Technology has become an indispensable part of our life-style today, but it is considered by many to be 

a double-edged sword. When it comes to youngsters the situation becomes more critical. Many parents s
ee the technology more as a bane than a boon.
Nevertheless, in an article titled, "The digital Parent Trap," Eliana Dockterman tries to provide compelli
ng facts to explain early exposure of the youth to tecnological advances and electronic gadgets.The conv
incing argument is further backed by objective data such as estimates, authoritative university research 
studies and rational explanation coupled with some stylistic elements.

To begin with, Eliana uses some statistics to illustrate how common technology use is in American scho
ols. In doing so, she gives figures and numbers (27% using tablets, 43% using smartphones and 52%
using laptops). She also points to Los Angeles Country School as a case in point where by 2014 $30
million has been spent to provide 640,000 children with iPads. She also puts out counterarguments to
furnish the readers with a more comprehensive picture though.
Grunwald research firm's findings show that there is no consensus among parents in school curricula on
the employability of electronic devices. She also refers to certain adverse effects such as cyberbullying,
depression, insecurity, obesity, hyperactivity, aggression, and attention deficit to voice the opinions of
the antagonists on the move
In reality, she tries to prove her impartiality by presenting both the pros and cons of the change to make 
a fair judgment in coping with the usefulness of technology at schools.

She also mentions an updated research finding and recent studies by SRI and MIT to stabilize her stance 
on early use of technology.A 
social network website like Facebook has proven to deliver excellent learning opportunities; “Online,
kids can engage with specialized communities of interest.” In fact, recent findings by a non-
profit research firm SRI indicate that in school logic exams, children who played some trouble-shooting 
computer games outpaced others. Likewise, children who played a historic computer game excelled in th
e history class test.
MIT research shows that "engagement" is the fundamental reason for this intellectual hegemony. In addi
tion, scholastic findings show that learning is closely linked
to doing something instead of reading, listening, or watching something.
By presenting objective scholastic facts, the argument is quite effective in getting the reader into followi
ng the stance of the au thor.
Nonetheless, the author tries to sell to the reader the idea that, contrary to the unfounded belief in two-
hour screen-time damages, early tech exposure can improve the intellectual growth of our children, and s
uccessful surfing on a computer or tablet can be far more brain-stimulating than vegetating out in front o
f the TV.

Eventually, she is trying to trigger fears of readers about the job opportunities for their children in the fut
ure. The logic is straightforward and simple.
She addresses the parents and holds them responsible for the likely failures of children.2 First, she make
s us believe that it is a competitive world and is a must to stay complete.
Secondly, she avers that computer literacy is unquestionable in order to keep up with the latest job vacan
cies in different fields and if our children fail to do so, they will be left behind others.
Indeed, by resorting to the feelings of parents ' insecurity about the future, she convinces the readers that 
the success of our children later in life is interwoven intractably with their exposure to early tech use.
Ultimately, to be more compassionate, she advises the parents to regulate the wild exposure of children
to electronic gadgets and to apply sound screening on objectionable materials. She also asks parents to
keep away from parochial views in order to allow their children to flourish their potential through tech
experience of early use.

All in all, by using facts, applying logic, and using some words cleverly, Eliana succeeds in putting forw
ard a cogent argument to cast doubt on negative assumptions regarding early use of the computer and pe
rsuade her readers that parents had best let their children benefit from early exposure to technological ad
vances.