Is Digital Connectedness Good or Bad for People, Essay Example

Over the years, technology has advanced and has changed lives across the globe. Two debaters, Emerson Csorba and Noa Gafni Slaney, address either side of the question, “Is Digital Connectedness Good or Bad for People,” in the New York Times’ Space for Debate, for better or worse. “Noa Gafni Slaney, the CEO of Impact Squared, a company that works to elevate its message through social causes, begins the debate by saying that the internet is “a place to explore and create connections that we would not otherwise shape (Slaney). Slaney, a strong believer in the success of individuals and organizations, and groups who can succeed in this day and age because of the opportunity to network and communicate through social media tools, serves on the pro’s side. While trying to connecting with friends, most people are spending most of their time online. This argumentative research tends to answer the question, whether this digital trend is hurting or improving their lives.

Emerson Csorba, on the other hand, an entrepreneur and philosopher who works with higher education organizations, disagrees with Slaney’s internet utilization argument. Csorba is adamant that internet access portrays a picture that covers an individual’s real morals and beliefs. His response to Slaney’s statement had strong points, but Csorba expressed more of his views rather than evidence as the debate progressed. He creates fallacy within his writing that made it difficult for his claim to gain credibility. However, Slaney continued to include informative sources of positive results that further validated her claim, rendering her argument more convincing than that of Csorba.

At the beginning of the debate, Slaney shares personal stories of how networking online and connecting with people can benefit everyone involved. One of the main examples she uses is the accessibility of culture through online connections. In her argument, Slaney appeals to ethos by sharing a story from her childhood as a foreign parents’ daughter. She described the fun times she “marveled” through MTV artists as a child and watching the “Mundial on Univision” with her Chilean father. Slaney connected this childhood memory to different types of music, sports, and cultural information that are being shared all over the world through a digital connection. As for Csorba, he used his voice to rule against digital connectedness. Csorba feels that people are losing themselves by posting different aspects of their lives online rather than keeping those things private. Saying such things as “authenticity of these activities is often suspect, often more an attempt to curate a particular image than an expression of a person’s actual beliefs and convictions.” Speaking more so on people attempting to put on their best face for those who view their profiles, rather them being themselves, which in some situations are true, but not always the case—making this statement invalid and more of an opinion rather than a fact.

Additionally, Slaney provides groups made up on social media, such as the bulk of people who participated in the “ALS Ice Bucket Challenge” or “Lean In.” To gain more credibility, Slaney brings in the facts of the 115 million dollars raised for ALS due to the Ice Bucket Challenge and uses the 900 companies that would bring down the gender gap in their businesses due to the awareness of these movements. Using social media on all fronts for both of these groups, raising awareness has made it possible for their voice to be heard and action to be in motion. On the other hand, the opposing debater, Csorba, seen Slaney’s argument as “a need to portray oneself in a particular light to appear to be a person committed to being good.” Speaking as if the only reason one does a challenge online is to be seen as a good person. Csorba committed the straw man fallacy because he misinterpreted Slaney’s argument of the ALS Bucket Challenge using the internet to “peer pressure” social media. Csorba continues to voice more of his opinions and has not been able to gain any credibility in the debate based on what he brings to the table.

While being hit with counters of Csorba’s, Slaney included informative and useful sources to sustain credibility throughout that set her apart. She argues that social media is the number one source of news all over the world. According to the source she cites, 48% of people in the U.S. use the internet for social media, and 28% use the internet to access global news. In Canada, 48% of people use the internet to obtain news. As for Csorba, he debates that people on Instagram are more “suggestive of a Vanity Shoot than a serious gathering between national leaders” when speaking of the U.S. and Canada; Csorba committed the red herring fallacy to distract readers from the real subject. By not staying on topic, Csorba never gains any ground of credibility.

Slaney cites another valuable source titled “Millennials and How They Are Changing the Art of Giving,” Within this information, it mentions that 62% of Millennials are more likely to donate through charity’s mobile apps than by mail. By citing these sources, Slaney is securing her credibility and appeal to ethos by including a positive impact the internet has on those in need. In contrast, Csorba feels that online sharing takes away one’s power to act without being influenced by social media users. For support, Csorba uses a book named “How to Be Alone” written by philosopher Sarah Maitland as a source. He states that in Sarah’s book, she “wonders how it is that in a world that glorifies the individual, we have become so afraid of spending time alone.” Although providing a source, it doesn’t include facts or statistics that proved his argument of the psychological damage social media does to an individual’s mind. This quote included in his debate seemed more of an observation than a fact.

Conclusion

Although starting the debate with even leverage for both sides, Slaney provides facts that help show how social media is more so needed for the world rather than not. Slaney can provide a better image of the power of social media. With the entire globe at the helm of our hands, we can have a voice in a world so big. While making a valid point that, yes, social media does involve a little more of a public opinion in one’s life, Csorba goes on to lose the debate by speaking more of a personal opinion rather than providing the facts Slaney had done. According Slaney, she believes that we as social creatures, are always seeking for opportunities to connect with other people. For the connection to be deemed effective, the internet is among the tools that can be of great help.

Works Cited

Slaney, Noa, and Emerson Csorba. “Is Digital Connectedness Good or Bad for People?”Nytimes.com, The Opinion Pages, 28 Nov. 2016, www.nytime.com/roomfordebate/2016/11/28/is-digital-connectedness-good-or-bad-people.