R U Really Reading?

With the internet becoming a commonplace and inextricable part of life, especially for the “new generation”, we have to redefine what reading means in the digital age. Is it better to read books in the traditional style or read on the internet? Motoko Rich explores this question in the article Literacy Debate: Online, R U really reading? He argues that although the two styles are different, both are essential. The internet is the future; anyone seeking a good job should have above-average digital skills. At the same time, they should be a proficient reader, with the ability to focus on linear narratives for an extended period.

The first half of the article looks at the question from a pro-book perspective. Proponents of traditional reading methods argue that books help readers develop intellectual and emotional growth whereas online reading only provides disjunct information with numerous distractions. They believe that learning can only be acquired through prolonged exposure to books. They attribute declining scores on standardized tests to the fact that students spend more time online that reading books. Many articles on the web are poorly written with incorrect grammar, which become part of many peoples’ speech.

The next half of the article presents the pro-web view. According to this view, reading online is better than not reading at all. Most teenagers do not read novels and books for fun; the internet provides a fun way for reading. A study that gave low-income kids internet access found that their reading scores increased. The internet also allows a topic to be more thoroughly examined than a book. It is much easier to view multiple viewpoints on the web since a book usually expresses only the opinions of the author only. Research is also much easier and efficient on the internet.

New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word

As our technology continues to improve and evolve, we are introduced to new concepts and new ways of doing things. However, technology also makes some of our traditional ways of doing things obsolete and force change. A good example is the effect of the “New Media”, which refers to digital works, over the “old media”, which includes newspapers and books. In the article New Media and the slow death of the written word, Mark Zeltner, mentions how most of his young students prefer to read online and avoid the printed word altogether. While this is a major cause of concern for him, he concedes that writing for the internet also has many inherent benefits and urges his students to embrace the New Media.

Zeltner introduces ten rules for writers of the New Media to follow. The first of these rules is to “write tight”. It means that writers should be concise and to the point, without beating around the bush. This is a good guideline to follow for many types of articles, especially informational articles. However, not all writers would be able to achieve their goals if they were too brief and only gave facts. For example, in a persuasive article, such as an article promoting a candidate or a political agenda, it is essential to infuse the text with suitable adjectives and include subtle hints to influence and mold peoples’ perceptions.

The second rule, “break the text into appropriate chunks” goes hand-in-hand with the third rule, “think in modules, not chapters”. It is the writer’s job to determine not only what information to include, but how the reader should view it. The computer screen is inconvenient for reading because it can display only a certain amount of information at a time. Longer articles that require constant scrolling or numerous clicking are very annoying and may frustrate readers. Also, there is a risk of losing the train of thought and ultimately missing the point of the article. Using modules and easy- to-view text can help readers overcome the physical limitations of the computer screen.

The next three rules describe how we can embellish our articles by taking full advantage of technology. Pictures, audio and video all enhance the meaning of a work. For instance, an article about a Stradivarius violin (which usually costs more than a million dollars) will be greatly enhanced by a video showing the characteristics and tone of the instrument. However, pictures and videos should not be overused since they can be distracting and sometimes may divert attention from the article.

.

Thesis Paragraphs

The election of Barrack Obama as the president of the United States was historic because it showed that any US citizen with the desire, dedication and talent could become the president despite their race. However in reality not all US citizens are eligible for the office of the president. The constitution bars any one not born in the US from a chance at becoming the president, even if they are legal citizens of the US. Does this seem unjust and shortsighted? At this point in history it most certainly does. As the world is becoming smaller due to technology and as we become increasingly multicultural, it becomes more and more difficult to define what an American is. In fact many famous Americans such as Arnold Schwarzenegger and Pamela Anderson, who are instantly recognized as “American” throughout the world are in fact not born here. So should the constitution be amended to allow any US citizen regardless of where they are born to run for the presidency? Definitely. I’ll go one step further and predict that it is inevitable.

Queens College is known as one of the best schools of the CUNY system. According to the Princeton Review it is among one of the best colleges in America. While I find Queens college to be mostly agreeable (so far) there is one thing that I dislike very much – the fact that students have to pay for something as trivial as a game of pool, ping-pong or tennis. These should be freely accessible to anyone with a Queens College ID. It’s a crime to make people pay each time they want to take a break from studies or have something to do during gaps between classes.

Thousands of people use the New York City public transit every day. Most metro cards contain the phrase “The NYC transit has transported more people than the next two biggest systems combined in 2008”. One would expect such a large and widely used system of such a famous and advanced city to be immaculate, easily navigable and perhaps even enjoyable to use. The truth however, as anyone who ever had to travel from Queens to Manhattan via public transit knows, is grim.