This shows that this source is not credible because it is basically just a marketplace for opinions. I thought this was funny because just looking up one statistic can completely irradiate the reliability of this op-ed. If I looked up quotes and saw “.org” or “.edu” I would believe his statements much more because these are credible sources. This is just another example of how “Fake News” is actually everywhere and that people don’t always research what they are posting when posting it publically.

I think overall the strength of Millers’ op-ed is that he is very passionate and uses language to build up and rile up the reader. He uses “facts” all throughout the essay to encourage his point, as any persuasive writer would do. However, I think he lacks the basic knowledge that smoking is in fact bad for you. He instead highlights that smoking isn’t “as bad” for you as other things like low-exercise and a bad diet. I think had he gone for a more compromise approach his argument would have been more effective.

think teaching people the importance of “fake news” and spreading it is an essential item we should focus on. I can’t count how many times I log onto Facebook and see someone share a link that is false. Whether its spreading misinformation about someone or something,

was adding music and creating pop—ups on my page, which is crazy to think about now. These days no kids are really learning about anything on technology besides social media.

To me, the most critical claim that was made was, “teens will not become critical contributors to this ecosystem simply because they were born in an age when these technologies were pervasive,”. In order for teens to have a high media literacy they need to learn the ways. Nobody is born just knowing things, and media and online literacy is included in this. I agree with Boyd when she makes suggestions about making digital literacy skills more attainable. In our day and age it is very important that we stay up to date with technology as the future generations are the ones that will continue to grow and expand.

When I was growing up all throughout middle school and high school we were told to never trust “Wikipedia” and such. I find it comedic though that it was said to trust google always. Google is just simply a search engine, and you can find false information all throughout it.

Alike Ong, I think both versions communicate their point in understanding and intellectual manners. I believe for myself personally, that Johnsons version would be more beneficial for myself because I find it easier to comprehend and recall the information in that sort of format. I also think that I can relate better to this type of writing because I am use to writing how I speak. Therefore I am able to understand others better when its written in more of a vocal climate than the other. Neither culture is considered better than one another, just more or less a different way of learning and communication

One of the most interesting parts of the text that I found was the comparison of Rhetoric and Community. Its not a common thought of mine that rhetoric builds communities and that a lack there of can be devastating to a community. I think this is very applicable in the world right now, where everyone is throwing there opinions on the internet and instead of having an intellectual debate using rhetoric, people are choosing to make a division. This division is caused by rhetoric of each other and the lack of understanding and willingness to try and see the other side. I found this concept very interesting and applicable in our lives currently.

somethings can relate with. I am big on Instagram and Facebook when it comes to sharing photos and achievements with my family and friends. I have come to realize that it is an easy platform to share photos and information on, whilst reaching almost all the friends and family I need to! I use twitter to stay updated with breaking news happening around the world. From this class I’m mostly excited to see how advertisements, social media sites, blogs, images and media influence my life. I am really excited for a great semester!

Alike Ong, I think both versions communicate their point in understanding and intellectual manners. I believe for myself personally, that Johnsons version would be more beneficial for myself because I find it easier to comprehend and recall the information in that sort of format. I also think that I can relate better to this type of writing because I am use to writing how I speak. Therefore I am able to understand others better when its written in more of a vocal climate than the other. Neither culture is considered better than one another, just more or less a different way of learning and communication.

One of the most interesting parts of the text that I found was the comparison of Rhetoric and Community. Its not a common thought of mine that rhetoric builds communities and that a lack there of can be devastating to a community. I think this is very applicable in the world right now, where everyone is throwing there opinions on the internet and instead of having an intellectual debate using rhetoric, people are choosing to make a division. This division is caused by rhetoric of each other and the lack of understanding and willingness to try and see the other side. I found this concept very interesting and applicable in our lives currently.