Closed Reading - #4 "Cellphones for kids are more gadget than necessity"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/cellphones-for-kids-are-more-gadget-than-necessity/2011/11/21/gIQAIfg1vN_story.html?hpid=z4

Once again I must insist on a closed reading post from the news. I find these informative and often even interesting to read. So let's get started.

First off language is a huge factor here. Michelle Singletary's language gives the reader a sense of discomfort. It is because she uses language to point out the uncomfortable truth. The truth that American children are now getting cellphones for granted from a very young age. Her questions of cellphone usage are striking: "Is it just me? Where would a young child be without adult supervision so that he or she would need a cellphone? And why would a young child — or teen, for that matter — need an iPhone or any smartphone?" She shows the argument children or even adults use to get their children cellphones and counters it with the questions stated above.

Second is a piece of diction. "Gadget." This word can pretty much give the reader all they need to know about Singletary's viewpoint on cellphones. It is important because the word shows that children don't really need cellphones but they get them because it makes them look cool. As the title says cellphones are not necessities for children to use but more like a gadget.

The last is the details. Singletary's uses specific details from her own life to show her opinion. Her stories of her son wanting a new phone or her daugther having to sign a contract of do's and don'ts with a cellphone are very striking stories that support her opinion. At the end she offers advice to parents who have succumbed to the demands of their child's wishes to get a cellphone.

Through the means of language, diction, and details Michelle Singletary shows us the truth that kids don’t really need cellphones and that their usage would become more controlled through proper adult supervision.