2.10 Course Reflection

            What I found most useful about this course was that it forced me to read the newspaper and to stay current with the news, a habit that I will likely continue after this course. We talked about the news, debated about the news, wrote about it, and also compared different news sources. I now regularly check the Huffington Post and the New York times online as opposed to just getting my news from Yahoo. I feel that I am a more informed citizen and that I will definitely be ready to cast my vote for the next presidential election. I also think my knowledge and desire to be informed of current events will definitely help in my future, especially in interviews. Also, the amount of writing we completed in this course has improved my writing process tremendously. I no longer fear writing six page papers because this course has almost made writing fun, key word being almost. I liked how for the most part we were able to choose our topics to write about, especially for the longer essays. I find it incredibly difficult to write six pages about a topic that has no interest or connection to my own life. 

Extended Essay 2 Final

Meara Stack

Writing 1122

Eric Leake

5 March 2012

A Look Inside the Fear Factory

            It is no secret that Apple is one of the world’s most successful companies. As of 2011, Apple’s net worth was 302.47 billion dollars and continues to grow. Apple products are instantly recognized worldwide and especially in the United States it is uncommon to not own an Apple product. Whether it is an iPhone, iPod, iPad, Mac, or Apple TV, people cannot get enough of Apple. This company had total worldwide sales of 65.23 billion dollars in 2011 and this number will continue to grow as Apple continues to release new technology. Until recently, Apple dominated the news each time former CEO Steve Jobs released the latest version iPhone to the public in highly anticipated and publicized event. When new Apple products are released, those crazed Apple fanatics go gaga and start drooling over them desperately wanting to own one, even though their iPhone 3S still works perfectly. However, after recent explosions and suicides in the Apple manufactory in China called Foxconn, Apple has been receiving quite a bit of negative press.

            The spark of this negative attention happened several months ago when it was reported that about one dozen Foxconn employees committed suicide in addition to several in-factory explosions due to dust build up. Naturally, people became curious about what actual happens inside the factory where their iPhones and iPads are made and as a profiting company, Apple dislikes any negative press. In an effort to turn the news about their company from negative to positive, Apple granted ABC’s Nightline reporter Billy Weir full access to every machine and employee inside the factory.

             In a preview to his investigation, Weir wrote that he believes the reason he was finally granted access inside Foxconn was a result of the recent explosions inside the factory and suicides committed by Foxconn employees. Not only did Apple invite Weir and his camera crew inside, but also members of the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The FLA assessed the working conditions and mental conditions of the workers. Their report and analysis will be released sometime in March hopefully extending to the original story. I would expect more articles to be produced once these reports are released in an effort to extend and spread news relating to Apple.

            I first heard about this story through Yahoo News one day when I was browsing for something interesting to read. I watched the three-minute preview clip aimed at grabbing people’s attention so they would watch the full story the next night and it definitely caught my interest. Then I proceeded to read Billy Weir’s introduction and background story about why he was doing this news story. At the time I was unaware of the explosions and suicides that brought the negative attention to Apple. Like many of my peers, I assume, I was also unaware of Foxconn and the mass production of Apple products that take place there. I knew the production of these products had to be taking place in China like most of the products I consume on a regular basis but I did not realize to what scale and magnitude. Nor did I know that most of the production is completed by hand, not by machine.

            With my interest spiked, I sat down and watched ABC’s Nightline special title “Inside Apple” not knowing what exactly to expect. What I saw was row after row after row of young Chinese workers doing the same mindless task over and over and over. One worker will insert the tiny camera into the iPad while another with dust off the touch screen and another will package the finish product. Thousands hands are required to make one iPad and they must repeat this process for twelve long hours a day to keep up with demands. They are paid on average $1.75 an hour and most employees live in dorms attached to the factory where rent is cheap. The most common complaints among workers when interviewed were low wages, crowded living conditions, tiredness, and boredom. When Weir addressed the recent suicides with the boss at Foxconn, he said his company’s suicide rate is lower than the national average in China and that Apple executives took measures to ensure the workers are mentally stable. Giant nets now hang on the sides of the buildings to prevent people from jumping out of the windows and workers now take surveys (on iPads, ironic?) to assess their mental conditions.

            Although there was no striking evidence that the factory workers were severally mistreated, I was curious to find out what other people thought. I thought that this news story might spark some sort of nation wide debate about being informed consumers and how big American companies treat their workers in China. Unfortunately, the big debate I was hoping for never happened. But the story did not go completely unnoticed. I did find some reputable sources talking about it the next day.

            While it did not make the headlines, the New York Times and the Huffington Post acknowledged this story. The Huffington Post mostly summarized the episode of Nightline, which did not help me in my quest to find the next great debate. However, the New York Times went deeper into the story. With the title reading “Pressure, Chinese and Foreign Drive Change at Foxconn,” the article discusses why cameras were allowed inside the factory and how it will impact Apple in the future.

            That great debate that I was looking for, well I found it, from one hundred passionate and opinionated people leaving comments online. Comments range from bitterly sarcastic to aggressively angry. I view these comments as countering not only the authors of this article, but also Apple as a company. Some people argue that outsourcing will always exist due to cheap labor and heavy demand from the United States and others are outraged at the working conditions in the factory. Commenter A.M. Garrett was affected by the news story as he comments,

I still have the first iPhone. I remember being so happy to get one as a gift. Now I can't think of having that same feeling about buying a new one, knowing what I know now about how it's made. So I'll stick with the 3G. Why do we need new phones every few years anyway?

Garrett is upset with the way iPhones are made and finds consumption of every new model unnecessary. However, Troy from Utah disagrees and counters Garrett as he comments directly at Garrett, “I'm not sure I understand "knowing what I know now about how it's made". Having lived in China I can tell you that Foxconn is at the top of the heap of factory jobs.” Although reading comments is not a traditional source for news media, it is interesting, informative, and often funny to read what these commenters have to say.

            Another non-traditional news source that covered this story is The Daily Show. This show is a half hour news show satirizing current events, tradition news media, and political figures. Host Jon Stewart reports the story in a seven-minute segment calling Foxconn “Fear Factory.” The Daily Show and other shows similar to it are now becoming more popular, especially for my generation, and some of my classmates cite it as a major source where they get their news.

            Because we rely so heavily on the Internet in today’s society, the way in which we get news has changed drastically from the beginnings of the news. Jeff Jarvis compares the old press sphere to the new press sphere in several diagrams that make the differences quite obvious. Before, there was only the press reporting on the news and that is the only source people had for getting the news. However, now there is a multitude of sources people use such as online blogs, online newspapers, television shows, friends, and so on. I think the new press sphere is accurate and actually creates better-informed citizens because the news is now so easily accessible. Although there were not as many follow-up articles investigating Foxconn and Apple as I had hoped, there was quite a bit of discussion online. I think one reason this story did not get more attention was because the Nightline episode was not conclusive about if the workers are treated fairly or not.

