http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/education/parents-children-facebook-privacy-age/
"Facebook and the Children's Online Protection Act"
Written by Margaret Weigel on November 2, 2011
Margaret Weigel's article "Facebook and the Childrren's Online Protection Act" discusses the unintended consequences of the Children's Online Protection Act. The 1998 Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) was passed in an attempt to protect the privacy and safety of children as the internet began raising concerns among parents. "Facebook and the Children's Online Protection Act" explores parents and children who find a way around this new act. Using details of parents defying the COPPA act through a survey, diction indicating parent wrong doing, and language that appeals to many parents in the country to convince readers that the COPPA Act is not necessarily effective.
Details throughout the article accentuate the fact that parents are well aware of the Facebook age requirement, yet assist their children in signing up for an account. In the third paragraph, the detail: "For instance, 2008, parents assisted their 11-year-old children to access Facebook 47% of the time, while in 2010, parents assisted their 9-year-old children 78% of the time" highlights the fact that children as young as 9 years old are being assisted to create a Facebook, despite the 13 year old age requirement. By showing that parents are assisting the creation of Facebook accounts of children that are 4 years younger than the age requirement, the statistics seem far more shocking. The article lists the reasons for parents assisting their children in signing up for Facebook despite their children being underage, supporting the idea that parents will continue to help their children sign up for Facebook early, regardless of the COPPA Act.
The diction throughout the article is intense at times and makes the underage children on Facebook seem like a more dangerous thing than one would otherwise believe. Words such as "violate", "antithetical" (when referring to the parent's actions), and "circumvented" seem to make the reader more inclined to believe that the parents are in the wrong and that the COPPA Act is being seriously violated. This makes the COPPA Act seem more unnecessary.
The language of the article appeals to all parents. It is colloquial in order to be relatable to larger numbers of readers with more elevated diction sewn in periodically throughout the article. The elevated words, as stated earlier, create an even more extreme spin on the actions of parents.
This is very good. I really like how in you said "details of parents defying the COPPA act through a survey, diction indicating parent wrong doing, and language that appeals to many parents in the country" instead of just saying "details, diction, and language." That shows very sophisticated and focused writing. Besides that, you did a nice job using evidence,quotes, and word choice. Nice job!
ReplyDeleteHey Joyce, good post. You had good examples for all of the techniques you chose to talk about except for language, which you might want to include next time. You also at one point say that the law is "unnecessary" while at the beginning you said ineffective. I was a little confused with the point you were trying to support. Overall though, it was a good post if you just stick to what you said in the thesis.
ReplyDeleteYou started out strong, but after the first body paragraph, you lost momentum.
ReplyDeleteAbout the last sentence in the paragraph about diction, that was a bit of a hop from the rest of the paragraph and could use a longer warrant to connect it better. Also, the article isn't saying the COPPA act is unnecessary. I think the word you were looking for was "ineffective."
I'm in disagreement with you on the article being colloquial. It presents the statistics quite formally. The formality gives it more credibility in the eyes of the reader by sounding authoritative.
Noah Symanzik