HW 14-Draft 1

The first excerpt i read was about comparing video games to books. Steven Johnson still believes that reading is better than video games, but he also thinks that video games have their benefits. Besides restating the argument that video games increase your hand and eye coordination (which we hear very often), he also points out that video games can be also be very hard. Johnson alsp says he doesnt think its fair for people to judge video games on the second hand basis. Most people do these based off of experiments they have done on OTHER people, it isnt their direct experience with video games so how can it fully be true? He argues that video games do require thinking (more thinking than people who havent played them may realize).I found the fact that he questioned how fun video games actually are. He wonders how fun can video games really be when you're spending so much money trying to get through these unseemly complex scenarios.

The second excerpt I read was about the advancement of T.V. given through a history of T.V. shows in the 80's ( and before that). Johnson points out that back then, television shows didnt really require much thinking because there was usually one pproblem, and 1 or 2 main characters to follow. He explains how the 80's show "Hill Street Blues" changed T.V. at that time because it caused viewers interact with the show more than usual. This was because the show hadd more than one problem (thread) to follow, causing the viewers to connect it to a previous show. He also explains how modern T.V. has a handful of characters and threads to follow, causing you to remember what happen earlier in that season/series. I feel like his major point was taht television today requires a bit more thinking than it used to, even though it is more passive.

I mostly agree with the two excerpts I read. He points out that T.V. and video games have their bad aspects, but also some good aspects that most people fail to look at. I like these excerpts mainly because he seems to give a well balanced opinion on both subjects. He doesn't go to the extreme on either side which i think gives him a fair/balanced opinion. For example, in the T.V. excerpt he doesn't say that watching T.V. is the best thing to do if you want to become smarter, however he doesn't say it would make you an idiot either. Instead, he goes in to say that t.v. shows are less passive than they used to be.