Kids with cell phone brain

Liz Martinez
Professor Rowley
English 1
7 June 2015

                                                                                Kids with Cell phone Brains
               

                Nowadays, we have been surrounding ourselves with all forms of technologies: laptops, iPad, cellphones and other kinds of gadgets and devices. Who uses them? We do. We human beings do. According to Huffington Post writer Britney Fitzgerald, 58 percent of U.S. Smartphones owners check their phones at least every hour. It is because we are so tempted to peek on our phones whenever we   receive a message or notification of some sort. The curiosity starts to get to us and we end up being on our phones no matter where or what time it is. That means people would take their phones wherever they go and would always have them at all times. People from the ages of 8 and up will more likely have access to a cell phone. The thing is that children ages 8-12 are considered to be little kids, just young little beings when you think about it. Children don’t really have a need to have a phone in their possession. Although kids might need a cell phone to use for an emergency, it doesn’t mean they need the latest kind of phone either. They shouldn’t be allowed to have an advanced kind of phone because it can be a huge distraction for them. If we let children have the latest phone, they could have several problems in their growing development, such as lack of communication skills, obesity, and even being inexperienced in life. They are not growing up to be healthy, productive, and independent adults. Cell phone addiction can make children become very dependable on those devices and can make them afraid or even panic and have anxiety if they ever lose it. They would grow up depending on it and may not be able to live without it. This is a concern because this dependency is unhealthy and makes it so children don’t know how to be or act independent from technology.

                Children with the latest phone wouldn’t be so great with face-to-face communication, not even with their own parents.  According to Psychology Today writer Jim Taylor Ph.D. “One study found that when the working parent arrived home after work, his or her children were so immersed in technology that the parent was greeted only 30 percent of the time and was totally ignored 50 percent of the time.” That shows the lack of communication they have with their own family. This is a concern because it is very important to speak with one another; if not that is where issues starts to form such as a family bond collapsing. Also, in the family, I believe that’s where children would express themselves better. Communication skills have to start at home first in order to build character and to be able to use it outside of home, like school. According to another Huffington Post writer Katherine Bindley she mentions Melissa Ortega, a child psychologist at New York's Child Mind Institute claiming, “They don't know how to handle conflict face to face because so many things happen through some sort of technology. Clinically, I'm seeing it in the office. The high school kids who I do see will be checking their phones constantly. They'll use it as an avoidance strategy. They'll see if they got a text message in the two minutes they were talking to me." So if this is high school students responding this way, how would children be like when they get to this age? Right now they are barely being taught how to communicate with one another. If these high school students were only recently introduced to technology like cell phones, and are now like this, so imagine what the future generations are going to be like if parents give their kids them the newest technology at a young age.

               Phones can cause children to become obese. According to Taylor, “The Journal of Public Health published a study on 1,803 adolescents aged 12-19 years and found a positive correlation between screen time and likelihood of metabolic syndrome, independent of the amount of physical activity reported.  These children showed higher levels of triglycerides, fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, and larger waist circumference the more hours of screen time per day they reported.” As you can see, these adolescents are not getting enough physical activity these days. They spend the day mostly focused on what the little screen displays for them. If adolescents are not getting enough physical fitness to their daily routine, now imagine the little ones. How much physical fitness are they getting? According to NY Times writer Gina Kolata, "She is recommending that children and adolescents get 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity every day.” Kids need at least 60 minutes of exercise a day, which would make their body stronger and healthier. Having a screen all up in their faces isn’t much of a workout in my opinion.

Parents may say that having a phone is an important necessity. Thy may say, what if the child needs to contact their parents or what if a safety hazard came across a child’s path and they needed to call someone for help. What about a life and death situation, would the child need the phone for answers? First of all, children don’t need to worry about anything like that. If it comes down to it, they should just call 911. If a safety issue or other danger is around them and they need to call someone, again its only three digits away. To have the latest phone is not a necessity for children. A simple old kind of a phone would be good enough for them to use in an emergency for just calling. I know parents would want their children to be safe, but there are other ways to do that. However children may not learn independence if they call their parents every time the slightest problem arises. The latest phone for children should be out of the question. It will not benefit them much and will affect them negatively.

