Want to Raise Emotionally Healthy Kids?
That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Today, I am against the resolution, Resolved: Social networking sites have had a negative impact on the United States. My first conjunctions is as followed; --Social Networking is potentially going to harm to persons using them.
One example of this is Megan Meier, who took her life after an old friends mom posed as a boy on myspace and began harassing her.
When a social networking site does nothing to protect users of it's site, we see it as unfit. Just as we would see a mother unfit to raise a child if she didn't protect it from danger. To clarify one thing: If it wasn't already known, then social networking sites are things like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, as opposed to dating sites like Match.
To things manageable, I will make only a couple of opening arguments, and I will briefly refute the Con's. I - Social networking is beneficial. Man is, by nature, a social creature; that is, people need people. II - Social networking sites balance a child's privacy and a parent's right to know.
A classic clash always happens when pitting the right to privacy of a child against the right to know of a parent; however, social networking sites find a happy medium, so that neither side is overlooked; for example, on Facebook, a teenager may have private conversations with a friend over the private messaging system, but the parent of this teenager will still be able to keep track of things such as posts made to other friends' walls, pictures posted, etc.
Social networking sites give parents the ability to keep tabs on many of their child's online postings, such as pictures and personal information, but without having to directly invade on their child's privacy; this again proves that social networking sites have had a positive effect on society.
III - Social networking sites provide a degree of online safety. While all websites and internet users are vulnerable to some degree, the openness and oversight provided by the staff of social networking sites, give or take a few situations, ensures a higher degree of safety than might be found elsewhere on the internet.
While these sites don't have to take direct responsibility for their users, there's still a higher sense of security than would be found in unchecked e-mail services, instant messengers, and chat rooms full of shady characters; so, to some extent, social networking sites provide all the benefits of other services, such as IM and e-mail, but without the fear of being stalked by a predator or serial killer [though I can't account for the harmless creepers that tend to accumulate on some sites.
Now, to move on to the Con's sole contention. Social networking is potentially harmful. A lot of different things can be potentially harmful; however, simply because something has the potential to be misused does not mean that it has had a negative effect on society; prescription medication, for example, can and often is abused by the people to whom it is prescribed; however, this potential for abuse does not mean that we do away with prescription drugs completely, and it is the same with social networking sites.
In the case with Megan Meier, this girl was already reported to suffer from depression, was on several medications, and since the third grade, had been kept under the careful eye of her psychiatrist [ http: Drew, among others, was brought to trial, not the MySpace staff; for example, if someone is shot in a nightclub, nobody holds the nightclub staff responsible for being unaware that the shooting would happen; they hold the shooter responsible, as he is the one that committed the detestable act; in the same way, MySpace cannot be held accountable for the malicious acts of other people, and this instance, while tragic, is not a negative effect of social networking sites, but merely the misuse of them.
I will stand down for the moment, and allow my opponent to chew on my opening arguments for a bit. Report this Argument Con Good Morning, and thank you for welcoming me. To begin the second round of our debate, I will first demolish my opponents case, then move on to my own.
I do agree with my opponent that people need people. But long before we had social networking sites we had other ways of communicating. We picked up a phone, or wrote an actual letter.By submitting this form, I agree that Vista College may use this information to contact me by methods I provided and consented, including phone (both mobile or home, dialed manually or automatically), social media, email, mail and text message.
Jan 22, · Facebook Says Social Media Can Be Negative For Democracy: The Two-Way "As unprecedented numbers of people channel their political energy through this medium, it's being used in unforeseen ways. Are social networking sites good for society?
U NDERSTAND T HE I SSUES. U NDERSTAND E ACH O THER. Menu Toggle navigation. Good or Bad?
Daylight Savings Time Death Penalty Drinking Age - Lower It? Social Media - Are Social Networking Sites Good for Our Society? There are both good and bad aspects of staying connected to people on social media. Here are a few of the pros and cons. There are both good and bad aspects of staying connected to people on social media.
Here are a few of the pros and cons. Lastly, since social networking is all done on some sort of computer or mobile device, it can.
Social Networking: Good, Bad, or Both? Essay Social Networking: Good or Bad? Social Networking is any way of communication through the internet medium.
It has many ups and downs and in todays society it seems almost mandatory to have one, but in reality it is always your choice whether to have one or not.
Social Media and The Church: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. empower the church.
But just to cover all the bases, here I will lay out both some pros and cons of the relationship of social media and the church.
Let’s start with the positives first. The term “social networking” accurately describes what social media can – and.