            I continued my search for information and comments on this story and about two weeks after it first aired I did find some controversies. From the Tech section of the Huffington Post I found that there are reports stating that Foxconn hid some of their younger workers when the cameras where there. Venture Beat reports that Foxconn technically did not break any laws by simply relocating their youngest workers to different departments. The real issue becomes how those workers are treated when there are not cameras present. The Washington Post quoting an Apple representative stating, “A spokesperson said that the company insists on safety and respect for workers, and that… suppliers ‘must live up to (our) requirements if they want to keep doing business with Apple.”’ I believe this story will continue to be extended when the FLA reports are released and that those reports will ultimately determine if Apple mistreats its factory workers.

            As new reports continue to be released, this story will continue to grow and gain momentum until people are satisfied with the results. Due to the new press sphere and all of the debates online through blogs and commenting though, this story along with others may never truly have an end. The Internet makes it easy to forward, extend, and counter articles and story with just a few clicks of the mouse. For these reasons, the rate at which news is passed around and received is faster than ever and the depths of stories are thick. All it takes is a quick preview or catchy headline to attract readers who will follow a story from birth all the way through the end. I believe the Internet as revolutionized the way we receive the news and we are all better off and more informed because of it.

           

Bibliography

Barboza, David, and Charles Duhigg. "Pressure, Chinese and Foreign, Drive Change at

Foxconn." New York Times. 19 Feb. 2012. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/technology/pressures-drive-change-at-chinas-electronics-giant-foxconn.html?_r=1&ref=technology>.

"Fear Factory." The Daily Show. Web. 01 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-january-16-2012/fear-factory>.

Post, The Huffington. "Nightline Tours Apple Supplier Foxconn: Get An

Unprecedented Look At The Factory (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 22 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/22/nightline-apple-supplier-foxconn_n_1293393.html>.

Story, Watch The Video above for the Full. "Report: Foxconn Hid Teen Workers Before

Inspection (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 23 Feb. 2012. Web. 06 Mar. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/apples-foxconn-hid-teen-workers_n_1297515.html>.

Weir, Billy. "Inside Apple." ABC News. ABC News Network. Web. 06 Mar. 2012.

<http://abcnews.go.com/International/slideshow/inside-apples-factories-china-15750239>.

                       

rough draft #2

Meara Stack

Writing 1120

Eric Leake

28 February 2012

Title

            It is no secret that Apple is one of the world’s most successful companies. As of 2011, Apple’s net worth was 302.47 billion dollars and continues to grow. Apple products are instantly recognized worldwide and especially in the United States it is uncommon to not own an Apple product. Whether it is an iPhone, iPod, iPad, Mac, or Apple TV, people cannot get enough of Apple. This company had total worldwide sales of 65.23 billion dollars in 2011 and this number will continue to grow as Apple continues to release new technology. Until recently, Apple dominated the news each time former CEO Steve Jobs released the latest version iPhone to the public in highly anticipated and publicized event. Each unveiling of a new product reminds me of the part in the Lion King when baby Simba is held up majesty for all of the animal kingdom to praise and worship. When new Apple products are released, those crazed Apple fanatics go gaga and start drooling over them desperately wanting to own one, even though their iPhone 3S still works perfectly. However, after recent explosions and suicides in the Apple manufactory in China, Apple has been receiving quite a bit of negative press.

            Unknown or simply ignored by many Apple consumers, the production of these sleek technological masterpieces is just as important as their invention and design. With such an enormous and ever growing demand for these products, production is under more pressure than ever. Underneath the glamorous display in every Apple store, lies millions of young Chinese workers working relentlessly on the same small task day in and day out to make an iPhone or iPad.

            What exactly goes on in the Foxconn factories where Apple products are made used to be a mystery until ABC’s Nighline reporter, Billy Weir, was granted full camera access to every employee and machine inside. In a preview to his investigation, Weir wrote he believes the reason he was finally granted access inside the Foxconn was a result of the recent explosions inside the factory and suicides committed by Foxconn employees. Apple executives were not happy with the negative press they were receiving so not only did they invite Weir and his camera crew inside, but also members of the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The FLA assessed the working conditions and mental conditions of the workers. Their report and analysis will be released sometime in March. Maybe then we can truly conclude whether Apple treats their Foxconn factory workers fairly or not. But until those reports are released, we can make our own conclusions based on the evidence presented in Nightline’s thirty-minute broadcast.

            I first heard about this story through Yahooo! News one day when I was browsing for something interesting to read. I watched the three-minute preview clip aimed at grabbing people’s attention so they would watch the full story the next night and it definitely caught my interest. Then I proceeded to read Billy Weir’s introduction and background story about why he was doing this news story. At the time I was unaware of the explosions and suicides that brought the negative attention to Apple. Like many of my peers, I assume, I was also unaware of Foxconn and the mass production of Apple products that take place there. I knew the production of these products had to be taking place in China like most of the products I consume on a regular basis but I did not realize to what scale and magnitude. Nor did I know that most of the production is completed by hand, not by machine.

            With my interest spiked, I sat down and watched ABC’s Nightline special title “Inside Apple” not knowing what exactly to expect. What I saw was row after row after row of young Chinese workers doing the same mindless task over and over and over. One worker will insert the tiny camera into the iPad while another with dust off the touch screen and another will package the finish product. Thousands hands are required to make one iPad and they must repeat this process for twelve long hours a day to keep up with demands. They are paid on average $1.75 an hour and most employees live in dorms attached to the factory where rent is cheap. The most common complaints among workers when interviewed were low wages, crowded living conditions, tiredness, and boredom. When Weir addressed the recent suicides with the boss at Foxconn, he said his company’s suicide rate is lower than the national average in China and that Apple executives took measures to ensure the workers are mentally stable. Giant nets now hang on the sides of the buildings to prevent people from jumping out of the windows and workers now take surveys (on iPads, ironic?) to assess their mental conditions.

            Although there was no striking evidence that the factory workers were severally mistreated, I was curious to find out what other people thought. I thought that this news story might spark some sort of nation wide debate about being informed consumers and how big American companies treat their workers in China. Unfortunately, the big debate I was hoping for never happened. But the story did not go completely unnoticed. I did find some reputable sources talking about it the next day.

            While it did not make the headlines, the New York Times and the Huffington Post acknowledged this story. The Huffington Post mostly summarized the episode of Nightline, which did not help me in my quest to find the next great debate. However, the New York Times went deeper into the story. The end of the article raised questions raised if changes were actually going to be made not only inside the Faxconn factories, but also to China’s entire system of manufacturing by the billions. Big manufacturing companies such as Foxconn are worried young Chinese workers are becoming less willing to live and work in the factories. To compensate, Foxconn is now investing money in building robots to do some of the work. Will this solve the problem of workers unwilling to work for low wages or will it cause greater problems rising unemployment rates in an already struggling economy in China?

