Finney 1
Jill
Finney
RWS
100
Mr.
Werry
08
September 2014
Updates, Tweets, Emails, and Blogs…
How
does tweeting, blogging, texting and the endless amounts of time spent on the
Internet change how we think? Do we actually get dumbed-down? Or is the Internet
phenomenon producing better, more accomplished writers? In Smarter Than You Think, by Clive Thompson, specifically his
article titled “Public Thinking”, he argues that the Internet has contributed
to a generation that is smarter and can write more complexly than any other
before them. He argues that students aren’t really getting the credit that they
deserve; studies have shown that college students today are overall smarter
than their parents were. Shockingly enough, this is due to social medias, and the
needs to always be writing; whether it is tweeting, updates on Facebook, email,
or blogging for the world to see. Kids are writing to audiences, and knowing
that they have people reading their works; their writing is improving. Of
course there are many arguments behind technology’s role in our lives, and Thompson’s
main focus is on how it has changed our cognitive behaviors. Thompson attempts
to show his audience the evolution of writing in the world by providing the readers
many examples. These are not only from studies, but also personal interactions
with his mother, and statistical information. He weighs the advantages of
technology rather than seeing the typical view: that it’s destroying our
brains. Thompson persuades us to believe that the vast increase in public
writing through the inspiration of the Internet is causing a beneficial change
for individuals and society as a whole. In this paper, I will go into further
detail regarding multiple claims made by Thompson as well as analyze the
evidence backing up those claims. Through thorough examination of this article,
I can better understand the deeper meaning to Thompsons work.
Thompson introduces his article with
a short story about a young student who starts a blog. Although she centered
most of her writings on the corrupt society of her home country, Kenya, she was
able to reach many people through daily blog posts. Like anyone else, she
thought she had “zero ideas to say” (Thompson 45), however she later discovered
that with seven years of blogging not only did it lead to “a witty, passionate
voice, keyed perfectly to online conversation” (Thompson 45) but also “two
telephone sized books” (Thompson 46) with millions of ideas. This piece introduces
the reader to the majority of Thompson’s further claims in the remainder of the
article. Additionally, the piece connects with many readers. Like Okolloh, many
people don’t feel very strongly about writing but knowing that a young Kenyan
woman can do it, provides a sort of inspiration that others can do it as
well. Anyone, anywhere can write and be
a successful writer. This strategy of intriguing the reader and connecting on a
personal level is very effective and provides a solid base for the rest of Thompson’s
paper.
Finney 2
In order to support his overall argument,
that “the Internet has produced a Niagara of writing” (Thompson 43) that has
created “a global culture of writers”(Thompson 50) Thompson utilizes a variety
of strategies and evidence to persuade the audience into his way of thinking.
He makes claims that Internet writings can “clarify our thinking” (Thompson 51)
and cognitive skills. With a introduction to a interview Thompson did with
bloggers they came to him to say, “they’ll get an idea for a blog post and sit
down at the keyboard in a state of excitement…soon thinking that someone will
read this as soon as its posted”
(Thompson 52) thus causing the blogger to think twice about what to write. Our
cognition has been altered due to the fact that an audience is now listening
and reading. Founder of DuckDuckGo Gabriel Weinburg presents the idea of
defending your papers through a phenomenon known as “hand-waveyness” (Thompson
53), essentially no one wants to crash and burn but so out of desperation to
try and make a failed paper presentable to an audience, you hand wave. “Even if
I was publishing it [a blog, article] to no one, it’s just the threat of an
audience…if someone could come across it [the paper] in my name, I have to take
it more seriously” (Thompson 54), Thompson uses this Weinburg quote to back up
his cognition theory. Literally due to the fact that majority of writing is now
publicly written, the cognitive process has altered significantly in all of us.
The weight is now on our shoulders.
Clive claims that these new forms of
digital writings significantly improve writing and thinking. Looking further
into the argument of the audience affect and how publicity can alter the way
humans think and represent themselves through their writings Thompson continues
on with a study done by Brenna Clark Clay, an English professor from Douglas
College of British Columbia. Assigning her students to create a wiki page for
all of their class documents caused stunning results. The use of Wikipedia
transformed their writing, “it was like night and day”(Thompson 56). Even if
the audience was only a few people, or classmates, the audience affect still
takes place. Thompson further stated, “going from an audience of zero (talking
to yourself) to an audience of ten people (a few friends or random strangers checking
out your online post) is so big that its actually huger than going from ten
people to a million people”(Thompson 56). Expanding on the idea of alternative
thinking, Thompson claims that writing can also improve your memory in what is
known as the generation effect. “Generating text yourself, ‘requires more
cognitive effort than does reading, and effort increases memorability”(Thompson
57), researchers state. Once the thoughts of our mind become public,
connections start to be made everywhere. This is another key component to
Thompson’s overall argument, “making connections is a big deal in the history
of thought- and it’s the future” (Thompson 58). The theory of multiples was
introduced by sociologists William Ogburn and Dorothy Thomas, to show the world
that, “our ideas are, in a crucial way, partly products of our environment”
(Thompson 59). However, our ideas often occur simultaneously, many people could
have the same ideas but would never make the connection due to nothing being
public. Much like that of the past, people didn’t have a way to spread word so
many had the same ideas at the same time. Due to the evolution of society,
multiples can be resolved, “the Internet, which encourages public thinking and
resolves multiples on a much larger scale….its now the worlds most powerful
engine for putting heads together” (Thompson 61).
Finney 3
As a result of Thompsons article and
the multiple claims, evidence and strategies that he uses, “Public Thinking” is
a very strong paper. He outlines his claims very well and convinces the
reader/audience that technology is good for all of us. Not only are we
developing better cognition skills, we are improving our memories, making
connections among ideas with much more ease, and creating a generation of avid
writers that can blow away the writers of the past. Technology is a relatively
young idea and to this point, it has caused so many benefits for our society.
With time it will grow stronger and be able to create many more generations of
writers that can write complexly and strongly about any topic. In Thompsons
article, he captures these ideas very well.
