Evaluation Assignment

Lesson 11-Evaluation Assignments

#1
In the article ‘Keep The Drinking Age At 21,’ by Chicago Times, I believe that the authors main purpose was to express the dangers of lowering the drinking age to 18, and how that might affect society. The author says “Lowering the drinking age would transfer responsibility--and in some cases legal liability--from colleges and their presidents to the immature shoulders of 18-year-olds.” Even though the author is not quite clear on which position or side they’re taking, I can make an inference and state that the authors stance is against lowering the legal drinking age.
I can’t say that I think the article is fully ‘reliable,’ since this article can be considered a one-sided stance, or in other cases, biased. Considering that this article was created by an author from Chicago Times; which is a news company, should not have biased information. Journalists are supposed to stance on both sides, unless, under one circumstance, it is in an opinion only column. Yes, I study up on my regulations for
Journalism. It’s what I plan to be when I finish with college. Back to the the assignment, here is an example that supports my thinking. “If an 18-year-old is old enough to fight in war, he or she should also enjoy the right to drink.” This is what lost me. Is the author taking sides of wanting to change the legal drinking age, or not? The title clearly says,
“Keep The Drinking Age At 21.” Now I am not saying that the author fully implies that their for the change, but things they’ve said made me think.
“That would be lethal and unwise.” This would be an example of how the author incorporated their own opinion into their article, which once again makes this biased, and one-sided. Opinions are not facts, there for they cannot be proven. In society, people always give their opinions, and one-sided information to others. The news companies are the worst when being biased. Not saying that all journalists are like this, but for the most part, a majority of them are. The author also makes a prediction that kids under 21 don’t drink because it’s illegal, and that if they lowered the age, they still wouldn’t consume any alcohol. What the author said had stopped me in my tracks. I received mix signals form the author. How can one predict what others will do, and try to pass it off as a fact. This cannot be proven, which also makes this an opinion. You cannot prove it. The author is subjected to being biased again in their own article.
Overall, in this article, there are many assertions; opinions being passed off as facts. As
I’ve already stated, the author of this article uses mostly propaganda techniques the article. The logical pattern used is cause-effect. There was a cause for ever effect, and vise-versa. For example, “Kids under 21 don’t drink because it’s illegal. And they won’t stop drinking if it’s legal.” This is my final statement. I do believe that the author is confused with which side to take, or is not literate enough to come to a conclusion.

#2

Lesson 11-Evaluation Assignments

“Social media is not about being everywhere, you just have to be great where you are.” I think that the author of this article ‘7 Deadly Sins Of Social Media’ is trying to inform their readers that you cannot be everywhere at once. The author of the article also implements the tool of comedy in the writing. For example, the subheadings in bold gave me a hit of inference that the author was being funny, or sarcastic. “Want to not suck at social media at social media.”
The information from the text is not reliable, because the article is in-fact biased, and one-sided. The author states that if you don’t want to suck at social media, then you should take advice, and follow the rules of not doing the 7 sins of social media.
“Gluttony, Pride, Sloth, Greed, Lust, Envy, and Wrath.” Each of these deadly sins consumes social users. I cannot sit here and say that I have not at-least sinned to one of the sins of social media. I have in infer that most of the social users have at-least sinned a few times in the social media standards. Let’s cut to the chase and agree that it’s all bad. (Yes, my opinion, which I am using freely)
The author does not state or imply their main idea. The stance is neutral. Then again, the author takes the position for social media, but overall, he or she is against it. In the beginning of the article, the authors says that social media is a sin and that there are seven deadly sins. Again, in my opinion, I think the authors is against social media, however, I could be wrong. I believe the author has subjected themselves to a onesided article.
Like I earlier mentioned, the author used a cause-effect pattern along side with a bit of comedy. Sounds like a wise crack to me. “Don’t try to have presence without being present.” This excerpt from the article helps support me in my overall evaluation of the text, and is what I believe to be the logical pattern is.