Critical Review

        His critical thinking skills can be understood from the following line: “if you go back 200 years, there were similar complaints about technological devices, but it was books at that time” (98). He compares what books and the current technology did to the modern families,

        Williams tries to stress his argument by talking about a few families who believe technical equipment is a powerful tool that supports the idea of quality time to unite their family, even though they are in different worlds. However, these few examples don’t prove that technology is good for quality time and still confuses the reader about the idea of quality time and the influence of technology. This is how he inspects in this article, and shows what we alienate aspects, and how our emerging technology to bring us together.  

        Williams supports families being alienated by citing authors like Sherry Turkle, a professor of social studies of science and technology at the Massachusetts institute of Technology, and the author of “Alone Together; Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other” (97), who is worried about the frequent use of digital media leading to isolation. She saw the connection between people because they spend more time with their diminishing technological toys. He argues about families being together by citing, Lutz Koepnick, a media professor at Washington University in St. Louis who says, "The transformation of the American living room into a multiscreen communication and entertainment hub” promises to “change our domestic sphere Individual family members might find themselves contently connected to parallel worlds almost all the time" (95). Furthermore, Williams supports his point of view on this great continent and study similar results like “2009 survey of 4000 people by a Canadian market research company indicating that people believe technology is bringing the family together, not pulling it apart by a substantial margin” (98). He reminds us that the proliferation of devices and media options makes it easier for family member to pursue their own individual time. He strengthens his argument with reference to Ronald Levant, psychology, University of Akron, who believes that such behavior can be understood as a health professor’s symbol work, rather than exhibiting abnormal relationship.  

            The main purpose for the article written by Williams is to redefined quality time. He argues for this by saying that the right direction for family time are new technologies. According to the article, one mom says, “An evening like that can bring more closeness than a night spent huddling over a board game back in the days of analog.” (99). He agrees with this and believes Barry Wellman’s research that “technology is bringing the family together, not pulling it apart.” (98). The implication of the author’s arguments is that technology isn’t reducing a family’s quality time, but also brings the family closer, and technology is good for family’s relationship. 

               Williams has a different view on the meaningful relationship compared to the public’s view. In my opinion, most of the people think verbally communicating is the only way to build a meaningful relationship instead of having a conversation through the virtual world. Although these families are in the same room together, and they may share some content, but their pointless activity doesn’t make their relationships better. They are not really “communicating”. These families find a new way to enjoy their own time instead of quality time together. The relationship they are building does not make them better. Quality time needs every member of the family actually sharing with each other on a deeper level. Instead of putting the smart phone as a pacifier for teenagers, parents should spend time on talking with their kids even couples should do the same things. Spending a night on the network world doesn’t build steady and long relationships. 

                        In conclusion, Williams used a profound way to describe this new idea of quality family time with his critical thinking skills, language, tone and structure, but he did not explain what quality time means for the American family. Everyone has their own definition of quality time. Williams shows both sides of the technologically isolated areas, and in which some families use technology as a means to share their experiences in a positive way. Williams tried to provide the evidence that technology is affecting the few family’s quality time who can afford to hold a positive view of the new technology.