producing a mindless mass at sometimes. The degree to which someone watches is a factor, but overall we all become a bit numb is this widely participated in activity. However, wouldn't it be more useful to monitor our television use all year round instead of "fasting" from it for one week?
DeleteZoha, I would agree with you that TV does effect who we are as individuals, especially those people that are constantly watching/exposed to it. I also found it interesting that you could relate to the fact that eliminating TV from a person's schedule clears up long periods of time which can be used for more productive activities such as homework or sports, etc. Do you think that it would be practical to assume that people would willingly be able to part from their tradition of watching TV in order to participate in a TV Turnoff Week?
DeleteI agree with your statement that participating in TV turnoff week would not be detrimental, however, I do not think watching TV should have to get to that extent. We should look at TV as a privilege and a way to relax. Personally, on school nights with sports and homework I do not even have time to watch TV so I look forward to Saturday mornings when I can just relax on the couch and watch TV. Do you think if watching TV turned into more of a privilege for many people rather than an everyday necessity, things would change?
DeleteZoha, I completely agree that in our society, our addiction to TV has made us quite mindless at times, and while I agree that we would have dramatically more free time and would develop better social skills, I think that it would be hard to get everyone to agree to turn off the TV and do something more productive. Many people watch TV because it gives them a mindless escape, a retreat from their reality. So while I agree that this is a good idea in theory, in practice it will be harder because not everyone will want to unplug from their television. How do you think we could promote people spending less time watching TV?
DeleteI read "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," by Steven Johnson. The purpose of Johnson's argument is to inform readers that the Sleeper Curve, which he defines as TV shows making viewers "pay attention, make inferences, track shifting social relationships," is nutritional. Although the sleeper curve may appear to be a myth it engages audiences, promotes cognitive thinking, and demands that people be alert even in their down time. Johnson mostly refers to shows from the 80s in the excerpt from "Everything Bad Is Good For You," but the engagement shown with the Sleeper Curve is still shown today. This, however, can be a problem as when audiences are exposed to a certain level of complexity they become used to it. Therefore, the engagement we believe we are receiving is not doing a great job. We require more complexity for the Sleeper Curve to be nutritional for our generation; and without that stimulation we will not progress in our mental processes during our free time as our parents have.
ReplyDeleteAmy, I agree with you that the sleeper curve of TV plots an threads is not enough to be considered nutritional for TV watchers in this day and age. As you point out, most kids grow up on this sort of thing, getting accustomed to keeping up with complicate plot threads, and thus watching these shows is no longer as intellectually stimulating for them. But do you think that as we outgrow this sleeper curve, we should continue to look for our intellectually engaging sources from TV? I think it would be better if we now move onto different sources for this much needed stimulation.
DeleteThis week, I chose to read the article "The Argument Against TV" by Corbett Trubey. The purpose of Trubey's argument is to persuade the readers that it is necessary for them to eliminate the use of TV in their lives because rather than wasting time for entertainment purposes, there are better alternatives that they can participate in to live a more productive life. TV is essentially acting as a buffer which has kept us from fully experiencing the world in its entirety. Although, I would agree that TV does limit our productivity in our daily lives, it also is very beneficial. Not only does it help to entertain and relax people after all of the work and troubles that they may encounter on a day to day basis; it also can serve to be a tool for informing people of important news stories. The key is not to eliminate TV from our lives entirely, but rather to ensure that we do not cross the line from moderately enjoying TV, to it becoming an aspect of our life that appears to be taking over.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi Umaid, I would disagree with your claim that TV is very beneficial. It can have some benefits as an effective way to quickly dispense information, like news channels do, but I don't believe that as a means of relaxing, TV is very beneficial. There are other ways to relax that are more active and perhaps even more enjoyable than watching TV, like spending time with family, reading, or some physical activity. It's not that TV is a terrible thing for someone, and certainly it is a low-stress enjoyable activity, I just think that there are better ways to spend ones's time, but given one's other demands, it may not be possible or as appealing to spend more energy than watching TV would require. What do you think?
