Sunday, October 25, 2009

THESIS STATEMENT DRAFT #3

1. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=111&sid=73650a7c-18be-4690-b713-317f1baf2cf2%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=44677029#db=a9h&AN=44677029
2. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=105&sid=73650a7c-18be-4690-b713-317f1baf2cf2%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=J0E374946123409
3. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=5&hid=105&sid=73650a7c-18be-4690-b713-317f1baf2cf2%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=J0E127571833509


New thesis paragraph:

Laws for teenage driving should be stricter to decrease the leading cause of teenage death. By getting their license at a young age, teenage drivers do not fully understand the responsibility of driving and are therefore reckless drivers. They commit unlawful actions like text messaging, talking on the phone, speeding, and driving under the influence, while putting both their lives and lives of others in danger. Coincidentally, laws already exist to prevent these types of actions, like “The Teen Driver Cell Phone Ban” in California, but they are not strongly enforced and the punishment is a small fine. This needs to change, the laws need to be strongly enforced and the punishment for anyone caught committing an offense should be more severe. If you are caught text messaging or talking on the phone, you should get a fine of $500 and get your license suspended for one month. If you are driving under the influence, you should be given a fine of $2,500 and get your license revoked for 12 months. If you are speeding, you should be given a fine of $750 and depending on how fast you are going your license should be taken away. For every 5 mph you are over, your license should be suspended an extra month. With stricter laws in place for teenage driving, more teenage lives and lives of others would be saved.

Old thesis paragraph:

Laws for teenage driver should be stricter to decrease the leading cause of teenage death. By getting their license at a young age, teenage drivers do not fully understand the responsibility of driving and are therefore reckless drivers. They commit unlawful actions, like text messaging, talking on the phone, speeding, and even driving under the influence, while driving and put their lives and lives of others in danger. In some states, like the State of California, laws already exist to prevent these types of action, but they are not strongly enforced or the punishment is a small fine. This needs to change, the laws need to be strongly enforced and the punishment for anyone caught committing an offense should be more severe. If you are caught using your cell phone to text message or to talk to someone, you should get a fine of $500 and get your license suspended for one month. If you are driving under the influence, you should be given a fine of $1500 and get your license suspended for 12 months. If you are speeding, you should be given a fine of $750 and depending on how fast you are going your license should be suspended. Ever 5 mph you are over, you license should be suspended an extra month. With stricter laws in place for teenage driving more teenage lives and lives of others would be saved.


NEW LITERACY

REVISED:
In the article “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy”, Thompson writes about how technology has an big impact on our writing. I agree with Andrea Lunsford, a Professor at Stanford University, who believes “technology isn't killing our ability to write, it's reviving it.” With the internet, people in today’s world write more often than before. With social networking websites like Facebook and chats online, it has allowed people to communicate with text then in earlier generations. In today’s world, professor Lunsford realized that when students write for an audience it “gives them a different sense of what constitutes good writing.” With a class assignment, students consider the professor not to be an audience therefore; they are “less enthusiastic about their in-class writing.” With the internet reviving the way we write, “Knowing who you're writing for and why you're writing might be the most crucial factor of all.”

As a teen in today's world it is true that technology is the new literacy of today's world. Everyday, its seems that everything i do has to do with some form or technology. Basically, technology rules the world. I believe that if there was not this much technology not that many people will write. Technology gives you the opportunity to read and especially write more. If its a text message, a blog response, or a chat response you are still creating some form of writing. It may seem that old traditional reading are becoming extinct like the newspaper, but with new technology people would be able to access the same newspaper on the internet or on the go with their cell phones. to me, new technology is the best way.
Question:
1. Is this article any different than the other articles we have read?
2. Do you agree that “technology isn't killing our ability to write, it's reviving it” or is it actually killing our ability to write.
3. Is the internet to really blame for the change in writing?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OLD:

In the article “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy”, Thompson writes about how technology has an impact on our writing. I agree with Andrea Lunsford, a Professor at Stanford University, who believes “technology isn't killing our ability to write, it's reviving it.” With the internet, people in today’s world write more often than before. With social networking websites like Facebook and chats online, it has allowed people to communicate with text then in earlier generations. In today’s world, professor Lunsford realized that when students write for an audience it “gives them a different sense of what constitutes good writing.” With a class assignment, students consider the professor not to be an audience therefore; they are “less enthusiastic about their in-class writing.” With the internet reviving the way we write, “Knowing who you're writing for and why you're writing might be the most crucial factor of all.”
Question:
1. Is this article any different than the other articles we have read?
2. Do you agree that “technology isn't killing our ability to write, it's reviving it” or is it actually killing our ability to write.
3. Is the internet to really blame for the change in writing?