Kids may grow up to be obese and with health problems in their future. Also, not being able to communicate well with other human beings could be a huge issue for them too, for the kids and for their parents. This is a concern because this dependency is unhealthy and makes it so children don’t know how to be or act independent from technology. It could even affect how close they are to family, as well.

kids with cellphone brains part 2

Nowadays we have been surrounding ourselves with all forms of technologies: laptops, iPad, cellphones and other kinds of gadgets and devices. Who uses them? We do. We human beings do. According to Huffington post writer Britney Fitzgerald, 58 percent of U.S smart phones owners check their phones at least every hour. It is because we are so tempted to peek on our phones whenever we   received and message or notification of some sort. The curiosity starts to get to us and we end up being on our phones no matter where or what time It is. That means they would take their phones wherever they go and would always have them at all times. People from the ages of 8 and up will more likely have access to a cellphone. The thing is that children ages 8-12 are considered to be little kids, just young little beings when you think about it. Children don’t really have a need to have a phone in their possession. Although kids might need a cellphone to use for an emergency, it doesn’t mean they need the latest kind of phone either. They shouldn’t be allows to have an advanced kind of phone because it can be a huge distraction for them. If we let children have the latest phone, they would have several problems in their growing development such as lack of communication skills, obesity, and even being inexperienced in life. They are not growing up to be healthy, productive, and independent adults. Cellphone addiction can make children become very dependable on those devices and can make them afraid or even panic and have anxiety if they ever lose it. They would grow up depending on it and may not be able to live without it. This is a concern because this dependency is unhealthy and makes it so children don’t know how to be or act independent from technology.
                Children with the latest phone wouldn’t be so great with communication. Not even with their own parents.  According to psychologytoday writer Jim Taylor Ph.D. “One study found that when the working parent arrived home after work, his or her children were so immersed in technology that the parent was greeted only 30 percent of the time and was totally ignored 50 percent of the time.” That shows the lack of communication they have with their own family. But in the family it is very important to speak with one or anything because if not that is where issues starts to form. In the family, I believe that’s where children would express their selves better. It has to start at home first in order to build character and to be able to use it outside of home like school. According to another huffingtonpost writer Bindley she mentions Melissa Ortega, a child psychologist at New York's Child Mind Institute claiming “They don't know how to handle conflict face to face because so many things happen through some sort of technology. Clinically, I'm seeing it in the office. The high school kids who I do see will be checking their phones constantly. They'll use it as an avoidance strategy. They'll see if they got a text message in the two minutes they were talking to me." So if this is high school students responding this way, how would children be like when they get to this age. Right now they are barely getting taught how to communicate with one and another. If these high school students gotten the chance to learn at an early age when these kind of technology wasn't invented and now are like this now imagine how the future generations going to be like if parents gives them the newest thing their is. 
               Phones can cause children to gain obesity. According to the psychologytoday writer Taylor mentions “The Journal of Public Health published a study on 1803 adolescents aged 12-19 years and found a positive correlation between screen time and likelihood of metabolic syndrome, independent of the amount of physical activity reported.  These children showed higher levels of triglycerides, fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, and larger waist circumference the more hours of screen time per day they reported.” As you can see these adolescents are not getting enough physical activity these days. They spend the day mostly focused to see what the little screen displays for them. If the adolescents are not getting enough physical fitness to their daily routine. Now imagine the little ones. How much physical fitness are they getting. According to NY Times writer Gina Kolata "recommending that children and adolescents get 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity every day.” Kids need at least 60 minutes of exercise a day which would make their body stronger and healthier. Having a screen all up on their faces isn’t much of a work out in my opinion. You may say that having a phone is an important necessity. Like if what if the child need to contact their parents or what about a safety hazard came across their path and need to call someone for help. What about a life and death citation, would the child will need the phone for answers. First of all children don’t need to worry about anything like that. If it comes down to it they should just call 911. If a safety issue or theirs danger around them and need to call someone, again its only three digits away. To have the latest phone is not a necessity for children. A simple old kind of a phone would be good enough for them to use in an emergency for just calling.I know parents would want their children to be safe, but there is other ways to do that. The latest phone for children should be out of the question. It will not benefit them much and affect them negatively. Kids may grow up to be obesity and with health problems in their future. Also, not being able to communicate well with other human beings would be a huge issue for them too. For the kids and for as well their parents. This is a concern because this dependency is unhealthy and makes it so children don’t know how to be or act independent from technology. It could even affect them as a family as well.

