Violence

People are often more attracted to the gruesome than to positive experiences. There's a reason why media coverage focusing on negative events gets more coverage, and why true crime shows are so popular. When viewing violent or dangerous events, people often feel compelled to keep looking rather than turn away. Dr. John Mayer, a clinical psychologist, places the reason as part of the survival instinct: "This acts as a preventive mechanism to give us information on the dangers to avoid and to flee from." Naturally, when something potentially disastrous occurs right in front of us, the first response is to find out more so that we can avoid the danger. It's a sense of morbid curiosity, where information about danger is balanced with the unpleasantness of viewing it. It's a balance of learning more about danger to avoid death and dealing with the graphicness of such danger. Even when we aren't confronted with danger directly, seeing what happens when facing destruction gives people a chance to confront their fears in a safe environment. This is why people are so drawn to violence even when it's occurring through the distance of a screen. With this distance, there would still be somewhat of a survival mechanism, but less so considering people can quickly recognize that they are not actually in danger. Rather, the distance gives people a chance to confront the reality of death without directly experiencing it. It gives you a chance to think about what you would do in that situation, whether you would be able to survive or not. It is also still a function of learning about danger, a way to glean more knowledge about how to avoid it yourself.

More Links:

Dr. John Mayer interview: https://www.nbcnews.com/better/health/science-behind-why-we-can-t-look-away-disasters-ncna804966

Psychology Today - Interest in Crime: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/decoding-madness/202109/why-are-we-so-interested-in-crime-stories

Vertical Farming

    Vertical farming has the potential to become a key component of agriculture, considering its benefits in making fresh produce more accessible.

    One of the largest advantages that vertical farms provide is reliable food production. Vertical farming is done in facilities that are completely climate-controlled. All factors of the farming process are controlled and can be adjusted accordingly, making crop yields far greater and more reliable than in rural farming. Source B adds that "crops produced by traditional farming are limited by geographic region and seasonal changes." Because of this, certain areas don't have access to fresh produce. Even regions that do have nearby farming aren't guaranteed such access, as Source A points out that "swaths of the country wither in the heat and drought of climate change." As such, weather changes completely out of control can drastically affect access to food for thousands of people, making traditional farming unreliable in comparison to newer farming techniques. Sources A and B would agree that vertical farming provides a far greater advantage in that food can be provided year-round without worry of environmental changes potentially damaging crops. Fewer regions would have to worry about access to fresh produce since vertical farming provides more consistent production of food and can be implemented in a greater variety of regions, both urban and rural. Thus, integrating vertical farming into agriculture provides an advantage to everyone, increasing access to something that should be a universal right: food. 

    While vertical farming provides greater advantages in the long run, it should be acknowledged that starting such farms can be energy-consuming. Currently, according to source D, "container farms...use...about 8 times the electricity used by an average San Francisco apartment." It's true that energy consumption could be a major environmental problem associated with vertical farming, but this agricultural technique is greener in other aspects as well. Source E touts the environmental advantages of vertical farming in its use of "recycled water and nutrients" and its potential to "completely eliminate the need for pesticides and herbicides." Recycling water and reducing environmental contamination from pesticides will have long-term impacts that will prove vertical farming's green reputation as valid. Even with its large energy consumption, Source D acknowledges that there is potential to "offset the enormous sums of electricity they use by powering them with renewable energy - especially solar panels." Source D tries to spin this advancement as negative, arguing that these farms are "trying to use the sun to replace the sun," but that's largely an attempt to scare the audience away from vertical farming. Even if vertical farming doesn't use natural sunlight, it doesn't mean that the system is ineffective. If anything, using solar panels to power vertical farms will provide an even bigger advantage by reducing one of the biggest flaws of vertical farming. Now, vertical farms can provide the advantages of reliable food without contributing to environmental damage.