Go Ahead Waste Time On The Internet - Los Angeles Times

1242019 Go Ahead Waste Time On The Internet Los Angeles Times

The assignment requires an essay consisting of four paragraphs: an introduction, a summary, an analysis, and a conclusion. The introduction should introduce the author and title, highlight major themes, and include a thesis statement supported by key reasons. The summary paragraph must objectively describe the main points of the essay, covering the beginning, middle, and end, using present tense and attributive tags with minimal quotes. The analysis should offer an in-depth interpretation of the work, addressing the central message, its importance, strategies used by the author, and any scholarly or autobiographical elements. The conclusion should restate the thesis and key reasons, ending with a profound statement or call to action.

Paper For Above instruction

In her opinion piece, “Go Ahead: Waste Time on the Internet,” published by the Los Angeles Times in August 2016, Kenneth Goldsmith explores the complex and often misunderstood relationship between humans and digital media. Goldsmith challenges conventional criticisms of the Internet's effects on society, arguing that the medium is multifaceted, combining frivolous and profound uses, and that its impact on cognitive and social behaviors is more nuanced than often portrayed. He emphasizes that instead of viewing the Internet as a monolith that diminishes our attention spans or social skills, we should recognize the diverse ways people engage with digital content, which can foster focus, communication, and creativity. Goldsmith ultimately advocates for a reassessment of assumptions about technology, stressing its potential to enrich rather than diminish human experience.

Goldsmith’s essay systematically examines common criticisms of the Internet, including claims that it promotes superficial browsing, distracts from meaningful engagement, and fosters antisocial behavior. He describes how the digital age is often portrayed as a threat to concentration and authentic social interactions, citing arguments that Internet use has replaced deep reading and face-to-face communication. However, Goldsmith counters these points by illustrating the diversity of online activities, from reading historical texts on a tablet to engaging in social interactions via texting and social media. He highlights that digital engagement can be focused and emotionally rich, challenging stereotypical views of the Internet as merely a source of distraction. By describing personal observations and referencing the widespread use of devices in public spaces, Goldsmith emphasizes that people are capable of sustained focus and meaningful social exchanges online, complicating the notion that digital media inherently diminishes cognitive or social capacities.

In his analysis, Goldsmith makes a compelling case that the internet’s influence is neither wholly good nor bad but depends on how it is used. He underscores that new media require new modes of thinking, and resistance based solely on traditional notions of focus and reflection is misguided. Goldsmith draws on media theorist Marshall McLuhan, who argued that each new form of media initially faced skepticism and was subsequently integrated into society, transforming cultural practices. Goldsmith also contends that dismissing online activities as superficial overlooks their creative and connective potential, exemplified by his own observations of individuals creatively engaging with content and maintaining social bonds. He suggests that the real issue lies in how society perceives and adapts to digital media, advocating for an openness to the evolving ways in which human cognition and socialization occur.

In conclusion, Kenneth Goldsmith’s essay challenges us to reconsider our perceptions of the Internet, recognizing its capacity to foster meaningful engagement, creativity, and social connection rather than simply viewing it as a distraction or a threat. His commentary urges a broader acceptance of digital media’s diverse roles and emphasizes the importance of adapting our understanding and expectations to match this new landscape. As society continues to navigate the digital revolution, embracing these changes with a nuanced perspective can lead to richer, more versatile human experiences. We must foster a mindset that values the transformative potential of digital engagement, encouraging responsible and inventive use of technology that enhances our cognitive and social lives rather than diminishes them.

References

• McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. McGraw-Hill.
• Goldsmith, K. (2016). Go ahead: Waste time on the Internet. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/
• Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books.
• Baron, N. S. (2008). Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World. Oxford University Press.
• Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2011). Ideological Segregation Online and Offline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1799–1839.
• Rheingold, H. (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Addison-Wesley.
• Johnson, D. G. (2000). Computer Ethics. Prentice Hall.
• Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.
• Patriksson, G., & Olsson, T. (2014). Digital Skills and Creativity in the Social Age. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 5(2), 1–15.
• Shirky, C. (2010). Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. Penguin.