There are two parts to a
reading response entry: the summary and the close reading. Below is an example of just the close
reading. Don’t forget the summary
in your entry!
“Then, there are those
little screens, our computer screens, hooked up to the Internet. Just fifteen years ago they were thought
to be a potential new electronic frontier for democracy. But today very clearly they are one more
mirror of a commercialized, privatized society where everything is for
sale. The Internet which our
children use is now a steady stream of advertising, mass marketing, a virtual
mall, a place where the violence, the values – for better or worse – of these
same universal corporations reappear in video games and sales messages” (Barber
2).
I
am initially attracted to this passage because it marks the end of Barber’s
rhetorical move involving screens.
Moving from movie screens to TV screens to “our computer screens,” Barber
connects his argument about the amount of passive viewing we do in our daily
lives (2). In this way, Barber
argues that we have become passive consumers of a media that is all around
us. His mention of the Internet as
“one more mirror” continues and expands on this rhetorical thread (2). In other words, these all-encompassing
screens also function as mirrors to reflect our own passivity. Although not obvious in this passage, I
also feel that there is a note of sci-fi hysteria here – ‘can they see us through the screens?’
It
seems, then, that Barber is making a powerful point about our media
exposure. He strengthens his
argument by pointing out the difference between the Internet today and “fifteen
years ago” when it was a “potential new electronic frontier for democracy”
(2). While we may have seen the
Internet as a method for more equal access to information among all people,
Barber claims that the Internet today is “a virtual mall” (2). I can see his point; surfing the
Internet involves navigating through pop-up ads and interwoven commercials. Thus, our expectations don’t always
match reality and it may be worthwhile to revisit and interrogate our
expectations of media.
However, as I reach the end
of this passage, I do have some questions about Barber’s ideas. He references “the violence, the values”
of “universal corporations” in the final sentence of this passage (2). I wish that he had provided some
examples to clarify his point here.
Is he referring only to Internet ads as before or is he collapsing the
advertising with the actual product (i.e. video games)? I also feel that there is still a strong
educational component to the Internet that may be downplayed in this
argument. I also can’t escape the
feeling that Barber’s argument in this passage could be characterized as a
luxury complaint. What about the
people and students in numerous schools who do not even have access to the
Internet? Before stemming the flow
of advertising on the Internet, should we be more concerned with equal access to
the Internet itself?