Summary of Do Video Games Kill by Karen Stemheimer In the commentary, “Do Video Games Kill”, Karen Sternheimer brings to light an interesting and incredibly controversial subject; are video games to blame for youth gun violence? She maintains that due to many biased opinions; political, religious and advocacy groups, the media have failed to provide ample information to the public resulting in the inability to form an educated opinion, in turn causing a mass hysteria resulting in tougher security guidelines in schools, stricter juvenile laws and far less personal and parental responsibility. An incredibly popular first person shooter video game, Doom, is ripe with gratuitous violence. So much so that it has been blamed for several mass shootings, perpetrated by middle-class, white, young-adult males. The media, politicians, advocacy groups as well as the FBI are steadfast in claiming that the only rational explanation is that of the individuals falling prey to the aggression inciting video game.
People who lose themselves in the media or online networking, lose their realistic identity as-well. They need to wake up from their “cyber-limbo” and return to the reality of face-to-face communication. As a result of Sir Alfred not having an identity and being in his own limbo, he did not have a normal human relationship with anyone or an actual friend, similar to the so-called Facebook “friends”. These cyber-limbo people, who do not socialize with the world as much as before the networking era, are beginning to reel in their own space--a replica of Alfred’s illusion of existence. The author “sets the stage” in an airport full of motion and life, which makes Sir Alfred stand out even more.
Technology is manipulating us into thinking that virtual interaction can serve as a replacement for human interaction. By doing this we become awkward with one another. It’s important that others understand what will become of the future society if this continues. Technology can be very beneficial, but many users are abusing it. In Sherry Turkle’s chapter No Need to Call, she argues that choosing technology over peers is eventually going to lead to isolation.
Especially we need to recognize that the Internet is a public environment everyone has access to. As Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. argued, “Protecting this kind of Internet speech posed ‘a very grave threat of domestic violence” (Denniston). Elonis’ case is definitely different from Virginia v. Black in 2003 because burning a cross does not show a clear message and only involves a limited amount of people, but Elonis’ words online can speak clearly that he would do something and convey to a much wider audience, making them fear and nervous. If everyone is free to speak any violence word as Elonis did online, the society will be in completely chaos. Everyone will live in fear because saying terrorism is all right.
An Argument Analysis of “How Facebook Ruins Friendships” In August 2009 Elizabeth Bernstein wrote an article called “How Facebook Ruins Friendships” for the Wall Street Journal. She mentions in the article that social network help people got back in touch with friends from childhood and help them become better acquainted. In contrast, she states, “Here’s where you and I went wrong: We took our friendship online.” She believes that social networking is ruining friendships rather than making friendship closer. Bernstein’s argument also claims that “the problem is much greater than which tools we use to communicate. It’s what we are actually saying that’s really mucking up our relationships.” At first brief look, Bernstein’s argument is effective because she gives good examples that support her argument and most people can empathize with.
WhіƖе computers аnԁ thе internet hаνе become invaluable resources аnԁ everyone now hаνе nο іԁеа hοw they сοuƖԁ еνеr live without thеm, thеrе аrе still ѕοmе things thаt thе computer саnnοt replace, and one of those things іѕ relationship. According to the article “The Negative Effects of Internet Dating,” “the internet hasn’t solved аƖƖ relationship problems, аnԁ іn fact, іt hаѕ іn many cases added more trοubƖе thаn anything” (Jackson). The difficulties of online dating come from the users for not giving a straight ѕtοrу, and thеу аrе οftеn misrepresenting whο thеу аrе аnԁ whаt thеу up tο. Meeting online іѕ a totally different experience frοm personal contact, and thе person mау nοt bе аt аƖƖ Ɩіkе thе person that daters always thought they were dealing with; thіѕ shock іѕ usually on both
I find it disturbing, to not say disgusting, this newly found need of self-entitlement people have now. Because people find something offensive, inappropriate, stupid, demeaning or whatever it is they think of, they start rallying against whomever or whatever it is that “fulfill” these characteristics. Media outlets have fallen prey to this, but media outlets are the main cause for this uprise of self-entitled naysayers. The internet is the worst culprit of all. The internet has become the home for these naysayers, those who sit in front of a screen to simply criticize, insult, and put down whatever they see just because.
What more if it is a ten or a hundred thumbs down? The ‘dislike’ button is served as a silent and forced criticism to another person’s thought. As human beings, it is more difficult for us to not dwell into negative response than it is to positive response (Dan Pearce, 2010). No matter what the post is about, a single thumb down could suck any happiness out of it. The ‘dislike’ button could also strip away a person’s confidence.
Technology seems to be subtly destroying the meaningfulness of human interactions, disconnecting us from each other and the world around us, and leading to a menacing sense of isolation in society. We need to go back to simpler times and back to simple communication. People tend to exaggerate the personas they portray because they have much more time to revise and calculate the content rather than a spontaneous face-to-face interaction. Some psychologists and sociologists who have studied usage habits on Twitter, Facebook and popular dating sites say there's little correlation between how people act on the internet and how they act in person. Not to mention, Face to face communication had been the "norm" for thousands of years.
First, they are a great waste of time says Dr. Spock. At their worst, they promote violent responses from children. The main argument about video games is that they take away from children reading. Then the author presents the reasons that reading is so good for people. However, the author then says that a lot of the criticism about video games is because they are being judged by old standards by people who believe reading is the main way for children to learn skills.