Social Meida and its Goods

The Good of Social Media

Has social media taken over the world or has it become something that benefits people? This has been the argument since all the big social media websites have started such as MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and the list goes on and on. For many people, all the social media websites have just been distractions and nothing more. People complain about all of the negatives of these websites like cyber bullying, sex predators, scams and the most used excuse: procrastination. Everyone talks about how bad it is and what a distraction it is, but why don’t people talk about the benefits? For a small business owner such as myself, social media has been the key to success for our team at Livevil Clothing Co. We are a small clothing business out of Long Beach, CA “targeting all the people who want to dress freely but also doing it with style”. This is our motto and it’s up on every social media website you can think of. These websites have been the key to our success but it’s not a benefit only to businesses. The websites help support many other good things in our world, such as the Kony 2012 campaign. Kony 2012 was the idea of helping Africa capture criminal mastermind Joseph Kony. When I saw this campaign on Facebook.com, it changed my point of view on social media way more than I thought I could have. It was the first time I saw that something had brought the whole world together so fast.  Social media can be a benefit if you use it the right way. What is it going to be to you—just a plain excuse for procrastination or something you can use to be a part of success in your life?

Linsanity

From ESPN to ABC, all you would hear is the name of one kid who was making his mark in the NBA—a graduate of Harvard and an NBA undrafted player named Jeremy Lin. This kid was virtually unknown in the NBA. No one knew who he was or what he was about. All of the sudden, a star was born overnight. Is this a true story of a kid who made his dream reality or is it just a hoax for the New York Knicks to get publicity? This has been the argument since Lin had five games in a row that he averaged more than twenty-five points per game—soon after “Linsanity” was born. In my opinion, I give him all the credit in the world and so should the rest of the world. This kid is making a name for himself it’s just a story of someone whose opportunity was given to him and he took advantage of it. I know if I was in the same position as him, I would do the exact same thing. Days like these are what every athlete dreams of.  So that’s why I say that this should never be compared to a hoax. It’s just one kid’s dream becoming a reality. It’s the same with people in general. Once an opportunity is presented to us, it’s up to us to either take advantage of it or lose it. This kid took advantage of it and that’s how I am going to live my life. Take the chances you get because you never know what will happen.

A Little Civility Please by Mark Davis

Mark Davis's column is full of dry humor and plenty of examples to illustrate his point. The main idea of his article--to question the intentions of schools and their specifics rights over students. There actually seems to be two different points made. First of all, that schools are inconsistent with what is considered appropriate and inappropriate and second, that our society today laughs at the idea of having an intellectual debate. From the get-go, he starts with a suggestion that is bound for failure: sending a kid into school with a shirt that says "Martin Luther King Jr. Was Evil" or "Jews Lie: There Was No Holocaust." He then says to see if anyone suggests that the kid was not spreading hate, but rather trying to spark a debate (Paragraph 2). I think this clear-cut example is a great opening for the column, he gets attention right off the bat by suggesting something so outrageous. He points out that schools are inconsistent in their decision of what is disruptive or not--"Well, how exactly does a T-shirt disrupt?" he says in paragraph 10. This is a fairly true point. I remember walking around in high school seeing guys wearing Hooters shirts--those got banned. I think the icing on the cake of this article is in the 14th paragraph, when he says that debate on controversial issues should happen and in-fact be encouraged, but within reason. The title of the column says a lot--A Little Civility Please. It's okay to do controversial things and to be scolded for it. But if it has to happen, then we might as well have a discussion about it.

Out of the Woods: Today’s Kids Can’t See the Forest for the MTV

Out of the Woods: Today’s Kids Can’t See the Forest for the MTV is a casual and humorous article written by Joel Achenbach. He brings up good points about how kids are alienated from nature and whose fault it really is. He mostly focuses on the fact that it’s the parents who have kept children from the “outdoorsy” world. He says that parents are sending a message that says “Go play outside, and watch out for serial killers” (paragraph 10). While this is a great point, it’s not just the parents’ fault, it’s society’s fault too. The reason parents have to warn their children about serial killers is because nowadays, there are serial killers. Parents cannot help that fact. Achenbach also says that as parents “we hint that it’s the land of speeding cars, heatstroke, lightning, and creepy strangers,” which is true. Times have changed since Achenbach was a kid, and even since I was a kid. These dangers do exist and this world is different than it used to be, but the parenting has changed dramatically—at least according to Achenbach. He often refers to his own childhood experiences, and relates them back to his own children’s experiences, which is a powerful type of comparison. It gives a very clear cut picture of the differences. For instance, he says “Back then you got three channels, and a fourth if you could pull in that snowy station on the UHF band” (paragraph 5). Considering that most children watch an average of something like 5 hours of television a day, he makes a good point that time has changed. The most important question he presents to the readers is why the parenting has changed—or has it at all?

