As one of the world's popular social networking sites, Facebook has instigated controversial issues as a result.
This is a really awkward sentence, especially 'as a result.' Stephen Marche's “Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?” criticises
criticises what?and claims that Facebook does not resolve the ever-growing loneliness in America and has rather exacerbated it. From an emotive to an informative tone, he first comes to elucidate the context of the issue before discussing the crux of it
yeah... you're not really saying anything here. The image accompanied above the article seems to visually support Marche's argument
again, sure. But how?, followed by the responses from various internet readers.
The title of the article “Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?” clearly states its context (with the word “Facebook”), which will attract 'tech-savvy' readers.
as a result.What's with you and 'as a result' - you can cut it out and the sentence sounds better. Furthermore, the subject of this clause is inclusive, which inclines the reader to read the article as he or she is part of this huge issue and hence feels intrigued to learn more about the issue.
It's fine, but why does it attract tech-savvy readers? You need to say how and, to an extent, why language is used to persuade - you've got the how but not the whyIn the beginning of the article, a rather disturbing anecdotal experience of Yvette Vickers is introduced. Short clauses in describing the entrance to her home, followed by emotive and descriptive words 'barricaded', 'mummified', and 'permeating' leave the reader shaken and concerned.
sure, but why? What's the author trying to achieve by choosing these words? Continuing in this emotive tone, the cause of her death is then explained, and with the two words 'lonesome death', the reader may come to strongly censure Facebook as the cause of the women's pitiful despair, which is meant to be socially gratifying and not pernicious to internet users. Moreover, 'a symbol... to exploit our most basic fears in silliest ways' juxtaposed with 'a new and different kind of horror' brings further fear to the reader that it can happen to anybody, especially those with no social contacts. Similarly, 'distant fans' may come to imply that the internet is not a reliable, if not a precarious place, and is a last resort for socialising.
But whyyyyyyy? Why is the author using this kind of argument?Switching to a more informative tone, Marche comes to clarify the magnitude of Facebook's influence. Statistical evidence, such as “845 million users and $3.7 billion in revenue” demonstrates that the writer has done research and hence can be assumed that the article is reliable.
This feels like you're grasping... talk about the effect statistics have on the reader.Such statistical evidence, and a juxtaposition “the global coffee industry” with “one addiction prepared to surpass the other” suggests how easy it is to become attached to Facebook
don't really see the link between the number of uses and addiction, which may make the reader extremely concerned and powerless in how Yvette's predicament could happen to anyone. Furthermore, the words 'it is vast beyond imagination' emphatically reinforces how powerless the reader is in stopping Facebook. Combined with this and the statistics described, readers unwary of the internet dangers are also convinced to take this cyber issue seriously and vigilantly.
Continuing the use of
using credible statistics, Marche explains the history of America's loneliness and the internet
why why why why. “Facebook arrived in the middle of a dramatic increase... of human loneliness” is ironic with the haunting anecdote, which the reader is left perplexed as to how Facebook became counterproductive
I can't see the irony - you need to explain this link better. It is also this which arouses interest to the reader, in that knowing history may be useful in addressing the issue. Klinenberg's expert opinion, derided by
jocularlythis is silly, just say sarcastic sarcastic examples of happy social recluses,
repudiates and demands the reader to reconsider the common belief that 'the quality of social interaction' prevents loneliness.
Good, but you need more - how does the author describe and challenge this common belief? Moreover, Marche also includes a 'longitudinal study' mentioning that loneliness is a psychological problem, which forces these readers to once more readjust the common beliefs of loneliness and its stigmas, as well as to reaffirm that a situation like Yvette's is prevalent to anyone.
This is really clumsy - what are the common beliefs about the stigma of loneliness, how and why are they challenged?As the severity of loneliness is established to the reader, the cause is ostensibly blamed on the capitalist society of America. Using a similar analogy of the Pilgrims, cowboys and astronaut to which most Americans can relate to, Marche states another matter-of-fact: 'Determination and self-reliance causes loneliness... But Americans have been willing to pay that price.' To the reader, whom at one point understands the impacts of loneliness, also comes to realise that the much-yearned success in life is part of loneliness and that Facebook is not the only one to blame. Hence, the reader is left confused and possibly demanding an answer a solution to loneliness.
Whhhyyyyyyyyy? You're saying what the author is doing, you need to describe the intended effect on the audience. This is however abated by a lucid question which inclusively brings the reader to engage and question the crux of the issue: 'Is Facebook part of the separating or part of congregating?'
From here, Marche continues to deliver more questions than answers intended to engage the reader. Referencing another credible source of evidence of Carnegie Mellon, the reader is lead to another, broader question, probably intended to inform the reader about the bigger picture of the internet. Suddenly changing into a blunt tone, Marche states the benefits of Facebook as preventing 'the embarrassing reality of society'. The general examples of social embarrassment stated are all typical and uncomforting to many people, which the reader may feel a whim to neglect the negatives of Facebook for their own social good. This is further made attractive by the word 'simple'. However, Marche snaps the reader to reality that the simplicity obscures 'everything that matters'. With the reader's responsibilities being of high concern, the reader is reminded the unfairness and the reality of life, therefore causing the reader to condemn Facebook instead.
Finally, in a philosophical and veraciousthis is silly tone, Marche elaborates the difference between a 'connection' and a 'bond' with short clauses designed to be candid, to which the reader is inclined to agree as a result of being reminded of reality.
Reminded of reality? What does that mean? You need to be much clearer in your argument. Lastly, he
castigates Facebook with an inclusive
Is there anything in any article ever that isn't meant to be 'inclusive'?, frank tone: 'Facebook denies us a pleasure whose profundity we had underestimated'. The reader is ultimately left bitter and irate about Facebook's intention of being a “social network”, and sees it clear that Facebook holds major responsibility for today's increasing social reclusion and loneliness.
I think you need more on why the reader is 'left bitter' - just stating that they are is not analysis.The image accompanied with the article depicts the a man and a women holding portable high-tech devices. The choice of having both genders has been intended to show that the loneliness of Facebook can happen to anyone.
I guess - I think it says more about changed relationships. Furthermore, the man and woman have their bodies positioned abreast, with their eyes focused on their devices and the women appearing emotionless. This demonstrates that technology can have negative effects
How? What are the negative effects implied in the picture? and underscored with the dark-blue background, the reader may feel overwhelmed and alienated by the asocial depiction figures. Hence, the reader feels inclined to oppose the Facebook, or internet's side effect of loneliness.
Last sentence is really clumsy. You seem to have a lot of ..., or ... - you'd do better to pick one of the two. Or, you could say 'oppose Facebook, and hence the internet's ...The comments displayed below the article also seem to support Marche's contention, even if it is not explicitly stated. Douglas Roehrig, who uses a rather informal and calm tone
You can do better than that., states personally that socialising with 'real humans' is more beneficial
You've just summarised his comment - how and why is he saying this?. More importantly, the last sentence 'I refuse to be a sheep' suggests to the reader that they are not obliged to sign-up to Facebook as a social alternative.
Good, but take it further! What are the connotations of being a 'sheep'? As a result of reading the article, the reader will be persuaded to avoid using Facebook.
Will they be? Were you? Say something like 'the reader will be prompted to re-evaluate their use of Facebook.Similarly, Perpetual_Left supports Marche's point of view, but in an irate, acrimonious tone
which is demonstrated where? You need some example of this, but keep it to a few words. Although it does not clearly state his point, his tone however makes it clear he opposes the use of modern technology
example?. Younger readers, especially teenagers may feel intimidated as a result of the attack which is unsubstantiated
I don't buy this - talk about the intended effect of his irate tone, but you don't need to make generalisations about the audience. Lastly, Ben Vivo-Wachter expands the discussion of the effects of Facebook to society, and ultimately agrees that it negatively effects society. Most likely included in the article to support his arguments, the reader is therefore more likely to agree with Marche's viewpoint.
Stephen Marche first comes to use an emotive anecdote to arouse the reader's attention, then coming to inform the reader the history around the time Facebook was formed.
'comes' and 'coming' don't make sense here Ultimately, in a generally direct and philosophical tone
direct and philosophical tones are different, Marche states much of truths that we take for granted in order to belittle Facebook and its purpose.
what do we take for granted? I don't follow Although informing the history of America and Facebook proves useful in elucidating the issue, little of this is actually used to support his main argument which is found in his final paragraphs
Be careful - you're analysing the author's choice of language, not the success of his argument.
Furthermore, it would have been more engaging and relevant to the reader if the faults of Facebook were explained and used as evidence to support his contention, rather than bringing up further questions which may possibly confuse or frustrate the reader.I hope I haven't been too critical. It's good, but you need a lot more on why the author chooses particular language, and the effect it has on the audience. You've done this a bit, but it's too simply done to do much more than state the obvious. Also, don't use so many words from the thesaurus. Unless it's done well, it sticks out as clumsy. You should, for the most part, be able to express complex analysis with simple language. Just put in one or two fancy words in a piece if you must, and practice using them in future pieces rather than throwing them all in at once.
Well done though - it seems like you know the article quite well, you just need to be more precise in your analysis.