In the Wall Street Journal, Christopher Mims published an article called, “Why Snapchat Is the New TV.” In his article, he argues, surprisingly, that Snapchat is the new TV. His argument is supported by the ideas that Snapchat is a way to spread information quickly, it’s used as a leisurely activity, and has millions of users everyday. Although all of that information is true, I do not agree that it will replace TV.
Snapchat is a way to quickly spread information, however most people do not go to Snapchat as their main source of news. They tend to stick with the news on the TV or online websites like CNN. The news on Snapchat does not provide as much information as TV or online sources. Snapchat is also mainly used for contacting friends, not finding out what is happening around the world.
Mims also argues that Snapchat is a leisurely activity, like watching TV. However, dissimilar to watching TV, in my experience as an avid Snapchat user, most users spend about 5 minutes on Snapchat at a time. I would not sit on my couch for hours watching stories or contacting friends, but it’s a lot easier to spend hours watching movies or TV shows.
Finally, Mims uses the argument that Snapchat has a very wide audience so it is similar to TV. However, Snapchat mainly has teenagers who watch stories or read its news, and older adults tend to stray from Snapchat. However, almost every age feels comfortable using a TV. The TV has a much broader audience and larger audience as it reaches people through multiple companies, Netflix, Hulu, and many other ways to spread information.
Christopher Mims creates a strong argument for why Snapchat is the New TV, however I disagree with his argument. I do think that his message, that Snapchat is important and rapidly increasing its audience, is well supported through his argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment