The article poses the question of, “is new technology making the common American illiterate?” Quite frankly one side of the argument believes that this is a new era of literacy that has not been seen since the Greek era. People believe that people have been writing more than they have ever before. Previously, people used to finish school and never write another piece of text again. Ever since facebook, twitter and text messaging has come about people are writing in excessive amounts. There has never been an era of writing that the human race has seen before like the current one we are in right now.

Are people smarter as a result of all this new writing or are they not using their minds as well because they are not interpreting text?

Why are people so obsessed with new technology and our new style of text?

Does facebook writing actually qualify as informative and intellectual writing?

The “R U Really Reading” article argues that the Internet is corrupting the human mind and has decreased the interest Americans once had in reading. Some countries are developing literacy tests for paper reading and Internet reading because its gotten to the point that everyone only indulges themselves in the Internet. Some consider that reading texts off the Internet is still considered the consumption of texts but to a different extent. People still, however, do not believe that consuming text off the Internet is the same as reading it on a traditional paperback book. Skeptics have argued this and this will consistently be the new argument for the 21^st century.

Event though reading off the Internet may be different to some, to me, it’s the same thing because your still consuming information from a text. It does not matter whether it’s from a book or a computer, its still reading, no matter what anyone says, when you’re perusing through a page and obtaining information off that page. Maybe it’s true that we, as a society, have grown extremely dependent on the Internet but we are still reading and perhaps more than we used too. I remember when the Internet wasn’t this advanced. I would never pick up a book or read anything on paper, not even my homework. Now I can read everything off the Internet and even have my homework right in front of me. In reality, it’s definitely more convenient this way and reading is still reading on the Internet.

How can someone ever say that reading is different when it's on paper?

Is it possible that people are being obsessive about this issue that seems a little inconsequential?

Do you think people are even reading more now since there are so many interesting applications one can access via Internet?

“New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word,” conveys the major controversy of the new media and how it affects the common citizen’s literacy. The traditional way, in the author’s view, is the best way to look at media but he finds the new media as exciting and opportunistic as well. We, as a society, should exploit the advantages of the new media as we still appreciate the traditional ones. This is because without the traditional media there wouldn’t be a new media present in our lives today. The combination of new technology and traditional media makes up what we call new media to this very day.

I agree with the author’s claim on the issues regarding how traditional media will never die. Traditional media will never die because it came about first and without it we would have nothing. It’s the primary source of expressing opinion, learning specific things and reading about current events. The new media is the same thing, however, it just throws in those extra details so many people have grown to adore. He is incorrect when he says the traditional media is the best form of media because the new media is quick and accessible as well. The fact that someone doesn’t have to pay a penny to get their news and express their opinions, in the form of an article, tells it all. New media surpasses, at great lengths, the magnitude of traditional media but traditional media is the patriotic form of mediums that cannot die out. The original form of media cannot die out because there is still a great population of those who revolve their lives around newspapers and other traditional texts.

The author’s ten rules are utilized to assist someone write effectively on the Internet. They are all very viable sources especially the one that states quality over quantity. That’s one of the biggest misconceptions students have because they feel if their essays to short, they’ve missed key information regarding the topic they were assigned to write about. The author makes a valid claim concerning this issue and it’s actually very useful. I feel, however, that he puts a little too much emphasis on images. He says that images can portray your views when you can’t convey your views in words. I think that that’s a little to vague because whenever someone doesn’t want to write something they could just put a picture in its place. That’s insufficient and it also displays a lack of effort which no teacher or editor ever desires to see. That’s probably the only modification I would have to make. Pictures are all well and fine but to a certain extent.

Something to add to the list of rules may be avoiding tools such as the synonyms icon that is very accessible on the Internet. You can very well utilize it but don’t make it a habit because it can indefinitely distort your writing. Too many big words may often make your paper seem unoriginal which may yield to a boring read. One may take into consideration, when writing, to keep it in your own words and maintain that original theme throughout the entire paper so the reader can become embedded in your writing.

Steroids have become an ongoing predicament in all of sports. Players seem to persist in the use of these banned substances, even though they are illegal, and they seem to be tarnishing the reputation of what sports are perceived to stand for. Even the great American pastime, Baseball, has had its reputation tarnished as well because of the common steroid use that persists in the sport. The governemnt needs to crack down on these issues so they can clean up the sport and restore its reputation by creating greater sanctions along with formulating greater regulations to reassure these players stop taking these banned substances.

http://espn.go.com/special/s/drugsandsports/steroids.html

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/performanceenhancingdrugs/a/AnabolicSteroid.htm

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18299098

The government hasn’t intervened with the sport industry and believes it should not. Ever since the steroid era has ignited, it has become a very emphatic issue to attend to. Their involvement should become more frequent and they should condemn those who have participated in the usage of prohibited substances in sports today.

New York City has outlawed the MMA industry to participate in any arena under its jurisdiction. The problem here is that MMA is the fastest growing industry in the sports world today. New York City needs override the fact that this is outlawed because it can substantially benefit the city financially.

The world should focus more attention on world hunger as well as poverty instead of worrying so much about war and supremacy of nations. People all over the world are living in malnourished and impoverished societies and yet the world seems to neglect these problems drastically. They should focus on supplying food, cleaning up these slums and establishing sufficient governments that can attend to these issues efficiently.