Kids with Cellphone Brains

    Nowadays we have been surrounding our self’s with all forms of technologies: laptops, iPad, cellphones and other of kinds of gadgets and devices. Who uses them? We do. We human beings do. According to Britney Fitzgerald, 58 percent of U.s Smartphone owners check their phones at least every hour. That means they would take their phones where ever they go and would always have them with them at all times. People from the ages 8 and up will more likely have access to a cellphone. The thing is that the ages 8-12 are considered to be little kids, just young little beings when you think about it. Children don’t really have a need to have a phone in their possession. Although kids might need a cellphone to use for an emergency, it doesn’t mean they need the latest kind of phone either. They shouldn’t be allowed to have an advanced kind of phone because it would be a huge distraction for them. If we let children have the latest phone, they would have several problems in their growing development such as lack of communication skills, obesity, and even being inexperienced in life. They are not growing up to be healthy, productive, and independent adults. Cellphone can make children become very dependable on those devices and would make them afraid or panic and even gain anxiety if they ever lose it or live without it. Then they would grow up depending on it and not be able to live on with just being able to believe in them self’s.

"social media: establishing criteria for law enforcement use" counterargument

I know every thing I said from my last post is true BUT I have something that goes against what I have said and need to speak my mind. Just because police reinforcements have a job and uses their social media for work doesn't mean that they cant have their own personal one with a different name. They desire their own private account (if desired too) of their own. That is wear they can be free and to be able to express their mind to have freedom of speech and say what ever they want (but of course not job related to be safe). During work and their personal time they need a different account where they can slack, where they can be them selves. But while on duty they must perform the task until they are done for the day. It is not fair if they take that part from them that makes them human. They have a need too, they have feelings as well they are not robots.

"Social Media: Establishing Criteria for Law Enforcement Use" -Robert D. Stuart ~ My Responce

The article 'Social Media: Establishing Criteria for Law Enforcement Use" by Robert D. Stuart is about how  even police officers use social media just like us. BUT they need to be careful on what they put on line. Stuart says that "missteps in its use can endanger the safety of officers and compromise criminal cases, resulting not only in embarrassment to department but exposure to civil and criminal liability." If a police officer posts up lets say on Facebook with a picture of the crime scene, that can lead to exposure to he public with out permission to do so. Another scenario would be posting up a status saying " I'm feeling so sleepy I need a coffee like right now" the police officers are being watch by the department. So no matter what they put up they need to be careful on what they write for people to see. Stuart mentions a 2011 survey that was conducted by the Institute for criminal Justice Education found that over 78 percent of law enforcement respondents had a social media account and of those, over 38 percent identified themselves on heir profile as policing professionals", it shows how the law enforcement have interest in social medias. Well of course since they are people more likely they would have interests towards it. even tho social media can also be part of heir benefits. They can use social media for public relations, crime prevention, and criminal investigation he claims. That is their way to get the word out to the people. That way people can help inform the police with a more easy access if they have something to tell them about a crime. Something that is recommended to the police enforcement is to not mix up their social lives with their professional ones. It can bring discredit to them and their departments. Criminals can become spy's and spy on private information that publicly was shared by law enforcement officers. While some officers know what to and what not to put on social media about 15 percent of the officers do not. Stuart says "government entities can restrict the speech of their employees under certain circumstances, such as if the expression interferes with or compromises the mission of the department or brings into question the professionalism of the officers of the agency." They have the power to take away or limit what is put on line. Stuart wants the officers to get train to know what is and not okay to expose on line. He wants Law enforcement administrators to establish appropriate controls over  the use of social media to increase its benefits for their departments and reduce incidents of misuse by officers. Stuart does have a point on having the law enforcement to be careful about the information they put on line it can effect them on a helpful way or a negative way..

