Families Paying a Price
Matt Richtel, author of the essay “Hooked on Technology and Paying a Price”, continues the public persisting question of our society's advancement: is technology good or bad? Cascio says good, Carr says bad. Richtel votes differently. He admits the advantages of technological advancement, but warns of the harm of technology in excess. He represents the problems technology poses through an institution every human being can relate to, the American family. Mr. Campbell is addicted to technology, as is his son, young daughter, and even the wife who complains of her husband's addiction. As a result, the family patriarch misses critical business offers, everyday obligations, and most importantly, precious time with his family. We heard Carr's fears about degenerating brain power and changes in the way we process information, and Richtel relays the same facts. However, he brings to his readers' attention two points that captured my interest, and likely the majority of the remainder of his audience.
The first, more practical reasoning behind Richtel's anti-technology side of his essay, is the effects multiple screens and messages can have on one's productivity levels. Said “multi-taskers”, who claimed to be able to focus their attention at multiple tasks or screens at the same time, were studied by researchers. The study found that the multi-taskers were less efficient at distinguishing tasks and solving problems then the other subjects. Therefore, suggesting they have not been positively impacted by technological abundance. Rather, their cognitive power, as suggested previously by Carr, has taken a turn for the worse.
Additionally to providing scientific reliability, Richtel appeals to his audience's emotional and personal aspects of reasoning. He demonstrates the structure of the Campbell family, and how it has been negatively affected by every screen and wire that his family is unhealthily attached to. From burnt cookies to ruined family vacations, the negative effects are apparent, and even scary. The oldest Campbell child is even academically impacted.
However, the scary part is not Connor's C's on his report card or Mr. Campbell sitting in his vacation hotel room to play video games on his Ipod. The scary part is the deterioration of the Campbell family could happen to anyone, the Smith family, Davis family, Brown family. Even my own family. Everytime Apple releases the next must-have gadget or a bigger plasma television comes out at Best Buy, the threat increases. The thought of imagining my own father absent for the majority of a family vacation disturbs me, as I'm sure it does most of the public. The institution of the family is what makes us human and has enabled our survival for all of history, and the way of life of the modern “Information Age” is threatening the family's structure and function.
Authors Cass and Cascio both expressed their opinions behind the ever-growing technology boom persuasively and effectively. Richtel did the same, but differently. The author used two things any reader can understand, and will be easily swayed by. Richtel uses science from experiments and studies, presented in order to support his beliefs. However, his strongest and most effective influence comes from exemplifying the typical American family.
I really like how you tied all three articles that we've read together and then analyzed how each author persuaded their audiences. I agree that by Richtel using the typical "American family" he is able to connect with pretty much everyone who is in a family and uses technology.
ReplyDelete