DeleteI chose to read "Watching TV Makes You Smarter by Steven Johnson. Johnson makes the argument that modern popular TV makes viewers have to pay attention more than older TV shows because of all of the complicated plot threads and intricate, interacting parts. While I agree that it might be true that more recent shows make people think harder, I do not think that it makes people smarter. There are so many more productive things a person could do if they were truly seeking to improve their intelligence then to just watch a TV show, that supposedly makes one smarter with it's complicated plot line. Also, people can still continue to take these more complicated shows at face value, if a person is not actively engaged in keeping track of plot twists, then it will continue to do nothing to make the person any smarter.
ReplyDeleteTessa, I agree with you that he exaggerated the benefits of watching TV on the brain. I think that more recent TV shows do engage the mind more, making the viewer more intelligent. However, I think that he did not put this into perspective: sure it is stimulating the mind but the amount is so insignificant compared to what the viewer should be doing if engaging their mind were the actual goal. I really like the point you bring up about how the plot lines/character relationships/mysteries etc. are not even gaurunteed to be picked up on - people could still gloss right over it if they're not actively thinking, meaning that it is not necessarily better, it just has the potential to be better, making the mind-engaging aspect even more insignificant. Why do you think that TV shows became more complicated in the first place? Are we really getting smarter? Are we just more used to entertainment so harder to please? A different reason?
DeleteTessa, I disagree with your claim that more recent television makes people smarter. The intricate plot lines and complex metaphors are few and far in between. 99% of TV shows are adapted stories from past shows. Modern shows only change the working parts of the story, but not the story itself. Essentially, you are watching a rerun every time you flip on the TV. Have we lost our creativity? Perhaps. Or maybe the shows from the past also borrowed from its ancestors.
Delete
ReplyDeleteI chose to read “He Doesn’t Like to Watch” written by Julia Scott. Scott talks to Kalle Lasn who is an editor-in-chief. Lasn provides her readers with information and aims to convince her readers that the publics’ mental health is being harmed with the airing of televisions. They begin to discuss improving quality of life with little things, such as TV Turnoff Week. Personally, when I go to restaurants or fiends’ houses, it is nice to have the TV on in the background for extra noise and to occasionally lance at, however it certainly does not take away form the conversations I am having. Lasn talks about TV-the educational aspect of TV Turnoff Week and I agree with her statement that the educational component is not being sacrificed. I know a few weeks ago in Lang, we were talking to Ms. Lodge and she told us how her son watches television and some of the words he learned are ones that she has not taught him; therefore, learning does come from television sometimes. That being said, the programs that people watch need to be appropriate. At a sports bar, putting a game on television is very appropriate and shouldn’t be taken away.
I agree with you, Becca. TV definitely has a time and place, but we shouldn't completely scorn it and shame it as a bad influence. Like you said, TV has many educational components as well as adding background noise or a temporary distraction. You mentioned that it was appropriate to watch a game in a sports bar. What are some circumstances where you think TV would be inappropriate?
Delete"The Argument Against TV" by Corbett Trubey was written in 1999 to discuss the upcoming TV Turnoff Week. Trubey structured his argument against television. He argued that because the average American watches 9 years worth of TV in their lifetime, obesity and homicide have increase while education and exercise has decreased. Trubey's claim, while outdated, is also inaccurate and based on logical fallacies. While marathoning an entire TV show in one weekend may be bad for your temporary physical health, television in the long run is not harmful to educational or physical development. Many shows today are educational or are based on facts or real-life situations that are never taught in school. For example, I watch shows that are pure science to shows based on situations such as domestic violence, which has never been covered in school but is extremely important to know about. I also watch "mind-numbing" entertainment programs, but the messages they teach are the same as if I were to read a book with a similar plot line. Not only is TV educational in that regard, it also allows people who are illiterate to still be taught these lessons through a different medium. We live in a digital world and to not adapt to these changes and use them for good would be a foolish mistake.
ReplyDeleteMe read "The Argument against TV" by Corbett Trubey. In his writing, Trubey tries to convince the reader that there are better ways to spend leisure time than watching TV. Trubey's claim that there are better ways to utilize leisure time is fair, and more people should try to cut down on the time that they spend in front of the TV. The text mentions that the average person will watch 9 years of TV in their life - 9 hours that could certainly be used to improve one's life through more active and stimulating activities. One could make the argument that becoming more active and sitting on the couch less would lead to healthier lives for todos, and people would have longer average life expectancy.
