I'm skeptical about the value of the "social mapping" that Johnson talks about in his article. I agree that it is considerably more difficult to follow along with the plots of shows like "24" without understanding the interpersonal dynamics of the characters, and that because of the complexities of those interactions, one must exercise one's brain more fully than watching most other TV shows. But Johnson also says in his article that when we "play along" in front of these shows "The content of the game you're playing, admittedly, suffers from a shallow premise and a highly artificial environment".
Does watching a "Reality Show" that is essentially a complete fabrication teach us anything about our own interactions? Does interacting digitally with strangers help us learn about face-to-face interaction?

(Rant alert)
I guess part of my skepticism relates to my inability to find any interest whatsoever in the lives, loves, and foibles of Paula Abdul, Paris Hilton, or Jerry Springer. Are these really the role-models that we want to learn social interaction from?
-In Hansell's article he states "The lesson here is that on MySpace there is no distinction between personal and mass media".

I fully appreciate the ability these days of gathering information from a myriad of sources and points of view, and not having to rely only on TV or newspapers for "news or facts", however it makes it increasingly more difficult to parse the "truth" from
opinion, hyperbole, or even subliminal marketing ploys. Quite often it seems to me that people are offering "too much information"