            I think it will be difficult to find all the answers to my questions. I believe the published reports from the FLA will help however, Americans will always have to demand for these products and therefore I believe consumers have to most power to make changes. Consumers need to be better informed about where all these products they purchase come from. If consumers protest how products are made and stop buying them, maybe then we will see changes in the way factory workers in China are treated. Now I know that is a lot to ask for and changes do not happen overnight, but judging by the comments I read to the article in the New York Times, it might be possible.

            That great debate that I was looking for, well I found it, from three hundred passionate people leaving comments online. Comments range from bitterly sarcastic to aggressively angry at anyone they can blame. Some people argue that outsourcing will always exist due to cheap labor and heavy demand from the United States and others are outraged at the working conditions in the factory.

            Time will tell if Apple makes any changes in favor of their factory workers in China. In addition to the extremely low wages, I believe the working conditions need to change as well. I hope that other large American companies will follow Apple’s example of at the very minimum of looking more closely at their factories in China. What Apple did, allowing unprecedented access into their factory, should encourage other companies to do the same and should make consumers more aware of where the products they buy come from. I look forward to reading the FLA’s report on the Foxconn workers and waiting for any type of change to take place in production factories in China.

           

P9 Taking an Approach

In the most simplistic definition, Harris defines “taking an approach” as “working in the mode of another writer” (Harris 74). When taking an approach it is necessary to change the way you think, you must transform your ideas. If you don’t, you are not correctly taking an approach; you are just “applying ideas to examples.” The idea of taking an approach is applying new ideas to an existing theory, which is sort of similar to forwarding, in that you are creating new ideas. However, one way these two methods differ is that taking an approach derives from an authors writing style or sense, not just the written text.

           

            Harris describes three methods to use the styles of other writers in your own writing, they are: acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity. Acknowledging influences is pretty self-explanatory that is, recognizing authors who you’ve model for your own writing. Turning an approach on itself means asking the same questions as the original author. I interpret reflexivity to mean recognizing the mode in which you have written in.

            The idea of taking an approach is rewriting because you are using something that is already there and making it your own, just like forwarding and countering. In this example, you are taking another writer’s mode or methods of writing and practicing them in your own writing.

            I think the idea of taking an approach is visible in the New York Times and Huffington Post by the way the newspaper and websites are modeled. The editors have done research and know what works visually and want people want to read. I’m sure they have looked at past newspapers and blogs and studied why one fails and another succeeds. They take the strategies of the successful ones and apply them to their own paper in hopes that they too will succeed. 

P8 Countering Myself

When I was looking back on all of the blogs I’ve written this quarter, I came across one that, after thinking about it, I would like to change. In other words, I would like to counter myself. It sounds kind of weird saying that; I am going against what I agreed with back in January. When Harris talks about countering I don’t think he meant for us to counter ourselves. However, I think countering ourselves, although strange, might be the best way to revise your own piece of writing. Looking at it so critically can make for excellent revisions.

            Anyway, back to the main topic, the blog that I am now going to counter is about Chris Hedges’s article titled “America the Illiterate.” Initially, I was upset over the staggering statistics about our country’s literacy rates. I was concerned for the future of our country and sadden by the huge percentage of the population that is illiterate. But a few weeks later I wrote an essay with the main point being that the definition of literacy is different for everyone. After I really thought about it, I was less upset about the just the numbers of our illiteracy rates, and more focused on the fact the Hedges failed to define what it means to be literate.

            So to revise my previous post, (P7 The Shocking Truth About Literacy in America) I would have to say I am still shocked about how high America’s illiteracy rates are and I still believe that is unacceptable but, I realize Hedges made faults in his article. He neglected to define the word “literacy.” All he did was scold us as a nation for becoming more stupid because of technology. He did not offer any ideas on how to change it or how to use technology to make positive changes. He also failed to mention all of the ways in which technology benefits us. His argument is one sided and he benefit from reading Harris’s chapter on countering. According to Harris, to counter effectively, one must acknowledge the other side of the argument and how your viewpoint differs. Hedges’s article just acknowledges one side, his side and at first I fell victim to believing everything he said until I looked at it more closely.  

P7 Countering

The way I see it, Harris defines “countering” as arguing your own ideas in a polite manner. Harris makes it clear that countering is not engaging in a fight to the death debate to find out who is right and who is wrong. Countering means to introduce a new idea into a conversation. According to Harris the goal of countering is “not to refute what has been said before, to bring the discussion to the end, but to respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions” (Harris 56).

            One method to countering Harris discusses is to take the original author’s words and acknowledge what the author is trying to convey before you can refute it. Harris writes “To identify what a text fails to do, you need to be clear about what it achieves…” (Harris 57). When countering a certain author, you must first make sense of what the author is trying to say, whether you agree with it or not. By coming to terms with the original text, you can write a more compelling counter argument.

            I think Harris defines countering not as being defensive or aggressive about a certain topic, but offering a critique of what another author has previously written.

           

            I see countering sometimes in the Huffington Post’s Healthy Living blog when bloggers take new research to debunk nutrition or health myths that have been around for a while. They take the ideas that already exist and put a new perspective on them. These new ideas are always more convincing when there is scientific to back them up. 

P6 Forwarding

After reading Harris’s chapter titled Forwarding, I feel like I really only needed to read the first five pages to understand what his definition of the word is. He described what his idea of forwarding meant, briefly described four types of forwarding, and then provided all of these confusing, drawn-out examples of each type. I lost interest and focus a few pages into what “Illustrating” means.

With that aside, I think I still have a pretty decent grasp on what “forwarding” a text means. One of Harris’s first points in this chapter is the metaphor that writing is a conversation. He says that the purpose of writing an essay is not to have the final say an in argument, but rather to continue the discussion of the topic or add more input to an ongoing discussion. Harris writes, “A dialogue is not a debate. You don’t win a conversation, you add to it, push it ahead, keep it going…” (Harris 36). I agree with this point Harris makes. Unless writing a persuasive essay, you don’t set out to write an essay to convince someone that your opinion or ideas are the best and correct. You write an essay to introduce new ideas or to put your own spin on a topic. The goal of an essay is to strengthen an idea you believe in and by doing so, inspire readers to investigate for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

Harris writes about four ways in which you can forward a text: illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending. What I took away from reading about these four methods in detail is quite simple. If you are using another text as an example (whether by illustration, authorization, borrowing, or extending) don’t use an example just to use an example. You must use a relevant example to strengthen and reinforce what you already have.

I think blogs are an excellent example of forwarding texts. Usually, blogs are not the place people go to find breaking news that is the job of the news. However, a blogger will take a particular news story and use it to continue the conversation on that topic. A blog could potentially have more background to the story or will have an opinion on the matter. Another way blogs forward texts is that often blogs will have links you can click for additional information or related stories thus continuing that initial conversation that started it all. 

