Good Essay About Compare And Construct Of Two Articles

The aim of this essay is to present you with the comparison and analysis of the context of two articles. The first article is ‘Friendship, Facebook-style’ written by Aditya Chakraborty and published in the Guardian on January 11, 2011. The second article is ‘Flocking’ behavior lands on social networking sites’ written by Sharon Jayson in 2009 and published in USA Today. Both articles examine the nature of nowadays’ relationships as they have been affected by technology and new technological appliances like Facebook. The essay will present you with a review of each one of the articles along with the reflections drawn upon their reading and their strength and power in terms of putting across their messages.
Aditya Chakraborty prepares his readers with his title that he believes in the existence of a new style of friendship which is characterized on his behalf Facebook-style. So readers take it for granted. They are about to read a text which is on the new style of Friendship which has been characterizing human relationships during this period. But then the subtitle comes right after the title which brings readers in front of the paradox. The writer asks a rhetorical question which goes like ‘Are social networking sites promoting devalued, impermanent relationships?’ This is the inversion upon which readers’ attention is caught and their interest increases. What they are about to read is not a simple, descriptive piece of writing on the new kind of friendship which is characterized Facebook-style. This article is about to shed light on this new kind of friendship which is the result of Facebook’s invasion in people’s lives and it is about to raise questions concerning the contribution of Facebook to the creation of friendships. As a result, the journalist manages to catch his readers’ attention. He addresses his readers with a rhetoric, paradox question which could be paraphrased something like ‘How friends are the friends people acquire through internet?’
The article begins questioning the quality of the friendship created through Facebook which is the social network that brings people together and helps them to get to know each other, through a real-based incident. Simone Back, a girl said goodbye to her friends on Facebook by posting ‘Took my pills be dead soon so bye bye every one’. This girl was supposed to have 1,048 friends over the internet but not one of them bothered to reply to her message. There were only two postings generated by her own posting but none of them was an actual response to what Simone said. There was a posting claiming that Simone most of the times lies and another posting commenting on the alleged habit of Simone to take pills because of the outcome and evolution of her relationships. The reality was cruel and proved the opposite. Simone died and as not even one person who replied o her posting or who even showed the slightest worry as far as the announcement of her own coming death was concerned. Simone Back died and her mother wrote ‘My daughter Simone passed away today so please leave her alone’. This is the incident upon which the statements and thoughts of Aditya Chakraborty are built. The main question raised in this article and addressed to the readers is the worth of the friendship which is created through the social network of Facebook or other similar appliances like Twitter. Aditya Chakraborty does not seem to neglect the possible positive contributions of these kinds of communication but he seems to question the nature of their contribution. There is another way of treatment of friends and another kind of behavior, way of thinking and attitude which is adopted on behalf of Facebook users. This difference in the way friendship is treated and considered results in people facing the danger of neglecting or totally forgetting the importance of human relationships. Aditya Chakraborty focuses on this new kind of friendship which has invaded people’s lives and expresses his own worries as far as the quality of friendship and its future is concerned. He seems to draw people’s attention to the fact that friendship is important and ought not to be treated as something superficial. It could be argued that he wishes to emphasize on the fact that it is more important to experience real friendship than live the experience of superficial, false friendships which lead people to get disorientated and forget the real value and worth of ethical principles.
The second article titled ‘‘Flocking’ behavior lands on social networking sites’ seems to approach the social issue of social networks in a totally different way compared to the first one. In this article the social issue of social networking sites is approached in a more neutral, scientific-like way. Social networks have proven to be influencing people in a specific way as far as their behavior is concerned. People seem to leave behind them their individualism and they tend to join groups. Sharon Jayson refers to the findings of the scientific society which prove that people need to belong to a team. So Facebook and the other social networking systems contribute to the creation of a common way of thinking. There seems to be a great need for the formation of a common way of thinking. People need to reach social agreements in terms of their way of dealing with social issues of great importance. Also, people need to be members of a team. People who live all alone are either monsters or they suffer from great personal isolation. The article mentions that ‘being a part of a social network is good for you, research suggests’. The article highlights the findings of research which show that ‘social support and social networking offer benefit, from additional resilience to greater life satisfaction to reducing the risk of health problems. Other studies in the past two years have found that feeling like a part of a larger group helps in stroke recovery and memory retention and boosts overall well-being.’
It is easily understood that this article is slightly biased for the use of social networking since it refers to the benefits of social networking to people’s lives. As a result there is a variety of sources referred in the article. All the sources are credible and valid. The most important characteristic of these sources is the fact that they represent the majority of the scientific society nowadays. Therefore, the article witnesses the common thought and belief shared on behalf of the scientific majority concerning the new technological appliances and methods which have invaded people’s lives. It is of great importance to see that there is a positive look at anything new and there is a common positive attitude so that the benefits and good qualities of new technological advances can be enjoyed. But there is also lots of skepticism raised as far as the ways and methods which can be used in order to eliminate the potential drawbacks are concerned.
Both articles approach the social issue of social networking. Each writer of each article expresses a different point of view. It is of great significance to see that there are different opinions as far as the nature and benefits or dangers of social issues are concerned. It is also of great significance to witness different and opposing points of view on similar social issues since this plurality helps people to critically approach any issue of social importance. Any kind of opinion sheds light to different aspects of the same issue, thus contributing to the better and full enlightenment of the double edged nature of such a social issue.
In my opinion the first article is characterized by a more sentimental approach which speaks to the soul of its readers and seems to have a greater impact on people’s thoughts.