Originally Posted by
robertorolfo
I'm sure you are familiar with encyclopedias, no? They used to be a big business...
Anyway, again, I'm not saying that these technologies can't be used for good. They can, and very often are. I'm just saying that, anecdotal evidence aside, they have been an overall net negative, not a positive. Just use that fancy Google thing and you will find plenty of studies saying as much.
Yes, very familiar with encyclopedias. My house had 3 sets growing up and the info in them was limited in scope and breadth compared to what is immediately available to us online. There is simply no possible way anyone could argue that the information in a set of home use print encyclopedias is anywhere close to as detailed and complete as the internet.
As for finding plenty of studies that show the internet and television has been a net negative...I admittedly havent googled for that before since it just sounds so absurd. I also havent googled 'dog monkey' before, but am confident that both your claim and a picture of a dog monkey both exist.
Im also confident I could find plenty of studies, actual credible ones, that show the free flow of information since TV and the Internet came to be has had a net positive effect.
You mention my anecdotal evidence as if that isnt valid since its a small sample size...but that is actually my point- the sample sizes should be small and i think its a mistake to aggregate all those small sample sizes to then try and extrapolate a finding that fits your narrative. The sample size should be small because as I mentioned- its up to parents and the support structure that helps raise each child to ensure the child uses the technology in the best way possible. If that isnt happening, its the fault of the parents and support structure, rather than the fault of a source of free flowing ideas and information.