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?
Driven To Distraction
In my opinion, driving while texting is a terrible thing to do. It not only risks the life of yourself and the passengers, but also the innocent lives of others on the road. I feel that the law passed is justified in the sense that texting while driving is as bad as driving drunk. Both are very irresponsible and can end up very fatal. It is said that texting while driving is equivalent to driving with a blood alcohol level of .08. Therefore, I do think that driving while texting is a horrible thing to do.
Should I take A Job Promoting Cigarettes?
After reading this article, in my opinion, I feel that taking a job promoting a death of many people is not a good choice. Cigarettes kill 400,000 people a year in the United States alone. If I were to promote this, i would feel guilty of these deaths. Any person should not break their morals for money, because you have to make a stand instead of just giving in. Therefore, I would not take a job that promotes cigarettes.
No comments:
Post a Comment