Sunday, October 18, 2009

"online, r u realling reading?"

· revised:


The article “Online, R U Really Reading?” by Motoko Rich, Rich explains that in today’s world more kids are reading off the internet then from a book. He begins his article saying some believe the internet is to blame for the decline of student scores on reading tests. With the transformation of the new media, Rich mentions that “the internet has created a new way of reading, a way that can not be tested.” Rich mentions that “According to federal statistics, students who say they read for fun once a day score significantly higher on reading tests than those who say they never do.” The point is kids don’t read for fun, they believe it is a waste of their time. “According to Department of Education data cited in the report, just over a fifth of 17-year-olds said they read almost every day for fun in 2004,” but, this does not include online reading. The internet “can be more enriching than reading one book.” A book can take days to read but with the internet you can “cover a lot more of the topic from different points of view.”

·

· To answer the question “Online, R U Really Reading?” I would have to say yes, you are reading. The internet and a book are two different types of reading. A book would go through a lot of details and the internet goes straight to the point but, you are still reading. To be honest, if it wasn’t for the internet I would not be engaged with reading. I hate to read book I believe it is a waste of time but, with the internet it doesn’t fell like I am reading. The information is just given, I don’t have to go through details I don’t care about, and I just get the information I need.

I believe that the internet is a good form of reading. Technology these days is the easiest most convenient way to read. With the way technology is going, you would be able to read an entire newspaper on your cell phone. Recently, the Kindle has come out, which is a type of technology that allows you to read any book on a small screen, which you can bring on the go. It is true that the reading on the internet might be easier or not written correctly, but that is the way our generation is. The way we learned and with technology it is making our lives more convenient.


---------------------------------------


old:


The article “Online, R U Really Reading?” by Motoko Rich, Rich explains that in today’s world more kids are reading off the internet then from a book. He begins his article saying some believe the internet is to blame for the decline of student scores on reading tests. With the transformation of the new media, Rich mentions that “the internet has created a new way of reading, a way that can not be tested.” Rich mentions that “According to federal statistics, students who say they read for fun once a day score significantly higher on reading tests than those who say they never do.” The point is kids don’t read for fun, they believe it is a waste of their time. “According to Department of Education data cited in the report, just over a fifth of 17-year-olds said they read almost every day for fun in 2004,” but, this does not include online reading. The internet “can be more enriching than reading one book.” A book can take days to read but with the internet you can “cover a lot more of the topic from different points of view.”

·

· To answer the question “Online, R U Really Reading?” I would have to say yes, you are reading. The internet and a book are two different types of reading. A book would go through a lot of details and the internet goes straight to the point but, you are still reading. To be honest, if it wasn’t for the internet I would not be engaged with reading. I hate to read book I believe it is a waste of time but, with the internet it doesn’t fell like I am reading. The information is just given, I don’t have to go through details I don’t care about, and I just get the information I need.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word