P5. NYTimes Vs Blogs

So far I have not found too many similarities between the blog I’m following and the New York Times. Every time I look at the NY Times I see pages of political talk, Obama and the deficit talk, and world news about countries in conflict. The blog I follow is quite the opposite. The Healthy Living blog on the Huffington Post is all about how to maintain good health and the science behind food or exercise or certain diseases.

            The main difference between theses two new sources is definitely the audience. The Healthy Living blog is much more specific and has a narrow topic so it attracts readers who are interested in health as well. People don’t just go browsing around the Healthy Living blog looking to stay informed and up to date on important worldwide news stories. However, the New York Times’ audience is much vaster and more diverse. It has more variety to offer, but sometimes you have to search through the entire paper to find a few articles that you find interesting. I agree that the New York Times offers more important and pressing information everyday but unfortunately, that’s not always what I’m looking for when I want to read about the news. For me, it is a lot more difficult to sit down and read articles in the Times rather than the Healthy Living blog.

            Besides personal interest, I find reading blogs easier to reading the newspaper because blogs are written more casually. Newspapers are written so formally and sort of dry; there’s nothing personal, with the exception of the opinion section I suppose. On the other hand, I think of blogs as a personal interaction with the author and reader. Bloggers talk about their won life experiences and opinions in addition to the facts. Reading blogs is just simply more fun!

            I think blogs are a perfect example of what Jeff Jarvis was saying with his new model of the press sphere. Blogs have multiple authors, people can comment on posts, people can check the credibility of references, and click on links that lead them to more information about a certain topic. 

P5. NYTimes Vs Blogs

So far I have not found too many similarities between the blog I’m following and the New York Times. Every time I look at the NY Times I see pages of political talk, Obama and the deficit talk, and world news about countries in conflict. The blog I follow is quite the opposite. The Healthy Living blog on the Huffington Post is all about how to maintain good health and the science behind food or exercise or certain diseases.

            The main difference between theses two new sources is definitely the audience. The Healthy Living blog is much more specific and has a narrow topic so it attracts readers who are interested in health as well. People don’t just go browsing around the Healthy Living blog looking to stay informed and up to date on important worldwide news stories. However, the New York Times’ audience is much vaster and more diverse. It has more variety to offer, but sometimes you have to search through the entire paper to find a few articles that you find interesting. I agree that the New York Times offers more important and pressing information everyday but unfortunately, that’s not always what I’m looking for when I want to read about the news. For me, it is a lot more difficult to sit down and read articles in the Times rather than the Healthy Living blog.

            Besides personal interest, I find reading blogs easier to reading the newspaper because blogs are written more casually. Newspapers are written so formally and sort of dry; there’s nothing personal, with the exception of the opinion section I suppose. On the other hand, I think of blogs as a personal interaction with the author and reader. Bloggers talk about their won life experiences and opinions in addition to the facts. Reading blogs is just simply more fun!

            I think blogs are a perfect example of what Jeff Jarvis was saying with his new model of the press sphere. Blogs have multiple authors, people can comment on posts, people can check the credibility of references, and click on links that lead them to more information about a certain topic. 

P4 The New Press Sphere

I agree with Jarvis’s model of the press sphere. Today there are so many contributors to how readers get their news. The days of reading groundbreaking news from the daily newspaper are long gone. News is instantaneous now and the press only plays a minor role in informing us. Observers, witnesses, media, the government, etc. all play a part in getting the news to us; it’s a joint effort.

            And I think this joint effort is an improvement from the past of only receiving news from one source. One positive change is that having more sources eliminations some bias. Before, there was one source, the newspaper, with one contributor, the press. Now, there are millions of sources to get the news and millions of contributors. You can read the same story from multiple perspectives and then form your own opinion. I feel that before people read a story in the newspaper and had to believe it because there was nothing else they could compare it too.

            One aspect I found confusing in Jarvis’s models was the size of the circles in the new press sphere. I am curious if the size of each circle has anything to do with how important he views that contributor is. To me, it seems like the witnesses’ and observer’s circles are significantly larger than the data circle. Does that mean Jarvis thinks our news comes more from witnesses and observers than data?

            I think his model is very accurate to my experiences with the news. I get my news from a multitude of sources, mostly online. I watch the news on TV, I get it from newspapers online, online blogs, and sometimes even Facebook and Twitter. 

Blog Analysis

The main purpose of the Huffington Post's Healthy Living blog is to inform readers about the lastest health trends, new research and studies in health, and tips to live a better live style. I think the audience of this blog are people similar to me who are interested and spend time trying to live a healthy life. It would not surprise me if people who are trying to make major lifestyle changes like losing a bunch of weight also follow this blog. There is a healthy mix of writing, video, and pictures on this blog to things interesting. I just scroll down the page until an article heading catches my eye and then I'll read that post. This blog has a large variety of authors; some are doctors (dietitians and nutritionists), some are writers for the Huffington Post, and some wrote books on weight loss or healthy living. On another note, I have downloaded the Huffington Post app on my phone and find myself reading blog post from other subject areas such as business and the front page.

flowing a blog

I'm choosing to follow the Huffington Post's blog titled Healthy Living. I always find myself reading more news stories about health and fitness than any other topic so I figured this would be an interesting blog to follow. Here is the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/healthy-living/

P3 Reading the New York Times

Reading the New York Times has been an informative process for me. Before, I would occasionally watch the news (when I’m at home and dinner is just about ready) and browse Yahoo News multiple times a day. But I feel that reading the New York Times is slightly more credible and more informative on pressing national and world matter such as the Republican Primaries. I’m not saying Yahoo News is bad or irrelevant, but I feel more informed about more important matters by reading the New York Times. I love reading the random stories about giant sharks washing up on shore or what careers are best for shy people but I feel somewhat smarter knowing that I could have an somewhat intelligent conversation with someone about the Republican Primary candidates.

            Also, since reading the New York Times regularly, I have notice I visit other reputable online news sites such as BBC and The Boston Globe.com just to read stories form a different perspective and to stay connected to what’s happening locally. 

P2 Our News Habits

            After reviewing the way my classmates get the news, it is obvious that our most common source for news is the Internet. This not-so-shocking discovery makes sense because our generation spends so much time online already. Clicking over to a news website takes no time at all, so why not stay up to date on current events, it’s so accessible. Really though, kids our age have no excuse for not being informed on what’s happening in our nation and around the world.

Unfortunately, this is not always the case. I suppose because there are so many other distractions on the Web that our peers have more fun on sites other than informative ones. It’s great that everyone in this class reads the news, but how many of our peers outside this class do? I hope everyone does, but judging from personal experiences, I’m afraid I might be wrong

But why? Why don’t high school and college students regularly read online newspapers? Because they’re lazy? Because they’re too busy? Maybe it’s a combination of both? I don’t know, but it really doesn’t take that much time out of your day to read snippets of the daily paper.

