Thinking Outside the idiot Box was written by Dana Stevens as a direct response to Steven Johnson's article Watching TV Makes You Smarter. Johnson believes that TV shows have become more complicated, because the viewers have grown smarter from watching them. He argues that watching TV gives you “cognitive benefits... attention, patience, retention, and the parsing of narrative threads.” Stevens argues that television industries have complicated their storylines and filled their shows with rapid-fire information, in order to KEEP their viewers from thinking, so that the viewers will only think about the future shows.
24 is one example of how producers are keeping their audiences, with complicated plots and intense action. The show 24 has various plot lines which allude back to previous shows and keep the individual in suspense Thus, the viewer has to think back and make those connections, in order to keep up. This keeps the individual distracted from evaluating the “nutritional value” of the show.
Stevens then moves her argument on to discuss who should deem a show to be nutritional. Duringthe TV Turnoff Week in the year 2005, Kalle Lasn failed to turn off a TV in an airport, because it was a nature show. “Who decides?” which shows are better to watch? One individual could be offended by the living arrangements of a couple in a show, and thus deem the show to be inappropriate When we try to evaluate if a show is inappropriate versus appropriate, we are taking responsibility and freedom away from adults to make their own decisions. It should remain the individual's choice to decide if a show is worth viewing, just as the person should decide if watching TV is a smart thing for them to do. However, “There couldn't be a better time to test Steven Johnson's theory” than now. Just don't watch TV for a few days, and see if it makes you dumber.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Summary 5
Paul Campos, in his essay entitled Being Fat is OK, describes a “propaganda war” between individuals fighting against the dieting industry and the government. The government is supporting the dieting industry by releasing information that is misleading and incorrect. Starting with the Body Mass Index, or the BMI, the government is claiming that sixty one percent of Americans are overweight. Paul Campos points out that even though he runs thirty five to forty miles a week and is considered to overall have excellent health, he is fat to the government because he is five foot eight inches and weighs one hundred sixty five pounds.
Scientifically this information is incorrect, because it has not been proven that weight effects death. There have been some correlations between weight and death, however there is no data supporting the theory that weight can cause death. Yet, dieting industries have convinced people that thin individuals are healthier than fat people, when in fact, thin people have simply started out with less weight.
On top of no scientific evidence supporting that weight can cause death, there is little evidence to suggest whether or not losing weight is healthy. In order to prove this, an experiment would have to be conducted where half of the subjects kept off all of the lost weight. Since there is no known way to keep lost weight off, it cannot be proven.
Even though ninety to ninety eight percent of diets fail, it is widely believed that fat people can choose to be thinner. Thus the dieting industries are making about fifty billion dollars a year, convincing people to invest in dieting, when is it most likely that their dieting plan will fail. Scientifically, information regarding weight loss and dieting cannot be proven, yet the government is still supporting the dieting industry. Campos concludes by comparing diets to “ineffective cures for an imaginary disease.”
Scientifically this information is incorrect, because it has not been proven that weight effects death. There have been some correlations between weight and death, however there is no data supporting the theory that weight can cause death. Yet, dieting industries have convinced people that thin individuals are healthier than fat people, when in fact, thin people have simply started out with less weight.
On top of no scientific evidence supporting that weight can cause death, there is little evidence to suggest whether or not losing weight is healthy. In order to prove this, an experiment would have to be conducted where half of the subjects kept off all of the lost weight. Since there is no known way to keep lost weight off, it cannot be proven.
Even though ninety to ninety eight percent of diets fail, it is widely believed that fat people can choose to be thinner. Thus the dieting industries are making about fifty billion dollars a year, convincing people to invest in dieting, when is it most likely that their dieting plan will fail. Scientifically, information regarding weight loss and dieting cannot be proven, yet the government is still supporting the dieting industry. Campos concludes by comparing diets to “ineffective cures for an imaginary disease.”
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Summary 4
Radley Balko, author of What You Eat is Your Business, begins his article by introducing a three day summit on obesity. He judges that the program will promote government intervention of obesity. Then Balko moves on, by pointing out what the government and governmental officials are currently doing to fight obesity. For example, state legislators and school boards are banning junk food and soda pop from school vending machines. Also, President George W. Bush budgeted two hundred million dollars for anti-obesity measures.
Following these discussions, Radley Balko argues that these methods are “the wrong way to fight obesity.” He points out that government measures to solve obesity problems by limiting the available choices, take away the responsibility of the individual to manage their weight, by eating healthier foods. Balko then lists actions taken by lawmakers and politicians, which have caused America's health care system to move toward socialism. Some of these actions include candidates for presidency promising to make health care a part of the public sector and states preventing higher premium charges to overweight clients from private health insurance companies. Actions of this nature “effectively remove any financial incentive for maintaining a healthy lifestyle.” Balko discusses how individuals are not being held responsible for their own health, which causes them to lose motivation to stay healthy. Balko then talks about how this will pave the way for more government restrictions of personal responsibility and lose of individual freedoms.
Radley Balko concludes with some suggestions on how to solve the public health problem of obesity. Overall, he hopes to achieve this purpose by taking obesity out of the public health sector. He states that the only reason obesity is a public issue is because the public is paying for the choices of individuals. By liberating insurance companies to reward people for healthy lifestyles and allowing increased access to medical and health savings accounts, individuals will have more accountability for their own health and thus they will start making better choices.
Following these discussions, Radley Balko argues that these methods are “the wrong way to fight obesity.” He points out that government measures to solve obesity problems by limiting the available choices, take away the responsibility of the individual to manage their weight, by eating healthier foods. Balko then lists actions taken by lawmakers and politicians, which have caused America's health care system to move toward socialism. Some of these actions include candidates for presidency promising to make health care a part of the public sector and states preventing higher premium charges to overweight clients from private health insurance companies. Actions of this nature “effectively remove any financial incentive for maintaining a healthy lifestyle.” Balko discusses how individuals are not being held responsible for their own health, which causes them to lose motivation to stay healthy. Balko then talks about how this will pave the way for more government restrictions of personal responsibility and lose of individual freedoms.
Radley Balko concludes with some suggestions on how to solve the public health problem of obesity. Overall, he hopes to achieve this purpose by taking obesity out of the public health sector. He states that the only reason obesity is a public issue is because the public is paying for the choices of individuals. By liberating insurance companies to reward people for healthy lifestyles and allowing increased access to medical and health savings accounts, individuals will have more accountability for their own health and thus they will start making better choices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)