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!