And kudos to you if you’ve always read the paper and watched the news, I’m impressed. 

Interntcy: The New Era of Internet Literacy

Author’s Note:

            The audience of my paper is my generation as well as future generations. I want this paper to serve as a warning to be careful with technology. My goal of this paper is to show and present how the Internet and technology can be used effectively to increase our generations as well and future generations intelligence. I presented both sides of the argument to show my peers the dangers and what could happen if we become dependent on technology. I used modern day examples and social media terminology to connect with them. Also, the tone of my paper is not accusatory; my goal is not to punish anyone, but to enlighten them.

A few weeks ago, Wikipedia, the sixth most visited website in the World, purposely blacked out. To raise awareness and protest the new SOPA and PIPA laws, Wikipedia shutdown for twenty-four hours leaving only a message informing people what the SOPA and PIPA laws are and how and why we should protest them. These laws are intended to stop online video piracy and restore the rights of certain content to the original authors or creators. Just twenty-four hours without access Wikipedia was a major hindrance to some people. When beginning to research a topic for an essay or project or even when one has a simple question he or she cannot answer, where is the first place they look for the answer? The Internet, or more specifically, Wikipedia. Yes, blacking out Wikipedia for twenty-four hours may have been a little extreme however, this stunt did make a huge impact on me and I imagine everyone else who lives online (and especially that kid desperate for information the night before his essay is deue!) We rely so heavily on the Internet that some people argue it is harming our minds as individuals and as a society. However, what these people do not see behind the negative effects, and I agree that many exist, are the equally prevalent positive influences the Internet has on our lives and intelligence. In regards to the new age of Internet reading and writing, plain and simple it is different and will continue to change.

Maybe to our parents reading means sitting down at a desk and reading an old and dusty novel written by some great American author, but to me, reading has a wider definition. I think of reading as quickly browsing through news headlines online, reading Twitter updates, reading articles in magazines in addition to actual books. And not just textbooks I might add. A minority among my peers, I still find time and enjoy reading novels, for example, the thrilling series The Hunger Games by Suzanna Collins or riveting nonfiction books such as Laura Hillenbrand’s Unbroken. The same idea holds true for writing, where in old generations writing meant putting a pencil to paper for a formal school-assigned essay. Today, we write via Facebook, Twitter, E-mail, and the occasional academic essay.

The role of technology in today’s society is massively abundant and our usage of technology will only increase. Technology, especially the Internet, is argued as both helpful and harmful. Authors, professors, and bloggers all have discussed and expressed their opinions on this topic. On the one hand, promoting the Internet as a useful tool is author Clive Thompson who argues utilizing technology is the new way of literacy. Thompson analyzes data collected by Stanford writing and rhetoric professor Andrea Lunsford about Stanford student’s writing habits. One major difference between previous generations writing habits and those of current generations is that current generation writes more than ever before. The frequency of writing in addition to the content of writing has increased significantly. Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have a tremendous impact on how much we write. Multiple times a day, people are updating their statuses, writing on friend’s walls, commenting on pictures, or tweeting one hundred and forty characters about their day. Although simple and often just phrases, writing is writing. The writing process requires some sort of thought or creativity. Conversely, some would argue the opposite, that “Facebook” writing is not considered real writing. Author and blogger, Nicholas Carr would agree that we waste too much time clicking away on the Internet. He argues that people in today’s society simultaneously browse multiple Websites aimlessly and this action is lessening our ability to concentrate for long periods of time. Coming across as anti-Internet, Carr explains,

Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today. Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us.

He believes we rely too heavily on the Internet to do work for us and that it is “reprogramming” the way we think.

 Yet what Carr mentions, yet neglects to emphasize is how effective the Internet is at creating communication and brining people closer together. With the numerous ways to communicate via the Web, staying in touch with people oversees, across the country, or from back home has never been easier. All of this communication on the Web definitely leads to more frequent reading and writing outside of the classroom as Thompson examined. These processes are more frequent because we actually want to write outside of school.

            The Internet also gives us extreme amounts of freedom. With just a few clicks of the mouse, anyone could make a new Facebook page or create their very own blog. (Case and point: my blog took less than two minutes to complete) Social media sites allow for people to be open and share their experiences with all of their friends and others instantly online. Blogging especially promotes a type of freedom regular print authors cannot achieve. A blogger can finish writing a blog post and then publish online minutes, or even seconds later. No longer do authors have to send their finished work to an editor who makes changer, sends it back, then the author makes changes, then back to the editor, and the possibly to the publisher. (A painfully long process, just like this sentence!) Writing on the Internet is simpler and quicker and more and more people are trying it. However, people do argue that this kind of writing and living so much of our lives online is hazardous to our minds. Author Chris Hedges strongly agrees that the Internet is making us stupid and the Internet is to blame for our country’s growing illiteracy rate. He believes everything from presidential debates to ads on TV are being tailored for people who cannot read, write or think for themselves because we waste so much time online. He writes, “In our post-literate world, because ideas are inaccessible, there is a need for constant stimulus. News, political debate, theater, art and books are judged not on the power of their ideas but on their ability to entertain” (Hedges 2). According to Hedges, information is put out there now for entertainment purposes only. He believes cultural and news information is not there to make us think. We are losing our ability to think of new ideas and form opinions for ourselves.

            While it may be true that our country’s illiteracy rate is increasing, Hedges ignores what actually means to be literate. In his article he gives statistical evidence of illiteracy figures, yet he never once presents his definition of literacy. What does it mean to be literate? Or illiterate?

With all of the technological influences we have now, to be literate is not as simple as being able to read a book. This topic is much more complex than Hedges realizes and professor Sylvia Scribner makes an attempt to define such a complicated term in her article, Literary in Three Metaphors. As the title suggests, Scribner uses three metaphors to form a multidimensional definition of the word. Scribner compares literacy as adaptation, as power, and as a state of grace. She chooses these three metaphors because this topic is so broad and confusing she tries to compile a more simple definition of the term.

My argument is that any of the metaphors, taken by itself, gives us only a partial grasp of the many and varied utilities of literacy of the complex social and psychological factors sustaining aspiration for and achievement of individual literacy. (Scribner 5)

In her opinion, it is impossible to define the word “literacy” in just a few short sentences. This word is so complex and means different things to different people she wants to present multiple sides of her opinion.

Conversely, Hedges, states, “Nearly a third of the nation’s population is illiterate or barely literate… But even those who are supposedly literate retreat in huge numbers into this image-based existence” (Hedges 1). After his statistic about how much of our population is illiterate he questions and almost accuses the other two thirds of Americans of not being literate by his standards. Who is he to dictate what is means to be literate? For Scribner, to be literate means to be “functionally literate” which she defines as, “the level of proficiency necessary for effective performance in a range of settings and customary activities” (Scribner 6). In simpler terms, Scribner is saying a person raising chickens on a farm does not need to have the same proficiency level as someone running for a seat in Congress. To be literate on a farm is entirely different than being literate in politics. Also, just because I can find the second derivative of a function does not mean I can find the precipitation rate of an unknown substance in a chemistry lab.

