Children of the Screen

The bleak perspective of American society portrayed in Hannah Baylon’s essay, though accurate in many points, is also biased and melodramatic. Certainly there is truth in her assertion that humanity has succumbed to robotic antics lacking in vigor and enthusiasm as we blunder our way through the banalities of yet another day. Too often we complete our daily tasks without actively engaging in life or even really appreciating the wonders of the world around us. Society has become mechanized and technology-based, leading to a world where personal interactions are limited and it is easy to forget the enormous potential we possess. To this extent, I agree with Baylon’s analysis of modern day life. Yet, Baylon also asserts “the media is our environment.” Here I must disagree.

The media, although present in almost all facets of our lives, is not the problem but rather a symptom of the hectic lives we live. After a full day of trying to mold ourselves to what we believe society wants us to be, nothing is more appealing than relaxing, immobile and disengaged, in front of one of our many modes of virtual escape. Societal structure and the media truly do “feed each other” in an endless cycle of listlessness and discontent. Baylon suggests we have become accustomed to this environment and lack the will to change. On the contrary, I believe it is more than possible for humans to break from the mundane habits of our world. In fact, society itself isn’t really the chain holding us down, but it is our own perception of what we must do to fit in that inhibits us. Those who realize their potential and live true to their souls have no problem of becoming bogged down in a superficial society. Society does not shackle us; we bind our own hands with the chains. I believe the media is really not as detrimental as Baylon asserts; in fact, her one sided opinion instigates me to find a rebuttal and disagree. Her dismal analysis and adamant assertions are ripe for argument and controversy. I believe a less opinionated and more rounded presentation of the data would have bolstered her ideas about the constrictive and pervasive nature of the media.

Moreover, the photograph attached to the end of the article, although a very persuasive appeal to pathos, is entirely melodramatic. The media may chain us into a lifestyle in which the virtual is more appealing than that which is real, but that chain is self-imposed. We are not without strength and motivation to pursue other paths and engage in the living world. Additionally, the beaten child and the duct-taped mouth exaggerate the restrictive and abusive nature of the media. The media can be informative and enlightening; it is often a portal to the world outside our own limited sphere.  This is yet another example of the polarized view Baylon presents in her attempt to convince her audience of the detrimental affects of media and the loss of humanity’s spirit. To me, her propaganda is yet another media facet trying to impose a view on the human mind, merely contributing another link to the chain suppressing “this era’s zeitgeist.”