After reading two of the articles, write a one-paragraph response to each. Consider the following questions for each editorial [your commentary need not be in this order]:
-How does the author of the news article support a specific position on the issue? Provide an example of this slanted perspective.
-What is your personal opinion on the subject under debate? Why do you support/ refute the article's points? [ex. Cigarettes- Why would you take the job/ not take the job?; Locked away- How old do you think an individual needs to be to tell right from wrong?; Global warming- What does your diet mostly consist of?; Distraction- Who do you know that texts while driving?]
-What statistics/ collected data/ pictures/ etc. does the author choose to make his/ her point(s) in the editorial? How are they effective?
In the article driving to Distraction I thing that texting while driving is very dangerous. This should be illegal in all states because it is a very large safety hazard for other drivers and yourself. There is evidence that if you text while you drive you have a larger chance of dyeing. There are many cases where the author shows that death has come from texting. The author really shows you the message that texting while driving can cause death.
Also in the article Should I take a job Promoting Cigarettes, and I do not agree with the person. The person needed a job when he was offered one so he should take it. Also if he doesn't work in the tobacco company someone else will. Also promoting means that he is trying to get people to try tobacco but working there just means he is making the products. I believe that having a job is more important than liking it or not. Not may people enjoy their jobs but they do it because they have to.
No comments:
Post a Comment