Literacy can never be defined simply because it is such a complex word, but the main point I am trying to make is that this is a word that holds a different meaning for each and every person alive.

            We have a lot to thank technology for, but we have to be careful. If we do not monitor our Internet habits and rely too heavily on it, it can be detrimental to our society. Because of the Internet we can conduct research faster and communicate easier which promotes reading and writing outside of the classroom. Children of the “Facebook Generation” read and write more than any other generation solely because of advancements in technology. However, as technology continues to change the definition of reading and writing will also change. We must be careful not to let it do all of our work for us. The Internet is a great tool to increase our brainpower and ability to read and write. It is up to us to continue finding ways to use the Internet to promote intelligence.

Works Cited

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic — News and Analysis on

Politics, Business, Culture, Technology, National, International, and Life – TheAtlantic.com. July 2008. Web. <http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google.>.

Hedges, Chris. "America the Illiterate." 10 Nov. 2008. Web.

<http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081110_america_the_illiterate

Scribner, Sylvia. "Literacy in Three Metaphors." The American Journal of

Education(1984). Print.

Thompson, Clive. "Clive Thompson on the New Literacy." Wired.com. 24 Aug. 2009.

Web. <http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-09/st_thompson>.

Where my news comes from

Where do I get my news? Well, a multitude of places, but mostly the Internet. When I’m at home I enjoy watching NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams almost everything night as my mom is cooking dinner. That is my favorite national newscast, I’m not sure why, I guess I just like how official it is and how professional Brian Williams is. Also, I will occasionally watch my local Fox newscast late at night just to stay current on thing happening in New England. From time to time I will read the Boston Globe, but what usually happens is my parents read it and then will find an article that they either force me to read or highly recommend it because they think I will find it interesting or they want me to have a clue on current events.

However, at college, so far away from home, I rarely find time to keep updated on local New England news. But I am definitely more versed now in national and political news than ever before. While I don’t have the time, or a TV to watch the nightly news, I do frequent sites such as the New York Times or my favorite, Yahoo! News. Here at school the Internet is my main source for news. Occasionally I will pick up a copy of the New York Times and read it in the morning if I have time.

The best though is when my mom sends me a card or a package and puts in cutouts from the Boston Globe with articles and pictures about my favorite sports teams, the Bruins and the Patriots. It reminds me of home and is old fashion way of staying in touch with my hometown. She actually just sent a box of brownies with an article about Tom Brady’s life in high school and college along with a nice picture and article of the Bruins at the White House. A perfect care package!

And one last thing I have to say is, GO PATS! 

my audience, sorry!

            The audience of my paper is our generation as well as future generations. I want this paper to serve as a warning to be careful with technology. My goal of this paper is to show and present how the Internet and technology can be used effectively to increase our generations as well and future generations intelligence. I presented both sides of the argument to show my peers the dangers and what could happen if we become dependent on technology. 

rough draft

Meara Stack

WRIT 1122

Professor Eric Leake

30 January 2012

Still Need a Title

A few weeks ago, Wikipedia, the sixth most visited website in the World, purposely blacked out. To raise awareness and protest the new SOPA laws, Wikipedia shutdown for twenty-four hours leaving only a message informing people what the SOPA laws are and how and why we should protest them. Just twenty-four hours without being able to use Wikipedia was a major hindrance to some people. When beginning to research a topic for an essay or project or even when one has a simple question he or she cannot answer, where is the first place they look for the answer? The Internet, or more specifically, Wikipedia. Yes, blacking out Wikipedia for twenty-four hours may have been a little extreme however, this stunt did make a huge impact on me and I imagine anyone and everyone else who grew up with the Internet. We rely so heavily on the Internet that some people argue it is harming our minds as individuals and as a society. However, what these people do not see behind the negative effects, and I agree that many exist, are equally present positive influences the Internet has on our lives and intelligence. In regards to the new age of Internet reading and writing, plain and simple it is different and will continue to change.

            The role of technology in today’s society is massive and good or bad; our usage of technology will only increase. Technology, especially the Internet, is argued as both helpful and harmful. Authors, professors, and bloggers all have discussed and expressed their opinions on this topic. On the one hand, the side promoting the Internet as a useful tool is author Clive Thompson who argues utilizing technology is the new way of literacy. Thompson analyzes data collected by Stanford writing and rhetoric professor Andrea Lunsford about Stanford student’s writing habits. One major difference between previous generations writing habits and those of current generations is that current generation writes more than ever before. The frequency of writing in addition to the content of writing has increased significantly. Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have a tremendous impact on how much we write. Multiple times a day, people are updating their statuses, writing on friend’s walls, commenting on pictures, or tweeting one hundred and forty characters about their day. Although simple and often just phrases, writing is writing and just writing anything requires some sort of thought or creative process. Conversely, some would argue the opposite, that “Facebook” writing is not considered real writing. Author Nicholas Carr would agree that we waste too much time clicking away on the Internet. He argues that people in today’s society browse multiple Websites aimlessly and this action is lessening our ability to concentrate for long periods of time. Coming across as anti-Internet, Car explains,

Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today. Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net, there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us.

He believes we rely too heavily on the Internet to do work for us and that it is “reprogramming” the way we think. Yet what Carr mentions, yet neglects to emphasize is how effective the Internet is at communication and brining people closer together. With the numerous ways to communicate via the Web, staying in touch with people oversees, across the country, or from back home has never been easier. All of this communication on the Web definitely leads to more frequent reading and writing outside of the classroom as Thompson examined.

            The Internet also gives us extreme amounts of freedom. With just a few clicks of the mouse, anyone could make a new Facebook page or create their very own blog. Social media sites allow for people to be open and share their experiences with all of their friends and others instantly online. Blogging especially promotes a type of freedom regular print authors cannot get. A blogger can finish writing a blog post and then publish online minutes, or even seconds later. No longer do authors have to send their finished work to an editor who makes changer, sends it back, then the author makes changes, then back to the editor, and the possibly to the publisher. Writing on the Internet is simpler and quicker and more and more people are trying it. However, people do argue that this kind of writing and having so much of our lives online is hazardous to our minds. Author Chris Hedges strongly agrees that the Internet is making us stupid and the Internet is to blame for our country’s growing illiteracy rate. He believes everything from presidential debates to ads on TV is being tailor for people who cannot read, write or think for themselves because we abuse the Internet. He writes, “In our post-literate world, because ideas are inaccessible, there is a need for constant stimulus. News, political debate, theater, art and books are judged not on the power of their ideas but on their ability to entertain” (Hedges 2). According to Hedges, information is put out there now for entertainment purposed only and even cultural and news information is not there to make us think. We are losing our ability to think of new ideas and form opinions for ourselves.

