At this point, it should come as no surprise that entertainment mediums such as television, film, social media, and video games have surpassed their literary predecessors. For most Americans, especially younger generations, gone are the days of reading simply for entertainment or for news and research purposes. Instead, we now exist in a time period where we would much rather consume ourselves with visual stimulation than indulge in print. In other words, we prefer to watch the news, or some news broadcast, rather than read it ourselves. Such a drastic change has led to the expansion of popular streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, while allowing films like Avengers: Endgame to gross over $2.79 billion at the global box office within just 87 days of its release. This led me to wonder: Why do we hear so often about the success of major films and TV shows, but hear very little about literature anymore? Is it because we have made a lot of technological advances over the years or is there something else? Furthermore, could this loss of literacy be the explanation behind a generation of uninformed and mentally stubborn individuals? Due to the lack of liberation in our schools and the increase in the use of digital media, I am convinced that we are becoming more and more ignorant by the day. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay To understand why we have suddenly become predisposed to a lack of knowledge, it is imperative to first examine how the problem arose in the first place: the lack of a liberal education. In 1990, David Breneman, former president of Kalamazoo College and former visiting professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, published a study on the number of liberal arts colleges in existence. At the time, Breneman found that of the nearly 3,400 institutions in America, only 212 met the requirements of what he believed were true liberal arts colleges; colleges that primarily award degrees in arts and sciences, such as English, history, chemistry, and psychology. Fast forward twenty-two years later and find that that number has dropped to just 130 colleges remaining in 2012, a trend that has likely continued as time has passed. Lorraine Smith Pangle, a government professor at the University of Texas at Austin, proposes that as we move toward more technical and professional programs, we will likely see a “restructuring of universities… functioning more like businesses.” Ultimately, this will result in a model where metrics of student success will be determined solely by grades alone, and both professors and instructors will be pushed to teach basic, foundational tasks that can be easily reproduced. But why is this such a bad thing? Doesn't it make more sense to promote a model that equips students with the technical skills necessary to find work after graduation? Well, not necessarily. As noted in the Pangle publication, many employers find themselves dissatisfied with the level of “writing and critical thinking skills” presented by potential candidates. Fundamentally, we are not adequately equipped with intangible skills (communication, teamwork, report writing, etc.) that are crucial to succeed and thrive in a competitive work environment. Basically, Pangle offers a broad definition of what it means to have a liberal education. He suggests that liberal education is “an effort to instill breadth, general knowledge, critical thinking skills… and a zest for the life of the mind as an end in itself.” This is itinstructional model that will encourage students to read challenging publications and engage in conversations that require in-depth examination of the difficult questions that need to be answered. Furthermore, by studying the works of famous philosophers such as Socrates and Plato, Pangle believes that students will gain a greater appreciation for deep intellectual conversations and discover that they are more than capable of articulating their own personal beliefs; they will no longer accept arbitrary truths presented at face value. Since reading is an integral part of the liberal arts, it would be plausible to witness an increased interest in many literary forms among the majority of young students. But instead of encouraging the facilitation of free thought in our public education system, we have created an environment in which we force our students to read homework and remember insignificant details related to passages. Thus, we have turned reading more or less into a chore, causing students to see it as a mundane task rather than as a beneficial and enjoyable pastime. So if we no longer read for pleasure and have developed a genuine disinterest in the subject, then what are we doing with our time? In their study titled To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) confirmed that reading was no longer popular among young adults. In 2002, the NEA reported that the percentage of adults, ages 18 to 45, who read recreationally had declined significantly over a ten-year period. On average, there was a decrease of approximately 6.3% within the age group, a figure estimated at around 5-6 million people. Not surprisingly, this evidence was supported by an increase in adolescents, aged 13 to 17, who reported “never or almost never” reading any type of literature for enjoyment, and by a decrease in reading habits among UCLA students once they arrive at college. Instead, it was found that adolescents and young adults spent most of their free time watching television or engaging in some other type of activity. Statistics showed that individuals over the age of 15 spent 2 to 3 hours a day watching television, while only spending a measly 20 minutes reading. Now, I recognize that this study was conducted in 2008 and used data collected nearly twenty years ago. However, due to the increase in technological innovations and social networking sites, I am overly confident that the trends have remained the same over the years. We have fully emerged into what many would call the “digital age”. As we have cultivated a generation of non-readers, it has become increasingly common to see a child successfully using a handheld device before they are even able to read and write complete sentences. I would say we have a compulsion to watch our shows because they are less invasive. Subconsciously, I believe that human beings have developed a fascination with living vicariously through the lives of others. As Henry Beckwith states in his novel Unthinking: The Surspiring Forces Behind What We Buy, we like it when characters are portrayed just as we are. In other words, we feel comfortable when we are able to visually witness a character on screen experiencing the same trials and tribulations we face on a daily basis. On the other hand, we also like to see happiness and prosperity, as they reassure us of an optimistic future. In an article titled Why do we identify with fictional characters?, author Keith Hillman, a writer with