How Does Jonathan Zimmerman Hooked On Facebook

Jonathan Zimmerman’s essay “Hooked on Facebook” talks about how online social networking sites act as some sort of drug to teenagers worldwide. Zimmerman states that teenagers use the sites to communicate with each other and in that process, they are also talking to adults. However, he says that the real danger is not adults but it is teenagers themselves. In addition, Zimmerman states that addiction to online sites is replacing solitude and provides a solution to the problem which is teenagers creating a movement to pass on the word that these sites are uncool. By using the Toulmin Model, readers can see that Zimmerman has a clear claim and effective grounds.

Readers can analyze Zimmerman’s effective claim in “Hooked on Facebook'' which is

He argues that this behavior is not necessarily harmful, but it does expose them to certain risks that they may not be aware of or fully understand. As previously stated, he claims that online social networking sites are addictive and harmful to teenagers around the world, and his ground is a report from the MacArthur Foundation that states that most teens communicate online and that the sites replace solitude (487). The explicit warrant comes from the connection between the claim and the ground. Readers can arrive at Zimmerman’s warrant with a syllogism, which is drawing a connection between two things. With a syllogism, Zimmerman was able to make a connection between teens spending most of their time online and providing evidence such as a statistic. This connection concludes that online social networking sites are addictive and harmful to teenagers. In addition, Zimmerman uses an ethical warrant to support the claims and grounds. An argument that appeals to the morals or values of the audience is known as an ethical warrant. Zimmerman is able to convince the audience that it is morally wrong for teenagers to spend too much time on social networking sites by using an ethical justification. The use of warrants in Zimmerman’s argument proves the essay to be effective

For instance, Zimmerman writes that “ Although 32 percent of American teens say that they have been contacted on the Net by someone they don’t know, according to the Pew Research Center, just 7 percent report feeling “scared or uncomfortable” as a result” (488). Put simply, teenagers know the dangers of online networking sites, but they are smart enough to know that they can take precautions to protect themselves and are not as naive as some adults may think. He counters the opposing perspective by arguing that teenagers are capable of making informed decisions about their online behavior and that they should be trusted to do so rather than being overly restricted or monitored by adults. He states that teenagers are capable of making their own decisions on whether they want to stay on social media or not, and he gives an example of a group of teens who have already made progress by creating an online movement against social networking sites. By acknowledging that there are multiple sides to his argument, Zimmerman shows that he has considered the issue from different perspectives and is open to discussion and compromise, which proves the effectiveness of his essay