For 3 points, write up to 300 words to justify the case for one side of the following debate
Pro: The United States needs to invest substantial amounts of money in public broadcasting,
just like most other established democracies. A major non-profit public broadcasting system
would present balanced views of the issues to the American people and give viewers a better
understanding of politics. Political polarization would be reduced by exposing everyone to
serious discussion of public policy as opposed to todays focus on sensationalizing stories for
Con: Investing more money in non-profit public broadcasting would be a big waste of taxpayer
dollars. People tune into news programs for entertainment as well as for information. Americans
prefer media sensationalism over serious balanced discussion of the issues that is the hallmark
of public broadcasting. We cannot reduce political polarization by exposing everyone to boring
television news. People will just change the channel to something more interesting.
For 2 more points, write a response of up to 150 words to something posted on the other side of
Discussion Post Expectation:
– Clearly state which side of the debate you are on.
– Provide at least 3 arguments for why you chose the respective side.
– If you have difficulty in coming up with 3 arguments, provide additional examples (with appropriate references/citations) that illustrate your understanding of the debate topic and support your view on the debate.
– Stick to the debate at hand. While background to the issue is important, keep it concise and focus on arguing why you chose the respective side.
Response Post Expectation:
– Respond to someone who has the opposite stand relative to your view.
– Provide at least 2 counter arguments referencing the arguments made by the person you are responding to. Don’t just say that you do not agree with their point of view. Support your disagreement with appropriate counter arguments (at least 2)
– If you have difficulty in coming up with 2 counter-arguments, provide additional examples (with appropriate references/citations) that counter the view of the person you are responding to.