Watching Tv Makes You Smarter Steven Johnson Analysis
Basluel A. Mekonnen
Professor Browne
English 101 Reading Response “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” by, Steven Johnson.
A. Comprehension:
Steven Johnson argues about watching TV shows makes us smarter by developing our brain. He compares the current TV shows and earlier TV shows.
B. Response:
Johnson explains about how TV shows has changed over a decade. He explains how the show Hill Street considered to be a complicated TV show but that perspective has changed over years and comparing to current TV shows Hill Street could be considered easy to understand for its viewers. I agree on Johnson’s argument and how TV shows like The Sorpanos and 24 could
be more valuable in our brain development than the TV shows with plot less obscene. While we are watching TV shows, we can learn to think critically and analyze the situations that are happening in the show along with the drama.
C. Evaluation:
The writer does a great job explaining his view points and giving examples from decades ago which helps many people to relate to that. He doesn’t fail at providing the reader with a lot of informations.
Basluel A. Mekonnen
Professor Browne
English 101 Reading Response “Thinking outside the Idiot Box” by, Dana Stevens.
A. Comprehension:
This article was published as a direct response to “Watching TV makes You Smarter,” the article by Steven Johnson on PP. 277-94. Stevens argues that we should watch TV shows because we enjoy them not only because they make us smarter.
B. Response:
Dana Stevens argues that being smarter should not be our main goal to watch TV. She says that we are grown-ups and should be trusted to judge our own dosages. I do not really get what her point was writing this response to Steven Johnson. “ I’d participate in the experiment myself, but in my case, watching television is definitely a smart thing to do-I get paid for it.” (Stevens, 298.) This quote was really confusing.
C. Evaluations:
The writer does not really explain what her view points are. She fails at providing examples and informations on her topic to the reader. It is really confusing.
Professor Browne
English 101 Reading Response “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” by, Steven Johnson.
A. Comprehension:
Steven Johnson argues about watching TV shows makes us smarter by developing our brain. He compares the current TV shows and earlier TV shows.
B. Response:
Johnson explains about how TV shows has changed over a decade. He explains how the show Hill Street considered to be a complicated TV show but that perspective has changed over years and comparing to current TV shows Hill Street could be considered easy to understand for its viewers. I agree on Johnson’s argument and how TV shows like The Sorpanos and 24 could
be more valuable in our brain development than the TV shows with plot less obscene. While we are watching TV shows, we can learn to think critically and analyze the situations that are happening in the show along with the drama.
C. Evaluation:
The writer does a great job explaining his view points and giving examples from decades ago which helps many people to relate to that. He doesn’t fail at providing the reader with a lot of informations.
Basluel A. Mekonnen
Professor Browne
English 101 Reading Response “Thinking outside the Idiot Box” by, Dana Stevens.
A. Comprehension:
This article was published as a direct response to “Watching TV makes You Smarter,” the article by Steven Johnson on PP. 277-94. Stevens argues that we should watch TV shows because we enjoy them not only because they make us smarter.
B. Response:
Dana Stevens argues that being smarter should not be our main goal to watch TV. She says that we are grown-ups and should be trusted to judge our own dosages. I do not really get what her point was writing this response to Steven Johnson. “ I’d participate in the experiment myself, but in my case, watching television is definitely a smart thing to do-I get paid for it.” (Stevens, 298.) This quote was really confusing.
C. Evaluations:
The writer does not really explain what her view points are. She fails at providing examples and informations on her topic to the reader. It is really confusing.