The article talks about the media's role in present-day culture. It tries to say that people are constantly bombarded by images, which skews how we see the world and how we perceive images. The author also tries to make the point that despite all the visual media, people's visual media literacy has not been affected positiviley. Immediately I am inclined to disagree with whatever the author is saying because their way of writing is over the top and clunky, as well as being undescriptive and lacking substance. I think the author spends too much time worrying about young people's visual literacy when it should be argued that the younger generations are set up to be more visually literate (and most likely are) than the authors themselves. From personal experience, I can say that nearly every person I meet my age is more visually literate in the ways of media than someone over the age of 30. The author ends the article with, "People, and especially young people, are not equipped with the necessary critical viewing and thinking skills to survive it. " "It" being the "new digital world". I think this author needs their brain checked if they think that young people are the ones who need help navigating the digital world. Being raised from birth in a world that was already digital, I think it is safe to say that my entire generation is better equipped than the author. All the forms of media that we have been exposed to have been doing all the VL training that the author talks about since we were born. The internet, video games, movies, and books, are just some of the ways our generation has built up visual literacy and I would argue we have more critical thinking and media skills than the author gives us credit for. All in all, I think this article is a bunch of boloney and the only valuable insight it gave was at the beginning it compared today's image culture to how print media defined the 19th century, which I feel is accurate.