Texting: Head to Head

Texting destroys ability to communicate – by Katie Hodges

I am pulling out of my driveway, heading out to drop my younger sister off at the Christmas concert. We are chatting causally about the weather when she suddenly goes silent.

I don’t say anything, even though I am a bit surprised. Yes, our conversation was on the mundane side, but does that really justify completely ending the conversation mid-sentence?

I glance over to see if I accidently irritated her when I mentioned how it would hopefully warm up soon. But my glance is only met with a bluish electronic glow cutting through the dark.

Of course. Why have a conversation with me when she could quickly text someone at the concert “on my way?”

To be fair, it’s not just her that does this. I too have dabbled in the not-so-fine art of ignoring those around me to talk to people sometimes hundreds of miles away.

While I would never describe myself as “anti-technology,” sometimes the prevalence of texting in the world of today’s teenagers does cause me some alarm. Even though I might reach for my vibrating cell phone as quickly as the next girl, while I do so I can’t help but worry about the rapid on-set of carpal tunnel syndrome, which I am bound to develop by the time I’m 30, and the complete degeneration of the ability of the American teenager to communicate.

 Let’s face it. When we text, we are not actually communicating. As if making people understand the complicated thoughts of a 17-year-old girl wasn’t hard enough, now we are expected to do so through words with a maximum length of four letters.

Texting can be a convenient way to check in with someone, but it is taking away our ability to communicate. Texting has made is socially acceptable to ignore those around you in pursuit of more interesting conversation.

The question is simple: Who is more important? The person in front of you or the person you’re lol-ing with?

If we want to tell our friends and those around us that we actually care about them, we need to make an effort to give them our attention instead of quickly turning off as soon as our phones vibrate. Texting will do nothing to link us or bring us closer together if it gives us an excuse to ignore those around us.

Texting might serve some purpose, but as long as it means two people driving in a dark car and communicating with other people, it will only destroy our ability to communicate.

Txting: Pr0bl3m or $oluti0n? — by Zach Pottratz

 Do you look at your phone as a menacing monster of the future?  Do you feel that if you go over 50 texts you will add to the destabilizing qualities of the nation? Well, don’t feel that way citizens! I’m here to express my love for the art of “LOL-ing,” and I must say that I am an expert “LOL-er.”

 I send more than 500 texts each month. That’s about 13-15 a day. Some days I send more, and some days I send less. It really depends on my mood. Anyway, texting — for all you electronically illiterate folk out there — is sending messages without calling. Yes! WITHOUT CALLING! Can you believe it? Well, texting actually has some good things about it. Imagine you crash your car into a deep ravine. The calling is disabled on your phone, so you text your friend.

“hey, i need help!”

You are later saved from your untimely death through the text from your friend reading, “omgz! im on muh wayyy!”

Sometimes during class you might feel the enormous need to see what your friend is doing in the next room, so you whip out your phone and text away. BUT! You may get caught by the teacher. It’s like a game, a game in which I find much pleasure. You may also find you like doing it, though some of us get caught and suffer the consequences.

Texting is supposedly banned during class, and I’m sure that everyone with the ability to text has broken this rule at least once. If not, then good (maybe). There are about 1450 students at CMR, and I estimate that about 85 percent of them have cell phones, including Trac Phones, Droids, Blackberrys, and iPhones. I have a cheap phone from Verizon, which is all I need for texting and calling. It is all most of us need, but we purchase a cool, expensive phone. Which is probably meant for social status.

Think about it. How many of us actually NEED a smartphone? Good question, huh? Well yes it is. And I am not kidding when I say I saw a little kid with an iPhone. Really? What would make you need an iPhone at age 10!? I’m not saying don’t give kids phones, just do they need an expensive phone? Maybe a Trac Phone or something.

So next time you want to text, do it! Do it because with me, I need to be in touch with my friends 24/7. So next time you take out your phone, go a little crazy. Text Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, whatever.

Type on my friends, type on.

School board candidates speak out at public forum

Seven of the eight candidates for the Great Falls School Board gathered April 19 in Benefis Healthcare’s Cameron Auditorium to answer questions and introduce themselves and their views to the greater community.

The event was sponsored by the Great Falls Tribune and the American Association of University Women, or AAUW. Journalism students from C.M. Russell High School and Great Falls High School prepared and asked questions of the candidates. CMR junior Katie Hodges moderated the event.

Seven of the eight candidates who are on the mail-in ballot for the May 3 election were at the event. Candidates are: Randall Hand, a finance officer for Cascade County; Audrey Finlayson, a program director for the Cascade County Retired Senior Volunteer Program; Bob Moretti, an adjunct professor with the University of Phoenix; Mary Sheehy Moe, a retired teacher and higher education administrator; Jan Cahill, a current board member and executive director of the Great Falls Animal Foundation; Eric Bakly, a claims analyst; David Sculer, a retired U.S. Coast Guard officer; and Johnny Walker, a retired investigator with the Department of Homeland Security. Walker was unable to be at the April 19 forum due to a family medical emergency out of state.

The candidates were asked about many topics, including the curriculum, use of technology in schools and the $998,000 mill levy that appears on the May 3 ballot.

Schuler and Bakly told the audience they do not support the mill levy, while Moretti, Moe, Finlayson and Cahill spoke in favor of the funding. Hand told the audience that he chose not to answer the question, as his vote for or against the levy is private.