ReplyDeleteYo Pete. Now do ya think that 9 years added to your life really makes a difference? I mean most people live to their 70s and 80s. Would you really forgo instant entertainment for more years of being old and physically inactive?
DeleteI looked at the "TV Turnoff Week (visual)" by Anthony DiVivo. The purpose was to show readers how stupidly easy it is to turn off a TV and go enjoy the outdoors. We shouldn't be wasting all our time in front of the TV, we should be out socializing or getting some fresh air, anything to keep our bodies going. It shows how bad our society in America has gotten, like we need pictures and people talking to us like we are dumb, giving us step by step instructions on how to turn off a TV and go outside, to make us realize we should be changing our lifestyles. I've never taken part in a TV turnoff week, personally I don't really need to, I don't watch a lot of TV as it is, but it's a cool idea for people to start doing around the country.
ReplyDeleteVeronica, I agree with your position of how it's easy for people to turn off TVs, so the fact that we need to be directly told to do so makes us seem dumb. There are many things that can be done other than watching TV, like going outside, hanging out with friends, or listening to music, so it shouldn't even be an issue to reduce the amount of TV people watch. What do you think draws people to watching TV instead of enjoying other things that life has to offer?
DeleteVeronica, I agree with your idea that Americans are watching a lot of television these days in their leisure time. We are trying to entertain ourselves by sitting down in front of a box; however, I feel like it would not be practical to get rid of watching the television completely. We should learn how to control how much we watch the television so that we have time to do activities that we can benefit from. One thing to consider is how would a limit on the amount of television people watch affect the success of companies who are trying to sell their product?
Delete"The Argument Against TV" by Corbett Trubey posed an interested argument. Trubey strongly believes that the majority of the population who indulge in the wasteful activity of watching tv should pursue other things. He believes that people are wasting their time and should be spending it elsewhere where it matters. Now, as much as I would like to agree with this, I just can't. Television is a useful vice for some people that helps them de-stress from their problems. Sometimes entering a fictional world helps people escape from reality. A supporting example is my mother. She has to support for three children alone, work nearly everyday, and drive all of us to our activities in the afternoon. This leaves very little time to herself. With the stress of more work to do at home, I can't blame her for watching tv; I would want to relax as well. Anyway, as useless as the author feels tv is, television is a broader concept that really serves multiple roles.
ReplyDeleteJustin, I agree with you in that TV is not a complete waste of time as the author says. I, too, think it's important for people to be able to relax and enjoy themselves, and TV is a great way to do that (it doesn't cost too much, is easy, is convenient, etc.). I was bothered when the author talked about reading a book as if it was so much better than watching TV, as it is almost the same exact thing. Do you think that watching TV has such a negative connotation just because that's the way society talks about it? Does that apply to other forms of technology we spend our time engaged in, as well?
DeleteHola Justin, I think you raise a very compelling point about watching TV and why many people do watch as much as they do. Returning from a long day at work, or having to care for their families, TV would seem like the clear leisure activity. I don't think that the author is really saying that TV is useless, but that there are, in general, more productive things to do. Obviously it is a generalization that is not always applicable. Do you think there is a better alternative to TV for those who are tired at the end of the day? Or nah?
DeleteI agree with you Justin that T.V. is good for de-stress. I also think it is not right for the author to deem T.V. to be completely useless. This author is probably disagreed with many times due to unpopular opinion. For many people, T.V. can be considered as an important part of their life, as in your example, an escape. Is television become so essential that people cannot live without it?