In the article “New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word”, by Mark Zeliner is arguing that “we can no longer depend on words alone to carry our messages to the new technically sophisticated audiences of the twenty-first century.” He begins his article mentioning how much he loves everything about the newspaper and how much younger people don’t. Zeliner tries to convince his students that the good old newspaper is nothing like the “new media” that a “Computer screens are hard on the eyes” and “you couldn't fold a computer screen up and carry it in your book bag.” When he realized that no students were convinced he began to realize that the “new media” is the new way. He became excited on all the possibilities of the “new media.” Like the ability to “use hypertext links to break down the traditional narrative styles”, with this ability there would be new types of storytelling.
Other critics, like Neil Postman and Sven Birkert, believe that the “new media” is destroying the traditional style of the “old media”. Zeliner points out that the “new-media opens an untold number of new methods of reaching and communicating with an audience.” With the “new media”, journalists have the ability to grab the attention of his audience by inserting audio and video, which shows the tone of the journalist. He relates to the “old media” by saying that the “the new-media is not truly a "new" media. It is a compilation of many aspects of all the old traditional mediums.”
He then introduces ten- rules to learn on how to write in the “new media”. This rule “serve as a guide for beginning new-media writers and producers.” Rule one was “keep it tight, short paragraphs, simple active sentences, treat every word as a rare and valuable jewel.” I agree with this rule because you want to keep it straight forward, you don’t want your reader to read nonsense stuff that has nothing to do with the topic. Also, as a reader I wouldn’t want to read a long article, I like to keep it short and basic. Rule two was “break your text into appropriate "chunks" for reading, be aware of content when deciding between click or scroll.” This rule was basically trying to keep your reader interested as they go on reading. If you make them scroll down or click somewhere to keep on reading, slowly they will lose interest, I know I would. I don’t think this should be a rule since you have rule one. In rule one, if you have to keep everything tight and short, then why would you need to make the reader scroll or click to keep on going.
He then goes on with rule three which is “think in modules, preplan possible paths for your reader, insure that important information is difficult or impossible to miss.” This rule is somewhat important since your don’t want your reader to look all over the place looking for what they want. The important information should be in the middle of the article since many people just skim, they know where it the information is. Rule four goes on to say “use images to convey messages that you cannot convey with words, don't just scatter images around as window dressing, use thumbnails linked to higher-resolution images.” This rule is very important, since images say a lot more then words. An example of this rule, instead of writing about how the war in Afghanistan is going, a picture would show the audience more. With rule five he say “use audio clips judiciously, don't distract your reader but use clips to add to their experience.” This rule is not as important as some of them, unless you are trying to get a point across from what an important person, like the president, has said. You can also manipulate this rule and use it as an advantage for viewers to look at your page. If you play cool music on your page, viewers would explore your page to see what it is about.
In rule six, Zeliner says “use desktop video sparingly, use primarily to convey a mood or present a person's style or demeanor--not for content.” I don’t agree with this rule, I believe that you should use video all the time, if it has something to do with the topic. With a video, you can show the tone and mood in the person in the video and more information is put across through a video. In rule seven, he goes on and says to “link all footnotes, create your own definition and description pages, don’t hyperlink off your document.” I disagree with this rule; there is no point on making another page for the reader to go to just to get a definition. I would replace this rule, and make a rule on no tough words to jumble up your reader, use words of every day life.
For rule eight and nine, I believe that there is no put for these rules. In rule eight, he says “use hyperlinks off your document sparingly, gather your related links in the appendix of your document.” The only thing this rule does is take the reader away from the article and they are most likely not to return. Rule nine mentions to “use sidebars for supplemental information or narratives make it easy for the reader to return to the main document.” This rule would pretty much do the same thing as rule eight and drag the reader away from the article and they are most likely not to return to the same page. The last rule, rule ten is somewhat important, he says “think about form and how it works with your content, don't distract but add to the mood and meaning of what you are writing.” This rule is comparing the author to a producer. You have to think about the form of your article, you don’t want to make it too flashy but not to plan if you want to be good in the “new media.”

Mark Zeliner believes that these ten rules would allow you to write in the “new media.” I believe that some of the rules are important but, some are just nonsense. To write in the “new media” you have to make it simple and straight up. Place audio, video and image, because the audience loves entertainment. I would rather watch a video on the article then actually read it. I would also add another rule, to make your article colorful. Every article is usually the standard font with the color black. If you make it different color and different font, the words would stand out more.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

thesis paragraph #2

· http://www.dmv.ca.gov/cellularphonelaws/

· http://www.car-accidents.com/teen-car-accidents.html

· http://www.allstate.com/tools-and-resources/safe-driving-resources.aspx

Laws for teenage driver should be stricter to decrease the leading cause of teenage death. Teenage driving has been a serious issue, which has been brought to attention to government officials. By getting their license at a young age, teenage drivers do not fully understand the responsibility of driving and are therefore reckless drivers. They commit unlawful actions, like text messaging, talking on the phone, speeding, and driving under the influence, and put their lives and lives of others in danger. In some states, like the State of California, laws already exist to prevent these types of action, but they are not strongly enforced or the punishment is a small fine. This needs to change, the laws needs to be strongly enforced and anyone caught committing this offense should have their license suspended and given a fine of $250 or more. With stricter laws in place for teenage driving more teenage lives and lives of others would be saved.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Paper Idea's

