2. 考研
  3. Healthy Social Networking Sites Benefit Kids The other day I asked somewhat tongue-in-cheek (幽默讽刺的) whether Tom Friedman had

Healthy Social Networking Sites Benefit Kids The other day I asked somewhat tongue-in-cheek (幽默讽刺的) whether Tom Friedman had

admin2013-06-05  47
问题                 Healthy Social Networking Sites Benefit Kids
    The other day I asked somewhat tongue-in-cheek (幽默讽刺的) whether Tom Friedman had ever visited Silicon Valley. Today, I’m wondering if Lady Greenfield has ever used a social networking site.
    She warned that social networking sites are devoid (缺乏) of cohesive (有凝聚性 的) narrative and long-term significance. As a consequence, the mid-21st century mind might almost be characterized by short attention spans, sensationalism, inability to sympathize and a shaky sense of identity.
    I’m not a psychologist, nor am I a parent, so let me start by saying she might be right that these sites are harmful in some cognitive way. But I think she’s wrong to assume social networking is devoid of cohesive narrative and long-term significance. I can see where she’s coming from, but like a lot of people who don’t actually use these sites, she’s missing a fundamental shift from Web 1. 0 chat room days to Web 2. 0 social net-works: Real identity.
    We no longer go to the Internet to interact with some shadowy user name where we pretend to be someone we’re not. Ok, maybe people on Second Life do. But sites like Facebook and Twitter are more about extending your real identity and relationships online. That’s what makes them so addictive: The little endorphin (兴奋) rushes from reconnecting with an old friend, the ability to passively stay in touch with people you care about but don’t have the time to call everyday.
    Facebook makes me a more considerate friend because I now remember people’s birthdays. Via Twitter, my parents and inlaws know everything happening in my life so that when I call home, we have substantive conversations. In dozens of cases, these sites have actually given me a longer narrative.
    Greenfield may well have a point when she argues that the young brain can’t handle overstimulation of fast action and reaction. But isn’t that the same argument we’ve been making about all technology and entertainment for decades now? Everything has a trade off, and I’d argue the benefits in communications, education and collaboration of the Web are far more than the negatives, and indeed give us greater benefits than we get from TV or Guitar Hero.
    As more of our social graphs move online, via Twitter or Facebook, the more the same social pressures of the real world come to bear. Compare anonymous You-Tube comments with Twitter comments. Generally, Twitter is more kind and substantive, especially among users who Twitter under their real names. Now compare that to comments on Facebook, almost all of the comments on someone’s photo, video, status are supportive and empathetic, because the site has imitated real world relationships and with that real world pressures.
Which of the following is TRUE according to the passage?
选项 A、Facebook lacks cohesive narrative and long-term significance.
B、Greenfield believes youngsters are not sympathetic and having shaky sense of identity because of social networking.
C、The difference between Facebook and Twitter is Facebook’s destruction for kids’ cognitive ability.
D、Greenfield acknowledges that the benefits of social networking sites outweigh the negatives.
答案B
解析 事实细节题。由第二段最后一句可知。格林菲尔认为生活在21世纪中期的人由于用社会交友网站都有这样一些缺点：注意力集中的时间短，哗众取宠，不能理解别人，对自我的认识不稳定。故B正确。由第五段最后一句可知，在很多例子里，这些网站使我有更多的谈话内容，更完善的交流。A只是格林菲尔的误解，故排除；C“Facebook和Twitter的区别是Facebook对孩子的认知有害”，原文并没有提及；D“格林菲尔认为网站的利大于弊”，根据上下文，格林菲尔对这些网站一直持反对意见，排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/7Vd4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)