Critique of Teenagers and Social Networking by Clive Thompson

Introduction

Teenagers and social networking might actually be good for them. This is an argumentative story written by Clive Thompson and published in 2013 in the Guardian. The author argues that based on some studies and findings, teenage use of social media is not as dangerous as it is posed, and therefore, he finds it good, but moderation is required. In today’s world, technology has advanced, necessitating social networking; it, therefore, has impacted youths’ lives in one way or another. Therefore, the passage by Clive Thompson came at a time when the review of the impact social networking brings to the youth.

Summary

The author, Clive Thompson, was very clear in his passage, aiming to argue for social networking. He structured his article in a clever way, starting with the opposing views and, thereafter, supporting views. His opposing views include creating a shallow and trivial culture where kids are unable to socialize face to face; online socializing could lead to a hedonistic generation who lives only in the thrill of the computer-generated moment. The article further argues that Newspapers, too, are constantly filled with harmful articles such as pornography addiction and aggression supposedly caused by violent video games and finally cites the technology as being able to turn kids into emoticons. Clive Thompson goes ahead and puts across his supporting points. He claims that teenage social networking could actually be good by trying to refute how society views things. For example, he says: a good number of the kids are actually not extreme online addicts and that a good number still create time for face to face meetings, sexting is not high as thought. He claims new technology always provokes generational panic, while the study shows that digital use can be very beneficial. He further argues that kids care about their privacy, and as a result, some go for social media sites like Snapchat, where their traces are deleted. Lastly, he says, kids’ wrings have blossomed in size and complexity and that short forms claims are not true.

Assessment

I must say the author has written a well-researched article citing relevant works of other studies; this aims to establish his points on this very important discussion. I, therefore, view his arguments as wide and very significant but shallowly interpreted. However, citing relevant studies, he drives the article towards his opinions rather than the realities.

Response

I agree with Clive Thompson when he states in the essay of the novelist Jonathan Franzen that online socializing is creating a shallow and trivial culture. Technology proves to be very addictive, and therefore, once addicted, at least little time will have to substitute meeting with others for face-to-face talks’ this, therefore, leads to people who are never used to face-to-face socialization. This further supports Susan Greenfield’s argument that upcoming generations could be hedonistic and live only in the thrill of moments generated by the computer.

I support Clive Thompson’s idea that kids should be allowed to have technology, but I would say with extreme moderation, it’s normal that the generations have always had panics with new generations. However, the kids have actually proved to be very inventive with technology.

I don’t agree with Clive Thompson when he argues that kids care about their privacy in online socialization. Yes, some percentage of youths care about the information they share. Still, in general, according to Ramasubbu (2013), teenagers care less about data privacy and more about socially oriented forms of privacy, which are designed to protect the integrity of a community. The research shows only 56% find it easy to set privacy controls; therefore, the question becomes, what about the privacy of 44%?

Clive Thompson interprets the data by Pew in a way that gives it less weight. A 4% and 15% of teens worldwide being able to be involved in sexting is a massive damage the technology is causing, and Thompson ignores this. A total of 19% of youths are either receiving or sending sexts, and this is colossal damage to the teens’ morals.

Conclusion

This passage is based on the combination of my view as the author and those of the works of others that I’ve cited. Hence, it qualifies for a better understanding of what Clive Thompson could have been aiming for with his article. However, some of the works cited may have become less accurate; for example, the Pew research relied on was published in May 2017, and the data could have been different by now.

Work Cited

Ramasubbu, S (2017). Privacy and teens in social media: Pew Research Centre: retrieved on March 27, 2018, at https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us-58b92d56e4b0fa5b844b1de