            While it may be true that our country’s illiteracy rate is increasing, Hedges ignores what actually means to be literate. In his article he gives statistical evidence of illiteracy figures, yet he never once presents his definition of literacy. What does is mean to be literate? Or illiterate? With all of the technological influences we have now, literacy is not as simple as being able to read a book. This topic is much more complex than Hedges realizes and professor Sylvia Scribner makes an attempt to define such a complicated term in her article, Literary in Three Metaphors. As the title suggests, Scribner uses three metaphors to form a multidimensional definition of the word. Scribner compares literacy as adaptation, as power, and as a state of grace. She chooses these three metaphors because this topic is so broad and confusing she tries to compile a more simple definition of the term.

My argument is that any of the metaphors, taken by itself, gives us only a partial grasp of the many and varied utilities of literacy of the complex social and psychological factors sustaining aspiration for and achievement of individual literacy. (Scribner 5)

In her opinion, it is impossible to define the word “literacy” in just a few short sentences. This word is so complex and means different things to different people she wants to present multiple sides of her opinion. Conversely, Hedges, states, “Nearly a third of the nation’s population is illiterate or barely literate… But even those who are supposedly literate retreat in huge numbers into this image-based existence” (Hedges 1). After his statistic about how much of our population is illiterate he questions and almost accuses the other two thirds of Americans of not being literate by his standards. Who is he to dictate what is means to be literate? For Scribner, to be literate means to be “functionally literate” which she defines as, “the level of proficiency necessary for effective performance in a range of settings and customary activities” (Scribner 6). In more simple terms Scribner is saying a person raising chickens on a farm does not need to have the same proficiency level as someone running for a seat in Congress. To be literate on a farm is entirely different than being literate in politics. Literacy can never be defined simply because it is such a complex word, but the main point I am trying to make is that this is a word that holds a different meaning for each and every person alive.

            We can never thank technology enough for making our lives so much easier, but we have to be careful. If we do not monitor our Internet habits and rely too heavily on it, it can be detrimental to our society. Because of the Internet we can conduct research faster and communicate easier which promotes reading and writing outside of the classroom. Children of the “Facebook Generation” read and write more than any other generation solely because of advancements in technology. However, as technology continues to change the definition of reading and writing will also change. We must be careful to let it do all of our work for us. The Internet is a great tool to increase our brainpower and ability to read and write. It is up to us to continue finding ways to use the Internet to promote intelligence. 

P9. Reflection of Blogging

So after creating all of these blog posts I must say it was not as painful as I thought it would be. And by painful I mean trying to come up with 250 words or more about different articles relating to reading and writing. At first I thought there is no way I have that much to say about these topics, but I was definitely surprised that in several instances I had almost too much to say! I think the most challenging aspect of writing the blog was trying to connect each post with the previous posts. Sometimes it was obvious how they related and other times it was not so obvious because they were opposite of each other.

            I found reading the articles criticizing our society’s lack of brainpower most interesting. This was the first time I have read in depth about this on going debate about whether the Internet is making us, in general, smarter or stupider. I’m glad we were able to read both sides of the argument but I have to say the articles scolded us for using the Internet too often was the most shocking. It is impossible now to completely stop using the Internet because we rely on it for day to day life, but I think changed can be made to make it more helpful. I’m sure there are a million and one educational tools on the Internet that schools can use to better educate the next generation of tech-obsessed citizens.

            After tracking our Internet history and reading about my classmates Internet habits, I am definitely more aware of how I spend my time online. I wouldn’t say my habits have necessarily changed, but at least am I aware of what I’m doing. That’s half the battle, right? However, I do find myself checking different online newspapers and articles than I did before. 

P8. A Glimmer of Hope?

The main difference between Thompson’s article on the new literacy and Hedges and Carr’s article is the positivity in Thompson’s article that is pretty much non-existent in the other two. Thompson makes the claim that the Internet is actually improving our nation’s writing ability because people are writing more frequently online than ever before. There is actual statistical research to back up these hopeful claims. After reading Hedges and Carr’s articles about how dumb we’ve become as a society, it was refreshing to explore the other side of the ongoing agreement: is the Internet helpful or harmful? (A question to which I would still answer both.) However, I am slightly skeptical of what Thompson is saying. Yes it’s true we do a lot more writing out of school now via Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc. but what concerns me is does creating a Facebook status really count as a legitimate piece of writing? How about a 125 character Tweet? I mean how much creativity is really necessary there? Nonetheless, social media is forcing people to write something, no matter how short, and that I believe is better than not writing at all.

And now for the heavy stuff presented abut literacy and metaphors. What I liked about Scribner’s articles was that she actually made the effort to try and define the word “literacy” instead of just blaming technology as the reason rates of illiteracy are on the rise. Although Scribner defines the word “literacy” in several ways in all fourteen pages of the article, I still believe that term may never be accurately defined or generalized. Yes I agree that literacy is power and social. She makes a very valid, non-biased argument unlike some of the other author’s we’ve read. I agree with Scribner that the term “literacy” has different meaning for people all over the world. Do people in remote tribes of the jungle really need to know how to read the paper or understand a presidential debate? Yes I know this example is an extreme case but I think more people need to look into both sides of the argument before asserting their opinions. 

P7 The Shocking Truth About Illiteracy in America

            The prompt for this blog post asks what we find troubling in Chris Hedges’s “America the Illiterate” and frankly there’s not much there that I don’t find troubling. For starters, the fact that 80% of families in America did not buy a single book last year frightens me. What is happening to our society? If one third of our nation’s population is illiterate, who is going to lead our country in the future? Who will be the innovators of tomorrow, certainly not one third of the population?

            I do agree with Hedge and Carr that the Internet is contributing to this growing rate of illiteracy, however I believe there are other factors contributing to this issue. I think a big portion of the problem comes from families not having enough money to send their kids to elementary school. Also some schools do not get enough money from the government to pay for the necessary books and supplies. I would imagine that a lot of the population that is illiterate does not even have access to the Internet. I don’t know. Those are pretty large assumptions to make without any evidence to back them up but that’s just what I believe, or would like to believe at least.

           

            Both Carr and Hedge pretty openly blame the Internet for making America stupid. Carr presents both sides of the argument: that the Internet is both helpful and harmful. Hedge writes with more aggression and statistical evidence of how our country is evolving in the wrong direction. One fact that really put it all into perspective was the study of vocabulary from past presidential debates. The fact that the Lincoln- Douglas debate scored in between 11 and 12^th grade vocabulary level and the Bush-Gore debate only scored in between 6 and 7^th grade level scared me. Is our country really that dumb? I sure hope not. In recent years have the candidates really dumbed themselves down simply because such a large portion of our population could not understand them otherwise? Then what is going to happen ten years from now, presidential candidates speaking at a first grade level? I hope someday soon more people realize what is going on and make major changes to the way we use technology. 

