Hydra

 

Just about everything is good in moderation. This holds true for certain foods, social time with friends, and all forms of media. In analyzing the contents of the articles “Small Change” by Gladwell and “Watching TV Makes you Smarter.” Looking at both of these articles at face value could return polar opposite takeaways, when the reality is that both are somewhat true. Television and social media when consumed and utilized proportionally can have positive outcomes and negative outcomes when overutilized.

By extracting three elements from the article by Johnson, an interesting phenomenon can be exhibited. The components that encompass the substance of the entire article, suit criticisms from Gladwell but are represented as something that should be strived for by Johnson. The elements were the word “intricacies,” the phrase “narratives demarcate the line between texture and substance,” (Johnson 287) and the sentence “what I am arguing for is a change in the criteria we use to determine what really is cognitive junk food and what is genuinely nourishing.” (Johnson 293) As one could presume, Johnson elaborated on the intricacies involved with the maturation of television over time and the incremental increase in the incorporation of aspects in television such as multiple story lines simultaneously occurring and interacting with one another which prompts more and more critical thinking from viewers. The phrase and sentence referenced above add to the question of delineating junk from nourishment and how much of each can be tolerable.

A contrasting point of view to this distinction is presented by the article from Gladwell, who argues that “Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice.” (Gladwell 321) The examples referenced as real sacrifices were of participants in the sit-ins during the Civil Rights movement and the Montgomery bus boycott. Gladwell mentions the positives of certain aspects of social media, such as the resilience and adaptability that comes with the sheer number of participants as well as the ability to engage a massive network of participants across broad ranges. That being said the benefits, in his eyes, are outweighed by the low level of commitment and lack of centralized leadership necessary to overcome the inevitable hurdles that must be endured to build strength and overcome to achieve real change.

That being said, Gladwell does make it a note to mention that the lack of hierarchical organization contributes to the resilience of networks built from social media groups. Like Hydra in mythology. Every time a head is cut off, two more grow in its place. A level of resilience that could not be achieved otherwise. Johnson preaches that while many view television as nothing more than a waste of time, there are various cognitive benefits that come with it at varying levels which make it an overall beneficial form of media and Gladwell argues that “the revolution will not be tweeted.” (Gladwell 312) The reality, as with most things, is that the center of two wildly contrasting viewpoints is more often than not closest to the truth. It is also the most boring outcome, which is why it is scarcely asserted. There are pros and cons to all forms of media, and a good balance of all these tools could lead to the resilience and grittiness Gladwell views as two separate facets that could not be simultaneously achieved.