experience inneuroscience and biological psychology, further explores this idea of ​​why we tend to cling to the lives of characters on screen. Hillman proposes that we have an “evolutionary tendency” to identify with objects that we determine to be real as a result of our desperate need for human “companionship.” This inherently overcomes the premise of reading literature that simply contains inanimate words to our eyes; they have little or no emotional value. Additionally, visualizing characters gives us the ability to empathize with others. We can allow ourselves to completely dissociate from our lives with Clearconsciousness, without taking any responsibility for any negative consequences that may arise. But we didn't just resort to watching television or movies; we shifted our attention elsewhere. With the advent of social media sites, internet usage among teenagers has seen a significant increase across multiple digital platforms. In 2016 alone, it was found that 82% of middle and high school students reported using social media “almost every day,” also doubling their internet usage time over a ten-year period. Not surprisingly, as the use of these new media has increased, the use of older “legacy media” has rapidly declined (Twenge et al., 10). Subsequently, a sample of high school seniors reported spending, on average, about 8 hours of free time in front of some type of screen (TV, computer, cell phone), a number that has practically tripled since the 1990s. 70. This has ultimately created a new generation of students who will be unprepared to handle the academic rigors that will come their way. It will likely be more difficult for a student to navigate credible sources of information. It will be difficult for them to understand that a one-click search on Google will no longer suffice. Since we now have access to multiple forms of digital media, it is much easier for us to become susceptible to inaccurate information. What is even more alarming, however, is that we tend to seek out these inaccuracies on purpose to conform to our personal biases. In a report written by psychologists William Hart et al., it was determined that people are twice as likely to “select information that is congenial…to their pre-existing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.” That is, we prefer to develop ideas that agree or are in line with our points of view. In this way, we allow ourselves to feel “validated” about our perspectives, regardless of whether the information is true or not. This can make us vulnerable and fall victim to the spread of misinformation from various sources. The inadequacy of peer review and fact checking has led several political figures to spread propaganda in an open social media marketplace and “manipulate” the opinions of its users (Bradshaw and Howard, 21). I'm sure we're all familiar with the ongoing allegations regarding Russia's involvement in the 2016 US presidential election. But falling victim to false information is only half the battle. We must also overcome our inclination to believe it. According to David Rapp, a psychologist at Northwestern University, people tend to believe misinformation simply because it doesn't require their minds to undergo any in-depth or challenging contemplation. In his publication entitled The Consequences of Reading Inaccurate Information, Rapp explains that we “encode a trace of presented inaccuracies…into short-term memory,” later suggesting that our brain decides to retrieve this information first because it is easier (Deardorff , "Whylet's fall"). Rapp also details how we can be misled into believing information that may appear to be true. He states that “plausible alternatives are confusing,” further explaining that people are less likely to investigate general knowledge. It would be extremely unbelievable if I said that water is dangerous for our consumption and therefore you would have no problem rejecting my statement; it's not plausible. However, if I published an article highlighting a single act of criminal activity involving an illegal immigrant, and then commented on how illegal immigrants are the largest source of crime in America, you would be much more likely to believe my words are true without doing further research on the topic. This highlights an important issue in the early days of social media and Internet searches: credible sources. Rapp notes that even when we are suspicious of a source, we still find it “credible.” I don't know if this is a lack of laziness, or simply our tendency to believe what others say. In any case, we are doing ourselves a grave disservice. So how do we solve this problem? I think it all starts with reintroducing the liberal arts into our education system. History and statistics have shown that the lack of a liberal education has led to a decline in reading and critical thinking skills. This has been attributed to an increase in digital media consumption filled with misinformation. We must show appreciation and respect for the arts. We need to encourage our students to read by giving them multiple text options to choose from, as well as a variety of argumentative writing prompts. We need to stop teaching based on evidence and start exploring the depths of life; stop making students believe that an A equals a wealth of knowledge. It is also essential to do your own research, verify the validity of our sources and remain as impartial as possible. We must stop looking for information that undoubtedly agrees with our position and be willing to face the fact that we may be wrong. We need to listen to each other and start conversations that share different perspectives and effect change. By doing so, we will properly educate ourselves and future generations to come. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay A lack of truly educated individuals would be detrimental to our society, especially with the number of looming issues facing us. And I'm not just referring to graduates with diplomas; many people can graduate with a sheet of paper and have no knowledge of themselves, nor the world around them. Instead, we need individuals who are willing to think critically and take on the task of solving climate change, health disparities, immigration issues, and social injustices against people of lower socioeconomic status. In short, we need innovators and problem solvers to contribute to a resolution, not individuals who will start a disastrous revolution. Works Cited Baker, Vicki, et al. “Where are they now? Revisiting Breneman's study of liberal arts colleges. Liberal Education, Vol. 98, no. 3, 2012, www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/where-are-they-now-revisiting-brenemans-study-liberal-arts. Accessed July 27, 2019.Beckwith, Harry. Without thinking: the surprising forces behind what we buy. Business Plus, 2013.Bradshaw, Samantha and Philip Howard. “Challenging Truth and Trust: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation 2019.