[Street Address]
[City, ST ZIP Code]
[phone number]
[email]
Editor
The Guardian
Kings Place, 90 York Way
London, N1 9GU
Dear Catherine Viner:
I am writing to you in regards to a recent article you published titled, “Teenagers, and social networking – It might actually be good for them”. The writer, Clive Thompson suggests that parent’s need not worry about their kids spending too much on social networking sites, because they are developing social skills much like they do in face-to-face situations. Although Clive provides compelling reasons, and supports his claims with evidence, research has shown that the effects of too much device time can have a negative effect on an adolescent brain. Furthermore, research has shown that kids who spend more time than their peers on social media, are more likely to suffer from depression, obesity, and under perform at school.
In addition to this, Clive claims that worries about illiteracy as a result of too much time on the internet is unfounded. Again, here he gives his reasons, and supports it with some research. However the majority is against his premise. Insight into the country’s schooling system has shown that illiteracy in Western societies is a growing concern, and a good number of graduating students are unable to express themselves formally in writing because of it. This goes then affects their ability to perform well within the higher education system.
Although I disagree with Clive on some major points. I would like to point out that concerning the internet giving student’s the ability to research, and gather information more efficiently, I find that statement to be true. However, the quality of information on the internet has to be examined, before one can jump to the conclusion that the internet provides a great alternative to libraries – as was the case before the internet age. Nowadays, anyone can publish on the internet, and quite often the information is not reviewed or checked for its accuracy. If a student is unaware of this, and has not been taught to select only peer reviewed documents, then then time spent researching on the internet is a waste.
I did enjoy Clive’s use of case study material from his interview’s with teenagers. However, these reflect, but a tiny minority of teens who use the internet and social networking sites. Their experiences, though positive, do not accurately reflect the majority of teenagers on the internet. I feel that Clive is telling his readers how to respond to their teenager’s internet and social networking behavior. He gives evidence, but like I stated earlier, that evidence is faulty and debatable. Instead, he should encourage parents to seek out what is right for them within their unique situation. I feel Clive has used his case studies to manipulate his reader’s response. He is asking parents to allow their kids as much time as they want on social media, and the internet, because it’s good for them. Despite expert warnings about the health risks, and physiological disorders that have risen from too much screen time, Clive sticks by his argument because kids told him positive things about their internet use.
In conclusion, children need guidance from responsible adults when it comes to screen time. I think Clive is being quite irresponsible in this way by suggesting that parents need not worry about this at all. In this way, Clive has set himself up as an expert in the field and ignores the real expert’s warnings. Lastly, there are very few laws to protect children online, this should have been thoroughly addressed in Clive’s article, but it was missing. I don’t think one can make a decision based on Clive’s information, because he has not covered all sides of the debate, and has not accurately investigated the situation in depth. Furthermore, I think he is biased because he has children who use these sites frequently. So I think it is Clive’s parenting advice, or his way of parenting that is coming across in the article, rather than a well-researched piece of information that one might be able to consider for their own lives.
Please look into this and perhaps consider a re-write, or a retraction.
I am looking forward to your response.
Sincerely,
