According to this extract, the writer, Steven Johnson tries to bring up the knowledge and development of television narratives that are popular in television. His investigations have been done over the past decades. In this, he brings up the idea of perception those majority people have to a clear image (Steven, 01). He said that some of the shows that people deems to be bad in TVs are somehow of benefits and significance since they are healthy for our brains to watch. Although Johnson compares some of the shows such as "24," "The West Wing," "The Sopranos" and "ER" as shows that have complicated plots that try to overdo other shows with realistic characters. However, it goes without said that there are perceptions of TV’s shows that suggest that some shows are mentally stimulating.
Following this perception, TV shows can give someone a tilted perception of reality. Such unusual arguments of Johnson have an interest in them that make the viewers to pay attention to the approaches he uses that try to persuade the readers that he is correct. However, according to his perspective, TV shows have revolved and increases exercise cognitions as well as intelligence. Consequently, this makes the viewer’s brighter. While we are watching shows, as well as drama, we acquire that help us to analyze situations and environments and think critically. Johnson stand remains, he argues that no all TV programs are of significant benefits. He says that there are shows that are in the form of entertainment that are very unambiguous in many ways.
He gives an example of a finished TV series called “24” that the viewers must be keen and pay attention, make suggestions as well and try to track shifting their social relationships (Steven, 03). In this TV series, one’s brain tends to act out what one think would happen, along with the occurrence of action in the show. The good thing about these shows does not result from learning and following the characters’ actions, it comes from thinking and questioning things. Johnson shows the comparison between advanced shows from past years to recent advanced shows through multi-threads.
Back several decades, Hill Street was thought of too advanced to know for its viewers. Now, The Sopranos uses a similar multi-thread technique and this show is well known and enjoyed by viewers these days. This shows that intelligence has exaggerated together in United States of advanced shows that create us suppose critically. Johnson doesn't need his readers to believe that he thinks oldsters ought to stop observance what their kids ought to watch. Instead he states, “What I’m declaring may be a modification within the criteria we have a tendency to use to work out what very psychological feature food is and what's typically nutritious” (Steven, 03).
This dispute poses a modification in how we tend to rate TV. Johnson declares that despite the fact that shows just like the Sopranos and Twenty Four show acts of obscenity and violence, they are of valuable in brain development than other shows that are a lot of linear in plot less obscene. The viewers need to focus and follow the plot, this help them to focusing and make them sweat the elements of their brain that map social networks that fill within the missing data, which connect multiple narrative threads. In short, what Johnson is motility is rather than observation what our kids watch or we tend to watch supported obscenity and violence, we must always take a glance at a program’s narrative is development.
I concur with Johnson’s assertion that not all TV shows make us intelligent. The modern society relies on the television and other media for virtually all sorts of information. I recently developed a habit of watching the news daily so as to know what’s happing around the globe, and this has made me smarter. Various social crimes such as torture and racial profiling, which are threatening to engrave the society are exposed, and the entire human race stands annihilation of such acts (Steven, 02). The entertainment industry is increasing the cerebral convolution of its consumers.
However, not all people gain from the continuous prevalence of the industry and the many educative programs that are emerging. Personally, I was nurtured in a family where the parents were staunch Christians, and could not allow us to watch many of the programs that appeared to be “ill-mannered”. We, therefore, missed a lot and could not engage in hysterical discussions concerning such programs. These programs were at the heart of all teenagers, and most of them spent a great deal of their time discussing certain episodes or characters. We felt isolated and unaware of the real world of entertainment. Additionally, they were intellectually smart, organized and able to concentrate and connect events without much ado.
I believe that parents, as well as other agencies, have the right to control the programs that are viewed by consumers. These will help in preserving societal norms and reduce moral decadence. I, however, feel that parents should only restrict the programs that are extreme since though they might be educative, the harm that they cause to consumers might be extreme. Though Johnson claims that, “Smart culture is no longer something you force your kids to ingest”, I unwaveringly believe that the modern society has a role to play in the growth and development of a child (Steven, 03).
The social media is one industry that closely relates to the TVs. Both are educative, entertaining as well as destructive if not handled well. For instance, arguing that Facebook is informative, and assists in making people intellectually smart is a total reality. There are puzzles, quizzes and many other educative philosophies that are posted on Facebook and helps improve the IQ (intelligent quotient) of an individual. Nevertheless, it has been used to spread pop culture, and this does not augur well for a society that intends to preserve its norms. Just like TVs, Facebook has continuously been used to promote businesses for the benefit of syndicates, as well as the general public. Despondently, TV programs can be watched several times revealing new gradations thus making the more complicated programs to prosper than those that are relatively user-friendly.
Johnson’s argument and advice are of utter importance for a generation that wants to be witty without necessarily curtailing the freedom of the media. Though not all TV programs make us smart, many of them are misconstrued by people without knowing their social worth. Programs that display acts of violence and vulgarity play a great role in brain development than programs that are decent and linear in plot. I believe that a clear scrutiny of the program’s narrative development should provide the basis of whether to watch a particular program or not. However, despite the minor discrepancies, the society should embrace the wave of change that is strongly sweeping across. TVs and other Medias should be used to enhance cognitive development. I have leant that TVs are a major force to reckon with as far as mental development is concerned, and should not be underrated in any way.
Work cited
Steven Johnson. "The New York Times > Magazine > Watching TV Makes You Smarter." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. N.p., 24 Apr. 2005. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.