Gay Rights In California

Growing up as a kid in California, I saw many gay people. When I was young, I couldn't understand it. I would ask my friends why these people are together and I would get the same answer all the time: because they are dumb and gay. As I got older, I met many gay people and realized they are not the bad people; we are for judging them. It's not their fault for being attracted to someone. As a straight male, I see no problem with them. Why ban them from being married? In the article "Gay Rights in California," Kevin Drum talks about proposition 8 that was imposed in 2008 to ban the gay marriage in California. The proposition was passed but only won by two percent, 52-48. In my opinion, this means that if in 2008, the proposition only won by 2 percent, I can only imagine if it was proposed again--it would certainly win. I have no problem with the gay community and they aren't the problem, we are the problem for having trouble accepting their lifestyle. They are human beings just like us. Everyone wants to grow up and be happy and get married, so why not include everyone? I just don't understand our society sometimes. Yes, we live in America, the land of the freedom, yet gay people have to have certain rules to be like us. What if the world had restrictions on you and told you what you could and could not do? Think about that one and let me know how you feel.

Society is Dead: We Have Retreated into the iWorld

It's funny when you see something happen, then read it and shake your head up and down thinking to yourself "couldn't have said it any better myself." Reading Society is Dead: We Have Retreated into the iWorld had me doing that a good portion of the time. One of the first "YES" moments for me was when the author, Andrew Sullivan, says "Technology has given us a universe entirely for ourselves--where the serendipity of meeting a new stranger, hearing a piece of music we would never choose for ourselves or an opinion that might force us to change our mind about something are all effectively banished." Although the author is mostly referring to the iPod, I think that phones are a big part of that too--especially the "meeting a new stranger" part. It seems that people often use technology as an "out." Admit it, you have pulled your phone out and pretended to text someone in an awkward situation. Even though this article is Manhattan-based, this happens in the very halls of Illinois Central College. People plug into their iPods and shut the world out for the 4 minutes it takes to walk to class. I don't think we should all jump back to the 1800's and pretend like technology had never been invented. In many ways, technology has improved our communication. Sullivan summarizes the cons of technology without pointing out the pros. It is handy to have music at the touch of a finger (literally) and for some people, it makes the days a little shorter and easier. But the fact of the matter is--as the author points it out--that now that people have a reason to avoid each other, they do. Some are too busy listening to music, others talking on the phone. It used to be that something outside of your control sparked your interest, but now people are more in control of what they see and hear. We aren't being challenged the way we used to, in our thoughts or beliefs. We are seeing only what we want to see, and that makes for a pretty boring society--especially for people like us, who thrive on innovation and challenging the old stuff. Technology may be advancing, but we are going backwards with it.

The Government and our Foods

Recently, I went out to eat and was disgusted by the food available to eat, among others things. But nothing was more disappointing for me to watch than a woman requesting a bigger chair because she couldn’t fit in the standard-sized one. So why does that matter? It matters because apparently people in the United States can’t control their diets. Again, what does that matter? Growing up as an obese kid myself, it was a struggle always being the big kid. I loved food, especially my mom’s. But I also loved fast food, which is why I think the government should have a say in our diets. Now before I get 2 million responses of why not, let me tell you why. Sure, the government controls the speed we drive, how long we have to go to school, how much we pay for…everything, and pretty much everything. BUT, if you haven’t noticed, the United States has been a rather successful place. We need organization and sometimes we need to be told what to do. Now when I say that the government should have a say in our diets, I don’t mean there should be a law on how many carrots a day we have to eat. I just mean something along the lines of what age children are allowed to start consuming fatty foods or how much fat content is allowed in a meal. Personally, I went from eating delicious food that was horrible for me to eating delicious food that is good for me. So the point is, we need a little push to make America healthier—maybe the government, or even just the threat of the government would give us that push.