Out-Of-Class Assignment On Reality TV

In the out-[Need a title?]of-class assignment “The Appeal of the Real: Why Reality Television is so Popular”, the author, an undergraduate in an academic writing class seeks to argue that reality television benefits both its participants and viewers more than it harms them. However, the academic writing is ineffective in conveying the arguments the author wishes to present. The essay presented by the author lacks characteristics of an Aristotelian[Truly Aristotle?] academic writing, The main source of noise comes from the fallacies and weak or irrelevant arguments presented as well as the linguistic expressions of the author. As the author defers from the norm of academic writing, the essay is hindered in its effectiveness to persuade its readers.
In the essay, the author presents three popular reality television programs as arguments to support his thesis. The arguments, however, are undeveloped as the author over concentrates on describing the reality television programs. As a result, the arguments are hastily added and become weak or contains fallacies.[Since the whole paragraph is about fallacies, just say it contains fallacies or it becomes weak since it contains fallacies- -] In the second paragraph, the author states that “viewers enjoy sharing and celebrating the triumph of an unknown performer on his way to becoming a star.” This claim is a hasty generalisation of reality television viewers as a whole, and is weak in proving the benefits reaped by viewers from watching reality television programs. The author adds “To the losers, the truth hurts but only for a while; soon enough it heals. The show builds character.” As this argument is an opinion of the author that is neither substantiated nor explained, it is weak in supporting the author’s thesis. The noise in the arguments prevents it from convincing and persuading readers in favour of the author’s thesis. This lack of strong arguments is prevalent in the essay, resulting in a limitation in the essay’s
In the essay, the author uses numerous informal personal expressions, including the use of contracted forms. In paragraph one, the author uses the expression “The sky is not falling. This is television, not Carnegie Hall”. Such use of analogy makes the essay informal, against the norm of academic writing. It is also a poor analogy, considering the fact that the author is submitting the assignment in Singapore, thus the relation of television to Carnegie Hall in New York is not realised easily by local readers. [Let me know if you want to keep this point. If not we can remove it as well.][Ok, adopted.]The author uses expressions such as “self-proclaimed guardians” and “How different is finding someone to date and maybe developing a relationship with by appearing on a television show from answering an ad in the personal column of the newspaper?” By doing so, the author shows an inability to be objective about his arguments. As a result of the author’s personal opinions and strong emotions, the essay lacks distinction between fact and thought. With no distinction between personal opinion and the information the author wishes to convey, the argument for the thesis becomes less concise. Conversely, the use of contracted forms throughout the essay such as “don’t” and “it’s” also adds to the informal tone of the essay. Thus it is less effective in persuading the