Your Brain On Technology

692 Words3 Pages

Technological advancements have impacted our lives in numerous ways. Whether this has been a positive impact or a negative one, however, is still undecided. The articles “Your Brain on Technology” by Annabelle Jordan and “The New Literacy” by Clive Thompson are a clear interpretation of this ongoing dispute. Technology has had many drawbacks as well as multiple benefits. Technological advancements have benefited our lives in numerous ways. One benefit is it provide easy accessibility to what is going around in the world around you. “If you want to know the news of the day, check hat your friends are doing, watch a music video or movie, or look for a great deal on a product, it’s all instantly available” (Jordon, Paragraph 2). Technology has …show more content…

Annabelle Jordan’s article, “Your Brain on Technology”, takes a neutral stance on the benefits and drawbacks of technological advancements. She exemplifies this by including many examples of both, benefits and drawbacks, throughout her article, often at times contrasting the two. One occasions would be when she discussing the distractions technology could pose. “While the internet is a powerful tool, allowing us to access all sorts of useful facts, keeping up with all of the available information can also be distracting and overwhelming” (Jordan, Paragraph 2). Jordan’s use of words makes her contrasting of the benefit, easy access to information, and the drawback, access being distracting and overwhelming, clear to her viewers. On the other hand, Clive Thompson’s article, “The New Literacy”, takes the stance that technological advancements benefit our lives. She exemplifies this by focusing primarily on the benefits of technological advancements throughout her article. One instance of this would be her use of statistics from the Stanford Study of Writing. “For Lunsford, technology isn’t killing our ability to write. It’s reviving it- and pushing our literacy in bold new direction” (Thompson, Paragraph 3). Thompson constant use of benefits throughout her article shows her perspective clearly on this topic. Jordan and Thompson’s articles contradict each other in many