"CitizenFour" Responce

 This movie was based on how Edward Snowden wanted to expose the truth about how our privacy is being hacked by top secret organizations. His in his job, since he was in one of the higher positions, he had access to things that other employers did not. He was able to see all the information that the organization was tracking for many many people. Snowden, who showed that he was very well informed on the order or way things where going to go down like, had a plan to help the information be exposed to the public without letting them get to him first. In the past; before Snowden, Daniel Ellsberg had made her own films about signs of corruption that the government doesn't want us to know about for example the situation about Iraq. She was placed on the secret government watch list and watch her every moved. This caused her to move to Berlin because how harassed she was feeling. The journalist Glenn Greenwald becomes part of Snowden story along the way. He helped Snowden get his information get across the public a step at a time. Snowden of course knew the consequences from his actions. So he wanted to be cautious and not let his family involved to what he is doing. So the time when they went out, he left a note saying it is some sort of business trip. Just so his family could be innocent and not effected. Snowden knew the risk that was placed in line. But Snowden seem very aware of everything was gonna be placed. Eventually as his plan was put into action. His wife told him that large machinery was surrounding his block. His wife was clueless but Snowden knew exactly what is going on. The thing is they thought he was home sick bu tin fact he was all the way across the globe in Hong Kong where he is being interviewed at to be safe. Eventually he let be expose him self and things started getting a little hasty. If I was him I would of been paranoid. Many public news broadcast where getting aware of this and was all over the place. In the end he had to go move to Russia and has his family join him with him. When you think about it the things he had to give up. He had a well paying job lived in a fabulous home in Hawaii, his life was really good. But he was one of those brave souls that wanted justice and sacrificed what he had.

"The Snitch in Your Pocket" -Michael Isikoff ~ My Responce

The reason that Michael Isikoff named the tittle "The Snitch in Your Pocket" because there actually is a snitch in your pocket tattle telling your information. In his case, the snitch is your mobile phone that you carry around with you everywhere you go. They say companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint devices are using their cell phone products to help track people. Isikoff says “The tracking is possible because either the phones have tiny GPS units inside or each phone call is routed through towers that can be used to pinpoint a phone's location to areas as small as a city block". How where we suppose to know that buying a phone would come with a price, besides the price we already had to pay for. They are "277 million cellphones"

And most of us don't even have a clue that we are being tracked by them. This was going on ever since Bush administration's warrant less was wiretapping program that was like about maybe more than 8 years ago, it has been rumored that "mini- revolt was brewing over another type of federal snooping" was not getting any much publication to that notice at all. Isikoff believes that internal data from telecommunications companies would show the locations of their customers' cell phones with the excuse of they needed the records to "trace the movements of suspected drug traffickers, human smugglers, even corrupt officials". In that case they do have a good point but it doesn't mean that they are not using it for foul thing they should not be doing. Even some of the federal magistrates where not feeling at ease about it when they founded out.  The purpose for wanting to have access to trace sell phones are because it was intentionally to help police and other emergency officers during the 911 calls. It is indeed help full, wanting to know where the victim cry for help is located to know where they are at or if the call gets called off. At least the person would know that more likely their location will be known. But the FBI and other law-enforcements have been obtaining records or cell-phone locations without letting the person know or permission to do so. Sprint Nextel even has a web site that helps the law-enforcements to have access to record without really breaking a sweat.

Nextel says that in order for the agents to have access they would need be authenticated before they are given passwords to log on to the site but as will have to prove a valid court orders for all non-emergency requests. I am just wondering why the court is okay with giving them access if it is not even an emergency or need to. I wonder if they can do the same for other electronics that is not a phone that they use from companies also.