In the essay "Watching TV makes you smarter", Steven Johnson argues that many of the TV series that our society considers not beneficial are actually very beneficial for women our mental abilities. This compelling article by Steven Johnson compares what is present in literature and history, educates us: TV is horrible, let's avoid watching series. As many may know, TV is known to have been designed to “dumb” us and “control” us, slowly making us vulnerable with this emergence of electronics. But despite this, in Johnson's mentality, TV nowadays develops capabilities, consequently making us increase our intellectual abilities. During the time we watch programs, in addition to the hustle and bustle, we all become capable of acutely understanding and determining the environment and circumstances. Johnson certainly states that not ALL television programs can be constructive, since there are some figures of entertainment that are excessively erotic in various ways. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay I agree with Johnson that the benefit people get from series doesn't appear from mastering and copying personalities, behaviors, it seems from reflecting and taking positions. For example, a good example of a noteworthy television program would be programs like History Channel or Discovery Channel, programs that we can actually learn from, whether ancient stories that are now famous or about animals that live in our world. Johnson illustrates a connection between serious multiplexes from the old days to the complicated, multitasking programs of the present. As Johnson states, crowds willingly support this twist because they have been taught by years of multitasking drama. In the old days, the Hill Street show was known as overly complicated for watchers to understand. Today, The Sopranos series uses similar multitasking capabilities and now this series is admired and appreciated by watchers today. This shows that intelligence has also improved with the benefit of complicated programs that allow us to be open-minded. It is not the author's intention to make the audience believe that he specifically agrees that guardians should avoid supervising what children are watching. Rather than as he says, in other words, Johnson insists on an adjustment of the values ​​that determine what is truly mentally impaired and what is commonly healthy. For example, in the article “Are Video Games Art,” Nick Gillespie mentions the age of video games. people playing video games, which ties into one of Johnson's motifs. “The average player is 30 years old and 45% of players are women” (1). Gillespie is referring to parents supervising the type of video games their kids play, which is similar to what Johnson says about not avoiding supervising what kids watch on TV. “I'm not advocating that parents should stop paying attention to how their children have fun. What I am advocating is a change in the criteria we use to determine what truly is cognitive junk food and what is truly nutritious (1). The example Gillespie gives involves children playing violent games, which leads to the most important reason he gives: parents have lost their children to these types of games. was ultimately rejected), and books such as former West Point professor Dave Grossman's 1999 Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence advocated an outright ban" (1) Children become so obsessed with violent games that theyend up becoming victims of these video games, which leads to hurting themselves or, even worse, someone else. Families have been torn apart because their children made a simple mistake because they got the wrong idea from a video game. It's gotten to a point where families feel the need to sue the company and make a scene to prove a point, to let other parents know about the damage violent video games can cause. There is a connection between these two authors because they both compare ages and both believe that it is necessary to observe what their children are learning from, not only to verify that they are on the right track but also to make sure that they are learning something that will actually be useful in the future. Continuing Johnson's argument, he states: “...Today's reality programming is reliably structured like a video game: a series of competitive tests, which become increasingly challenging over time. Many reality shows also borrow a more subtle device from gaming culture: the rules are not fully established at the beginning. You learn as you play” (1). When talking about today's reality shows, Johnson once again mentions the word video games. Describe that many series actually take some ideas from video games, such as difficult challenges, making you really think about how to achieve the goal. Even though it may seem impossible at first, you will understand it as you continue playing, because your brain won't be able to rest in peace until you finally face the challenge. So who really benefits from reality shows? Reality TV gives us the chance to improve our techniques by observing how participants behave during one of the most significant days of their lives. Speaking of these types of shows, some of today's shows may have similar but different complexity. Like the Lucifer series and the Deadpool movie, these two productions have a connection because they have a similar type of format. For example, both productions have a strange and interesting way of arranging scenes, i.e. they introduce a scene at the beginning of the products that makes the audience wonder why is this happening or why do we need to watch it? This then leads to audience confusion until these two productions explain at the end of the story why all that confusion was necessary. But the point of these two productions is that in a way they are educational, Lucifer is based on the Bible, which is beneficial for religious people. In Deadpool, I think one of the important messages was that you should never judge a book by its cover and that there is always a silver lining to every situation. It also shows that you can't give up and that anyone can be good, and how it only takes a few seconds to be a hero. Adding more to my opinion that Johnson is right about watching certain television programs makes us smarter. I actually saw someone learn and become wiser just by watching TV. And actually, I experienced myself learning from TV. For example, not long ago, on a casual Friday night, I was babysitting my 10-year-old niece who loves watching TV, but actually acts a little older than her age. My niece loves watching films that are a little out of her league, I remember her asking me if I had ever seen the film Freedom Writers which is an educational film, but for high schoolers, obviously, I had seen it but I said no. so I was able to ask her what the movie was about. When I asked her what the film was about, she described in detail the rising action, the climax, the falling action and the resolution and what the theme of the film was, which was tolerance and understanding. This shocked me because it made me wonder.