P6 Is Google Really Making Us Stupid?

Is Google really making us stupid? Yes and no. After reading Nicholas Carr’s article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” I would have to agree with Carr in that used properly, Google and the Internet is an incredibly advanced and useful tool, but is also hurting our society in a way.

Google and the Internet is the quickest and most convenient way to access information about pretty much any topic. Instead of spending hours in the library among enormous textbooks and encyclopedias, one Google search can result in the same information in a fraction of the time. Talk about efficiency. In that way, Google is indeed increasing our knowledge.

            However, if so many people have such easy access to that information, then why aren’t we all super geniuses Albert Einstein or Mark Zuckerberg? (I actually had to do a quick Google search to make sure I spelt his name right. Ironic?) The reason we aren’t like them is because even though we have immediate access, the difference is how we access this knowledge. As Carr states, “Google is doing the work of the mind” and we simply click and click and click until we find what we are looking for. The only work we are doing is a quick scan to see if what Google finds really answers our question.

            Another way the Internet is compromising our minds is it is shortening our attention spans because on the Internet, once you get bored with something, you are just one click away from doing something else. As Carr wonderfully summarizes this idea in a metaphor, “Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.” It is becoming uncommon for people to sit down a read because when you’re online the instant the you get bored, you make a few clicks and just like that you are on another website. And if we can’t keep our attention on one webpage, how are we expected to focus on something so dull and lifeless as a novel or newspaper?

            Contrary to some of my classmates and even lit majors in this article, I still find myself reading print, especially books, for hours at a time. For me, a good book can capture my attention until I’m too tired and need to go to bed. I find books entertaining because they tell a story, fiction or none fiction, that is so different from my own life that it is exciting. Call me a book nerd, but I still believe in their fun.

            So again I ask, is Google really making us stupid? My Answer is still yes and no. If used appropriately, I think it’s an awesome tool to increase our brainpower. If abused, and used to do our thinking for us, then yes, Google is decreasing our knowledge. 

P5 Reading, Writing, and Rewriting

Harris’ book Rewriting is a book about how to write, (thank you captain obvious). But it is how he defines the art of reading and writing that makes this book unique from other writing guides. According to Harris the process of writing is taking a previous written text and put in a different perspective. He believes the purpose of rewriting a text is to allow the audience to think differently about the text, maybe see both sides of an argument. Harris defines reading as taking a text, whether is be a book, movie, poem, painting etc, and discover the author’s purpose for creating that particular text. Reading is extracting the meaning out of an existing text.

           

            When I compare Harris’ definitions of reading and writing to previously blogged about Andrew Sullivan’s definitions, I find a few differences. Mainly, Sullivan seems more casual or blasé about writing. Given the medium each author works with, blogs being more casual, I understand why Harris’ text has a more serious tone to it. Sullivan writes freely because freedom is a blogger’s best friend. On the other hand, Harris defines writing as a strict, almost formulaic process because he is writing an academic book about how to write academically. I neither agree nor disagree with either author because it is difficult to make a comparison when the authors medium as well as audience are entirely different. 

P4 we all spend a lot of time on the Internet

            After reviewing my classmates Internet logs it seems we all have one site in common, and it comes as no surprise that this site is Facebook. After all, we are the “Facebook Generation and while some people, mostly my parents age, would call this a bad thing to be labeled by, I have to disagree with them. Yes, I will admit Facebook and the Internet are not always just fun and games; it can be dangerous at times. However, sometimes I feel that people only see and talk about the negative aspects of using or abusing Facebook and the Internet. It is easy to overlook all of the benefits social networking brings us. For example, staying in touch with friends from home, creating groups for sports or classes, advertising events, Skyping with your parents or even grandparents, and countless other opportunities that would not be possible without the Internet.

            I also noticed more people than I thought read the news online. Not many people our age I know regularly read the newspaper but that doesn’t mean we are not informed. These days there are so many ways to get information and news online and since we spend a lot of time online anyway, it’s easy. Personally, I’m not a huge newspaper reader mostly because I find it difficult and awkward hold it up and read at the same time. Online newspapers and magazines are becoming more and more popular and print newspaper subscriptions are on the decline. The Internet is definitely ruling the lives of our generation and generations after us, which makes me wonder if print news will eventually disappear. 

P3 What am I looking at on the Internet?

Let me start off by saying I spend way too much time on the Internet and I’ve been trying to cut back in this New Year. So far it’s worked out ok. I would say I definitely spend less time on Facebook and Hulu, but I still need to work on it.

            Although my homepage is Google, my most frequented site definitely has to been Yahoo Homepage. I am probably on Yahoo up to ten times a day. Yes my email account is by Yahoo but that’s not the reason why I’m on this site so much. I’m always on there because I love to read the Yahoo news headlines. Getting the news has never been so easy or interesting before.

            For those of you who have never experienced Yahoo Homepage, I highly recommend it. Four headlines with pictures show up in the middle of the screen and there is a brief, attention grabbing sentence or two about the article. Then you can click the right arrow, which brings you to the next set of four articles with pictures. Sometimes there is up to 30 articles! If I see something that seems interesting, I click on the article and read it or just read part of it if its boring and not as cool as I thought it was going to be. Most of the articles I read have to do with the latest health and fitness advice, sports news, cool and lavish real-estate that I will never be able to afford, or even sweet videos of sea turtles high-fiving!

            When I don’t have time to sit and watch NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, or read the entire newspaper, Yahoo news is a great way to stay current with what is happening in the world with the additional random but interesting facts or stories.

            When I do find myself on Facebook it is mainly to chat or video chat with friends from home and the occasional, or maybe not so occasional stalking my friend’s pictures and let’s be honest, pictures of people I hardly know. Admit it, you do it too. 

a blog is the opposite of a diary

            I agree with Andrew Sullivan when he says blogging is the opposite of writing in a diary. A blog is written with the intention of other people, often strangers reading the author’s thoughts and feelings. For that reason I feel like one reason why Sullivan blogs is to be a risk taker, to add a little excitement in his life. Writing is not always the most exhilarating process but the idea of posting writing on the Internet for anyone to read adds a certain amount of risk and thrill. Blogs can be published instantly after they are written, a task that is impossible for newspaper articles or magazines and other forms of print. Because blogs are typically more personal than a newspaper article, with each new post, the author becomes even more vulnerable than before. Anyone with Internet has immediate access deep into the lives of the blogger. Sullivan is fully aware of the risks he is taking by blogging. He writes, “But blogging requires an embrace of such hazards, a willingness to fall off the trapeze rather than fail to make the leap” (3). Not all risk end in success but the fact that he is willing to take those risks even if he fails shows his courageousness. He understands not everyone one will agree with him or what he writes but he blogs anyway. He blogs because he enjoys the process and knows there are people out there who enjoy reading it, but he does not try to please everyone. Staying true to himself, as a writer is his first priority, how many followers he has is less important.