Smart TV
Think of a popular TV show. Does it challenge the viewer to think hard, or does the viewer just sit there and mindlessly follow along? In “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” Steven Johnson argues that by watching TV, a person can learn and gain knowledge, contrary to popular belief. I agree with Johnson’s article. Johnson believes that the words and actions portrayed on screen, the complex plot lines, and the judgment of all the shows are important.
How much does a viewer actually learn while watching a show? Johnson states that the words and actions portrayed on-screen is where viewers learn. He says, “They say witty things to one another and avoid lapsing into tired sitcom cliches” (280). By this, he is saying that by making sarcastic remarks and creating a problem in the plot of a story; this keeps viewers awake and thinking during a show, instead of mindlessly watching the show. I agree with what Johnson has to say. When watching shows where the plot of the story ends in the end of the episode, viewers do not have to think very hard because the ending is predictable.
As an adolescent, parents usually tell children to turn off some type of reality TV show. As a parent, you probably told your children to turn off the reality tv show they were watching. Johnson believes that watching reality tv shows increase intelligence. Johnson supports his claim by saying, “The pleasure in these shows come not from watching other people being humiliated on national television; it comes from depositing other people in a complex, high-pressure environment where no established strategies exist and watching them exist and watching them find their bearings” (291). Johnson’s claim that reality shows also increase intelligence rests upon the questionable assumption that all reality shows have plot lines that keep viewers on their toes and thinking. I agree that reality shows like “Survivor” could increase brain activity and strategical thinking. However, there are reality shows like “Jersey Shore” that require no brain activity or thinking of any sort.
The point that Johnson is really trying to argue in his article is how shows are judged and labeled. He writes, “Instead of a show’s violent or tawdry content, instead of wardrobe malfunctions or the F-word, the true test should be whether a given show engages or sedates the mind” (293). This statement challenges the work of those critics who have long assumed that reality tv shows are trash. There are reality shows that challenges the viewer’s mind, and there are decent shows that do nothing for the viewer’s mind.
In Steven Johnson’s article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” Johnson believes that the words and actions in TV shows, a complicated plot line, and how TV shows are criticized are all important aspects of how watching TV makes a viewer smarter. I agree with the information that Johnson has provided and argued in this article. When watching television, pick shows wisely because they can really be a great influence if the right one is picked.
How much does a viewer actually learn while watching a show? Johnson states that the words and actions portrayed on-screen is where viewers learn. He says, “They say witty things to one another and avoid lapsing into tired sitcom cliches” (280). By this, he is saying that by making sarcastic remarks and creating a problem in the plot of a story; this keeps viewers awake and thinking during a show, instead of mindlessly watching the show. I agree with what Johnson has to say. When watching shows where the plot of the story ends in the end of the episode, viewers do not have to think very hard because the ending is predictable.
As an adolescent, parents usually tell children to turn off some type of reality TV show. As a parent, you probably told your children to turn off the reality tv show they were watching. Johnson believes that watching reality tv shows increase intelligence. Johnson supports his claim by saying, “The pleasure in these shows come not from watching other people being humiliated on national television; it comes from depositing other people in a complex, high-pressure environment where no established strategies exist and watching them exist and watching them find their bearings” (291). Johnson’s claim that reality shows also increase intelligence rests upon the questionable assumption that all reality shows have plot lines that keep viewers on their toes and thinking. I agree that reality shows like “Survivor” could increase brain activity and strategical thinking. However, there are reality shows like “Jersey Shore” that require no brain activity or thinking of any sort.
The point that Johnson is really trying to argue in his article is how shows are judged and labeled. He writes, “Instead of a show’s violent or tawdry content, instead of wardrobe malfunctions or the F-word, the true test should be whether a given show engages or sedates the mind” (293). This statement challenges the work of those critics who have long assumed that reality tv shows are trash. There are reality shows that challenges the viewer’s mind, and there are decent shows that do nothing for the viewer’s mind.
In Steven Johnson’s article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” Johnson believes that the words and actions in TV shows, a complicated plot line, and how TV shows are criticized are all important aspects of how watching TV makes a viewer smarter. I agree with the information that Johnson has provided and argued in this article. When watching television, pick shows wisely because they can really be a great influence if the right one is picked.
Works Cited
Johnson, Steven. "Watching TV Makes You Smarter." They Say I Say With Readings. By Gerald Graff and Cathy
Birkenstein. Ed. Russel Durst. 2E ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. 277-294. Print.
Birkenstein. Ed. Russel Durst. 2E ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. 277-294. Print.