Analysis Of Dana Stevens Thinking Outside The Idiot Box

Consider the cognitive demands that televised narratives place on their viewers. With many shows that we associate with ''quality'' entertainment -- ''The Mary Tyler Moore Show,'' ''Murphy Brown,'' ''Frasier'' -- the intelligence arrives fully formed in the words and actions of the characters on-screen. They say witty things to one another and avoid lapsing into tired sitcom cliches, and we smile along in our living rooms, enjoying the company of these smart people. But assuming we're bright enough to understand the sentences they're saying, there's no intellectual labor involved in enjoying the show as a viewer. You no more challenge your mind by watching these intelligent shows than you challenge your body watching ''Monday Night Football.'' The intellectual work is

Television has a widespread influence on everyone, especially children. Children are impacted so much by the things they have seen and watched on TV. They learn many things from TV, but their social skills and other learning abilities slow down. Watching TV numbs the mind of children and keeps them inactive from daily exercise. Furthermore, speech delays can occur in children who watch excessive amounts of television. Television programming such as MTV, Adult Swim, and Family Guy exposes and promotes negative

Numerous studies have concluded that the content and amount of television programming watched by individuals – especially by children - has a direct result on the behavior of that individual. The behavior affected by television viewing can be anything from a desire for a certain food or material good to violent distemper (Zuckerman 1985.) Recently, more and more woman have given up their traditional role of raising their children opting instead to work during the day and leave their children to take care of themselves. Unfortunately, many children find that spending countless hours in front of the television to be a worthwhile way to entertain themselves. Most parents tell their children never to talk to strangers, but what they fail to realize is that every day their children are subject to the messages and ideas of strangers on the television. In fact, a study concluded that an average American by the age of 18 has spent more time watching television than they have spent in school; this study also went on the state that children spend more time watching television than any other activity besides sleeping. This may explain why an additional study revealed that if a child was told something by his or her parents and then viewed on television something that contradicted what the parents had said, four times out of five the child opted to believe the

Don’t watch too much TV it will fry your brain! We have all heard that phrase some time in our lives, but is it really true? The answer is yes TV does cause negative effects on the brain as well as the body. My paper will address the problem of too much screen time on the brain and how it causes health problems. If the amount of time spent in front of a screen is related to brain problems, then regulating the amount of time spent in front of screens will decrease brain damage because the most common cause for brain damage is due to low levels of well-being, limiting the amount of screen time can help reduce brain damage, and too much screen time can also cause obesity.

Steven Johnson 's argument is that television can actually make you smarter because when you watch a show, you are trying to understand everything that is happening. Today’s shows have a lot of action and scenes trying to keep people’s attention. Therefore, people carefully tune in to television shows trying to understand everything that goes on during the show. Johnson said, “You have to pay attention, make inferences, and track shifting social relationships.” For instance, depending on how the characters interact with one another, changes happen as the plot of the story continues on. An example of this is if a character happens to disagree with another character and an enemy of both characters comes into the mix, and those two characters join forces to defeat their enemy. The spontaneous changes like this constantly change the storyline to make it more interesting for the viewer. Johnson mentions the “Sleeper Curve” and how it is considered to “enhance our cognitive faculties, not dumbing them down." The author displayed several examples showing the many plots that happen throughout different shows. The more complex the show, the "Sleeper Curve" pattern was more detailed.

Add to this study a statistic from the Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics “75% of teenagers now own cell phones, 25% use them for social media, 54% use them for texting, and 24% of them use them for instant messaging” (Gwenn Schurgin O'Keeffe). We have an entire generation that is developing socially and emotionally while “plugged-in”. This negative effect is not only caused by just internet use and cell phones, our old friend the television is causing us harm as well. With the invent of newer ways to deliver television shows, the ability to better record television shows, and watch “on demand” shows it shouldn’t be shocking to know that according to Neilson Ratings the average American household watches “5 hours and 11 minutes of television a day” (Who Watches What (and How Much)? U.S. TV Trends by Ethnicity). Psychologists have proven that too much television has been shown to “hamper development of the pre-frontal cortex -- the area of the brain responsible for planning, organizing and sequencing behavior for self-control, moral judgment and attention” (Abell) there should be no doubt that this fact and the fact that nearly “1 in 10 children in America have been