1) There is a lot of controversy about owning guns and the second amendment, which gives us the right to bear arms. These days it seems that people are dying more and more from guns. I feel that guns should be strictly controlled. Guns are brought to schools creating a violent area; they have a huge impact on children, and provide a means for people to commit suicide. Overall, guns provide a threat of everyday living in this world.

2) The increase of teenage traffic accidents has been an ongoing issue, which has been brought to attention to both government and state officials. Being the top leading cause of teenage death, Teenage drivers are often associated in being amateurs to driving, committing unlawful actions everyday while driving. The increase in teenage traffic accidents is due to the immateriality of teenagers taking their eyes off the road to text message an associate on their cell phones, not concentrating on the road when talking on their cell phones, and driving recklessly believing they are invincible on the road.

3) The gaming industry has been getting very popular in recent years. Whether it is over the internet or on various game consuls, more people are playing games each day. However, the gaming industry biggest targets are adolescent/ infants. The increase of games has become a bad influence on these targeted age groups. The gaming industry has created an environment for kids to play more than to do academic work, it has introduces a world of violence and profanity, and has created an unhealthy lifestyle to kids on not being active in other activities.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Google and the Internet


















To summarize the article “The Internet Is No Substitute for the Dying Newspaper Industry”, the author argues that the decline on newspapers is not the Internets fault but, the fault of “a world where information is conveyed primarily through rapidly moving images rather than print.” He
mentions that with the decline of newspapers, the industry has tumbled with money loss and unemployment. His major argument is that “The Internet will not save newspapers.” The newspapers “are a public trust” that keep the citizens aware about situations in the world. He complains that internet articles are not the same as newspapers article and don’t take the same amount of effort to report, that “80% of reporting is done by newspapers and the wire services.” He notices that people are relying on browsing through the internet and looking at pictures more then reading the newspapers to get information. If people continue to live this way the newspapers will shortly die.

I disagree with the thought that the internet is no substitute for the newspaper because it is. With the improvement of the internet, many people get most of their information from there. On most websites, there is a top headline with some sort of news. The newspaper industry just need to get involved with the internet and start making most of there profit from the internet. I would rather get my information from the internet, because I am always on my computer, it is a click away to find any information I want. Most of the breaking news and top headlines are on my homepage, Yahoo. In our generation, the internet has taken over and rarely anybody reads the newspaper when the same information is on the computer in a shorter version, with color images that allows you to picture what is actually happening.







To summarize the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, the author is trying to point out that with the technologies that are being produced in our world, such as Google, makes us lazy and stupid. The main argument is with high speed internet, computers are becoming “our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.” He gets angry at search engines like Google, because he believe Google offers anything you want, you don’t have to go into deep reading to find your answer. You are able to skim through articles because they are too lengthy to read. This is how are society has become. Since we have high speed internet, there is no point on going to a library to get a book, because there is always a summary on a search engine, like Google. With the bold headlines on the internet, to some they don’t even need to open the link up they get their information from the headline.

I agree with the authors thoughts on how the internet is making us stupid. When the internet did not exist, people would have to read in length to get information that they were looking for. Now that the internet is available and search engines like Google are offered to us, there is no need to read in length, we would just need to skim through the articles and find the main points, you can even get the main put from the headline. Google offers us vast links to any subject that to get any information you just need to go to Google. As an example to this concept, in our class when we need to define a word, or to look up something what do we say, “It lives in Google.” But, even though I agree that it is making us stupid, it is part of our generation. If you compare us to older generations we would look stupid but, if your are comparing us to our own generations we are not stupid because most people get their news in a much shorter visually way on the internet.