There are many kids around the world that are in reality TV today. They get followed around by people with cameras throughout their life so that the people watching it can be entertained. There are famous kids that are on reality TV like Honey Boo Boo, and others that have been on reality TV for most of their life. Clearly, I believe that it is harmful for a reality TV show to be filmed at my school because it can stress out kids and it can decrease their privacy. Firstly, I have read that kids are being put under tremendous pressure in reality TV.
Reality television influences the culture by giving the young girls ' false expectations, stereotypes, and racism. Reality television has the power to influence people, so if they start using their power in the correct way then every problem connecting to the world of technology would be
Popular mass media has indeed put TV shows and video games under negative light. This has spread from person to person, eventually reaching the point were any amount time spent on these activities is considered wasted at best, if not damaging to the person involved in them. The increase in the complexity of popular culture witnessed throughout the previous decades stands as proof to the fact that popular culture does not dumb down the people who choose to involve themselves with it. “Despite claims to the contrary, popular culture has grown increasingly complex over the past thirty years. Complexity, in this case, is defined as the amount of cognitive work the audience is asked to perform in order to comprehend the work in question.
In addition, the motivation to win is intrinsic (coming from child themselves). When competing, “students are internally motivated” (Pandel), and since those who are intrinsically motivated typically get the best results from being involved, competition is healthy for kids. Clearly, competition is beneficial for kids until one becomes more concerned with beating others than improving. Everyone deals with competition at some point in their life, be it competing for a job or trying to buy the latest laptop before it’s out of stock at the nearby shop. The controversy stems from how individuals approach competition.
Life is filled with a mountain of complicated decisions that can shape people’s lives for either the better or the worse. Children are told the importance of standing out from their peers and to be themselves, yet children tend to assimilate to their peers’ ideas, customs, and behaviors. Some argue that assimilation is outgrown by those children as they approach adulthood, but sadly, that is not the case. The 1994 classic film “Quiz Show,” follows the journey of different players deciding to be unlawful and “follow the money,” or to stick by their core virtues. Peer pressure and the desire for power can sway any person’s judgement, but it is up to him to decide if he should keep up the lie, or ultimately tell the truth.
In the present day world, everyone knows technology is a key factor in raising the next generation. Everyday tech advances, getting bigger and better and more helpful, but what would happen if it became too helpful? The kids are so spoiled the start to loathe their parents? In the short story “The Veldt” Ray Bradbury uses bad parents to illustrate how spoiling a child can turn a good kid into a bad one. In this short story, symbolism can be found almost everywhere.
You learn how you should have done things in order not to make the mistakes that you did. The next time you try to succeed at the same task you can easily apply what you learned from your previous mistakes. I personally believe that the more we fail in life, the greater the chances we have in learning from them and therefore becoming successful. Everyone has failures in life obviously, but it’s the way we overcome them that reflect on our true selves. Success will for sure keep us motivated and encourage us to continue doing good, but if we never had our downs as well as ups then we wouldn’t have the knowledge and experience that others have.
However, it does leave room for two significant counter arguments, 1) that children are, by nature, actors which have their autonomy violated in some sense by the parents the nurturing process and gene selection is not a radical departure from the exercising of preference present in rearing, and 2) the perpetuation of sexism is not an issue because less of the disadvantaged group would give them more power in the society. Although these are strong objections to the claims made in the argument, an sufficient response can be made to each. To the first counter, although children are inevitably the subjects of the parent’s will, by allowing the parent to shape the child so radically so early in the relationship, the relationship between parent and child is ultimately different. The influence and goals of the parent become the foundation of the “family,” and individual desire will be undermined. To the second argument, a historical response could be offered.
This also makes us citizens concerned about our future as the rates of child poverty is still increasing even though it is much slowly then how fast it was increasing. And our nation would eventually be supported by these children. And this would also affect us economically as there will be more and more people in need of financial aid meaning lesser amount of money for development of the country and investors may not be that quick to invest in our nation as they used to. This is also because that even though
Aside from building positive relationships with and for children, Connolly et al. (2002) highlights the importance of working in partnership with families and the wider community in order to cover a broader range of inclusion. There is a wealth of evidence to support the claim that children do better when there is close partnership between home and early years setting (. Teamwork between teachers and families can be fostered by sharing feedback on children’s behaviours and their learning preference. The principle of communication between home and school informs the planning process, as without this link an inclusive approach is hindered.
Children are not Clueless to Right and Wrong Children are very important in the world today. Making sure they are stable and on the right track should be essential to all humans. Although some ads or commercials might influence children to make a not so good decision, it is ridiculous to ban all ads that may have negative effects on them. Although many ads may have harmful effects on children, kids are not clueless to what 's right and wrong. Because some ads are not good for kids, this helps them learn with decision making throughout their life.
It is very important that these kids get introduced to structure as soon as possible, so they can get used to have a well-rounded life. Introducing trophies is an easy way to support structure in their lives. Instead of a symbol for victory, trophies can be seen as many other symbols as well for developing structure.
With video games becoming super popular, many experts think that the most realistic video games are getting the most violent students are becoming. Violence in the media can cause copycat crimes. A decade later, the Columbine killings are being repeated by violent plots by people who are obsessed with the duo. If information like this was not accessible then maybe some people wouldn 't have to do it themselves. For instance, the Boston bombing inspired a kid named John LaDue.