DeleteI read "He Doesn't Like to Watch" by Julia Scott. The purpose of this article was to draw attention to the product TV-B-Gone and its benefits. TV-B-Gone is a positive addition to our society because it encourages time to be spent socializing rather than television-watching, allows people to avoid watching undesired programs, and draws attention to the large percentage of our time that we spend watching television. Although I am in favor of this product, I realize that there could be consequences if used incorrectly. Turning off TVs in places where TVs are meant to be on is a valid public disturbance. However, the places in which these devices are meant to be used are places such as banks, grocery stores, etc. where people are only watching the TV because it is on and is the normal thing to do in that situation. Therefore there would be no harm in turning it off. People should get in trouble for turning off TVs in places such as sports bars, and ideally there would be technology developed to prevent that, but I believe the overall benefits make it worth it.
ReplyDeleteNicole, I agree with you on some of the benefits of a product such as the TV-B-Gone; however, some of your points make me question the right that people have to turn off public televisions. For example, you address the advantage of such a product encouraging socializing and then also relate it to the incorrect use of it for turning off public televisions. Though a possibility, I think that public TVs should not be tampered with because the area is public property and people choose to be in such places voluntarily. Do you think that a product such as the one suggested above, could cause controversy over privacy rights compared to public rights?
DeleteNicole, I also agree with your position on how the TV-B-Gone product would be beneficial, but not in circumstances that would cause a public disturbance. Having the TV on in some public locations is a norm, so if it were eliminated, it could lead to loss of business. For example, customers could be turned away because there is no form of entertainment while waiting to be served. Are there any public locations where it would be acceptable to turn off the TVs?
DeleteI read “Godzilla vs. the Giant Scissors: Cutting the Antiwar Heart of a Classic” by Brent Staples. The author argues that editing studios take away intended meanings that the original film had to offer after post production, ruining a director’s true vision of a film. Studios only keep in mind that the film must be appealing to audiences to achieve a successful profit. Godzilla had an antiwar message within the film but the studio cut most of that part out, very few people are aware of the message of the film. In the past, around the era of Godzilla, America had a strict way of being very selective in what people were allowed to see, such as they were not allowed to accept anti american messages as Godzilla was thought to portray. In the present, the Hollywood/ Movie industry is very open to every type of film, directors are able to convey their ideas easily through film without interference. What happened to the Godzilla film was unjust towards the director.
ReplyDeleteThe article I read was “The Argument against TV” by Corbett Trubey. In this piece, Trubey describes the various differences that TV turnoff week displays within generations. Trubey accurately depicts difference preferences, tolerances, and actions based on a person’s generation. For example, the generation born into a life with TV, have a much more difficult time turning it off than their grandparents generation who grew up with newspapers as the only form of news. Though true, this argument displays societal gaps where culture and memories are not passed from one generation to another. Due to this we often lose important, influential activities and replace them with unnecessary, yet daily functions.
ReplyDeleteI read "The Argument against TV" by Corbett Trubey. The purpose of this argument was to inform the readers about the impacts of watching TV, and share how time spent watching TV could be used for better reasons. I agree with Trubey's claim, but only to an extent. I think that it would be beneficial for people to cut back on the hours they watch TV, but not eliminate it completely. Although the average person watches about 9 years of TV in their lifetime, it allows people to escape the hardships of reality and reduce stress. Also, the correlation between TV watched and health issues is a little bit extreme. Our culture has changed to include TV and other sources of technology, but that's not entirely a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteJess, I disagree with you in that I believe TV should be eliminated entirely. TV has been an essential part of our culture, but only because it fulfilled its purpose. It was used to communicate meaningful information to the world in a clearer and more personal manner. However, the modern age of TV has evolved into a poison of our culture. This TV is riddled with ads and unimportant b.s that has not positive impact on our lives. This form of TV should be abolished, and those who feel stress can take up a more productive activity. TV has changed our culture in a negative way in its new form. How will TV evolve in the future?
DeleteIn his essay, “The Argument against TV”, Corbett Trubey enlightens the American public on the unproductive nature of their TV obsession. Trubey supports the “TV Turnoff Week” challenge, but takes it a step further, trying to curb our behavior long-term. The main concept driving his argument is wasted time. “The average American spends nine years of their life glued to the box”. I agree that this time could be better spent, but I clash with Corbett on the extent to which it would improve our lives. He asserts that one “could have earned a PhD, achieved master DJ status, or cultivated a garden that amazes…”. While he assumes these outstanding achievements could be accomplished with the additional 9 years from TV, Corbett’s fundamental attribution error is that he fails to reconcile for situational factors. He hypothesizes that additional hours equal more opportunity, however, opportunity does not come along to everyone capable of seizing it. And what opportunities can be acted upon in the brief period of nighttime when TV was watched? Although straying away from television will improve your perception on life, this departure fails to cause meaningful achievements directly.
ReplyDeleteMike, I like your point about the time at which TV is watched and how some activities cannot be done. I agree with you, except I still think people should go outside more. Biologically speaking, we're more adapted to climb trees than sit transfixed to an LCD screen. Can you argue with science?
DeleteMike, I like your point about the time at which TV is watched and how some activities cannot be done. I agree with you, except I still think people should go outside more. Biologically speaking, we're more adapted to climb trees than sit transfixed to an LCD screen. Can you argue with science?
DeleteI read the article, “The Argument Against TV” by Corbett Trubey in which Trubey attempts to convince his audience that television is negatively impacting the lives of millions of Americans. He claims that spending hours glued to a TV screen is not only a waste of time but it prevents us from venturing out into the world and gaining real life experiences. I find myself torn on this issue. On one hand, I recognize that television as of late has rapidly been taking over the lives of many, teens in particular. With the ability to DVR shows and watch them whenever as well as companies like the ever-so-popular Netflix providing customers with endless hours of entertainment, it is easy for people to preoccupy themselves with such distractions rather than focusing on the work they actually need to get done. However, TV is not always a bad thing. TV allows for hard working individuals to simply take a step back, relax, and give their minds a break for an hour or two, which can be beneficially to mental and emotional health. Not only this but some television programs can be semi-educational as well and have the potential to spark one’s interest in a topic they may not have been exposed to otherwise. Simply put, I feel that television can be a good thing so long as it is used in moderation.
ReplyDeleteI read “The Argument against TV” by Corbett Trubey. The author wanted to express his concern about how people are becoming way too dependent on and attached to their televisions, and he wanted to convince people that they are simply wasting their time watching TV when they can be doing more productive things. Television is becoming an obstacle in the path of a person’s development including his or her physical and mental health, which is why we need to step back from the TV and experience the world with our bodies and not just our eyes. In today’s society, children are getting attached to their TVs from a very young age, which is hindering their ability to reach their fullest potentials socially, intellectually, and physically. Monitoring the time that we watch TV will not only benefit us, but it will set an example for younger children who are looking up to the older generation.
ReplyDeleteRani, you bring up great points. Do you think that this applies to situational factors? High school students for example, rarely have time to invest 5 hours a night watching TV. I think that from a personal standpoint that this argument is a bit exaggerated.
DeleteI had read the text "The Argument against TV" by Corbett Trubey, in which the author wanted to express the issue of television and its implications on society and how people are wasting time and could better utilize their time for other important things. While television is a major hurdle to overcome for the development of people both physically and emotionally, I still believe that television has benefited both us and society in very special ways. Because so many kids today watch television at a young age, television has shaped itself to teach a lesson at the end of certain episodes. Intangible things like confidence and passion could be mimicked through television and our young generation could learn important values from television that they could not have learned in school or any place else.
ReplyDelete"The Argument Against TV"
ReplyDeleteIn this argument, Corbett Trubey encourages people to switch off their TV in time for TV Turnoff week . TV is a waste of time for many who are passive watchers and are unable to grasp anything that we view. This time 9 year time span can be better spent engaging in more productive activities that might enrich our lives like live entertainment, gardening, education and so forth. In the absence of TV, one's choice will not be influence by the ads that take up as much as 30% of the program. One will truly be able to make the most out of their precious time by getting out and exploring.
I read "The Argument Against TV" by Corbett Trubey. In his argument, Trubey acknowledges society's attachment to television, citing it as unproductive and wasteful. At its best, television helps spread information with live coverages, documentaries, and educational broadcasts. At its worst, television enthralls and captivates us with images of riches and "reality". In my opinion, we should all get out from behind a screen and go outside (very hypocritical coming from a kid on the Internet...).
ReplyDelete