Also, Television attacks more the unconsciousness rather than the consciousness. Hamill says that, similarly to drugs, television is a consciousness-altering instrument (64), but this is not true. First, television cannot do more than depictions of sensations. Hamill explains how television can provide several moods and scenarios with the simple touch of a button (64). He says so because he is looking for a proof to support the power over the mind that television is meant to have, but rather this shows how television works on the unconsciousness and how difficult it is to alter the

found, for example, that only 3.5 percent of viewers were able to answer successfully twelve true/false questions concerning two thirty-second segments of commercial…”(Postman 152). Postman goes in depth of this experiment which established that Stern had found that 51 percent of viewers could not recall any news from watching the t.v. program. Around an average of 20 percent could not recall any information from watching a 1 hour show . This supports his claim of television being a disruptive resource. Watching television doesn’t increasing learning like a printed

Television has increasingly become the quintessential epicenter of communication, since its invention, in 1927. At any moment in time 2.5 billion people are viewing some form of television broadcast (Ballard). Modern society has introduced various categories of television. These variations range from educational to violent. This broad spectrum makes it hard to generalize the effects it has had on American youth; however, television seems to have increased moral and intellectual degradation. Through violent shows and monotonous news broadcasts, American youths have become desensitized to the poverties, and hardships of the world. This desensitization has had several, and moreover negative, moral impacts on the youths of America. Nevertheless,

Television is incorporated into my daily routine whether it is watching the news in the morning or a movie at night. When I watch the news in the morning I catch up on current events and other news. On the other hand. At night I watch movies for entertainment and enjoyment. Television is not just changing people into couch potatoes by watching “chasing fast cars, drinking lite beer, shooting each other t close range, etc.”, it also can be a daily tool to learn new things and catch up on current events.

The short story “Harrison Bergeron” brings into question the productivity that television contributes to society. This story, by Kurt Vonnegut, has been criticized as “a kind of desensitizing, numbing, and clearly thought-stifling, rather than thought-provoking medium that is partly responsible for the state of society.” Television, in reality, can be argued as a positive and negative medium that both benefits and hinders the public. Whether television is viewed as a beneficial or counterproductive mechanism is based its use. This form of media can be utilized as a source of knowledge, information, and education, or it can be used as negative propaganda, or as a form of brainwashing, as demonstrated in “Harrison Bergeron”. There is no cut

To begin with we will look at the issue of how modern TV can enlighten the audience. The author Stephen Johnson makes the argument of how TV is more complex, therefore it makes you smarter, in his article “Watching TV

In Growing Up With Television: Cultivation Process, Morgan, Shanahan and Signorielli assert that “long-term exposure to television tends to cultivate the image of a relatively mean and dangerous world (Morgan et al., 2009).” Rooted in the amount of time spent consuming content, the mean world syndrome is central to Gerber’s Cultivation Theory, or Effect. The theory states that they are viewing habits range from light to medium to heavy. Although subjective, the amount of time spent consuming content is a key component of cultivation effect. Morgan et al., noted that “the relative difference in viewing levels are more important than the specific amount of viewing (Morgan et al, 2009).”

Over the last forty to fifty years, television has been a major topic of discussion. Specifically, many debate societal benefits to television watching. One widely accepted opinion is that watching TV makes people dumber. People have referred to it with terms like the “idiot box” and do not feel that watching TV has any benefit at all. They feel that it is a waste of time and people need to spend their hours more wisely. Others are of the opinion that TV is actually has societal benefits. From this perspective, they claim that the development of the structure of the programs now requires one to intellectually participate in watching television. Essentially, the argument is whether TV is a beneficial societal force or is it simply a

In Watching TV makes you smarter, published in "The New York Times" on April 24, 2005, Steven Johnson argues for the multiple threads, fewer flashing arrows and social networking that make modern Television nourishing cognitive food. In answer to Johnson's article, "Carrie" posted Does watching TV make you stupid? on May 1, 2005. Carrie presents further blogs on May 3rd and May 7th, 2005; however, the gist of her arguments are contained in her first blog. Comparing the logic of Johnson's argument for and Carrie's argument against Television as cognitive food, I believe that Johnson presents the more convincing argument.