When it comes to creativity, people tend to think that we are less creative than our ancestors. In fact, it becomes more difficult for us to make scientific breakthrough, which is true for adults. So, how about children? From my observation, children’s creativity decreases, too. Comparing with my childhood, my nephews’ childhoods are sort of boring and they seldom come up with new, funny ideas. I believe that we can attribute the decreasing creativity on the development of technology partly.

First and foremost, technology leads children to pay attention to the virtual world rather than the natural environment. The natural environment benefits children’s perception, which is vital for the development of creativity. Once children expose to the natural environment, they will observe the different scenery. This difference will inspire their perception and creativity. I used to take part in a natural education project. This project functioned as the compensation for the loss of the natural experience and benefited creativity. However, this is far from enough.

Besides, technology will deprive children of creativity. Take myself as an example. When I was young, televisions and dramas were unavailable. My friends and I would make up the characters we liked and play our self-created drama, which was a wonderful opportunity for creativity. Nevertheless, with the development of television technology, televisions become affordable for most families. There exists so many dramas for children to choose that they will not play their own drama like what we did in the past.

I know that most children will not grow as creative as great scientists like Einstein. But technology development makes creativity harder. We cannot merely blame the decline of children’s creativity on technology. What we need to think is the degree to which we should expose our children on technology and how to minimize the negative influence of technology.

Television advertising plays an important role in our daily life. It may take effect to appeal to a certain audience and affect people’s choice. Nevertheless, when the products are specialized for young children, the situation is different. Young children cannot make the choice and it is the parents who decide to choose the product or not. So, should we allow television advertising directed towards these young children? My answer is Yes. We need television advertising.

It is known to us that in a market, time will help prove the quality of products and decide which one is the better. Because the preference from consumers will accumulate slowly, which plays the same role as the advertisement. The drawback of this pattern is that it takes a long time, and the market cannot remove bad products timely because it also needs time to prove. However, advertising accelerates the process. People tend to choose products with the advertisement because advertisement needs money. The more money the advertisement costs, the richer the company is. We know that a company’s wealth can only accumulate by selling products, which is the prove for the quality. In a word, advertising means that the company’s products are more reliable. Therefore, television advertising saves time for market choice. Without advertising, it were more risky for parents to choose products for young children. Besides, though parents always make the choice for young children, some elements can also draw young children’s attention. Hence, young children can also make their own decision based on their preference. In this case, television advertising is an important route. Different from parents, young children may focus more on the package rather than the product. But it does not matter too much.

In fact, I cannot come up with any reasons that television advertising directed towards young children should not be allowed. Young children are also consumers and can make the decision–though with the help of their parents. Television advertising is a healthy market activity, no matter who are the products’ target consumers.

Balancing between what we like and what we should do remains a challenge for most people. It is especially true when we must do what we have little interest in. It alos seems that more people pay too much attention to personal enjoyment-doing things rather than things they should do. However, from my observation, most people keep spending enough time doing what they should do.

There are many reasons for people to do things they should do. For example, students should finish homework to avoid parental punishment. Here the potential penality may serve as a warning. Also, adults should focus on their work and finish it satisfactorily to get promotion. In this case, promotion plays the role as an inspiration. No matter what the motivation is, if people realize that they can get what they want or they can avoid what they hate, they will choose to do what they should do.

Take my roommate as an example. She is the least hardworking student in our doom and it is rare for her to do anything related to academics. However, every time our teachers give certain assignments, she will take careful notes and finish them before the deadline. This contributes to her excellence in most courses. It is obvious that she spends much time on personal enjoyment-doing things like watching TV. But it does not mean that she forgets to do things she should do. Another example comes from my father. He enjoys playing computer games so much that it’s hard to imagine one day he forgets this entertainment. Nevertheless, this never influences his work negatively. Because he knows that as an employee, he must put work before entertainment.

I have to admit that it is a trend that people begin spending more and more time on what they like. However, it is of no doubt that people still devote enough energy to what they should do. Whether there is a punishment or an award may have something to do with this choice. But we must remember that it is people who make this determination.