[a习作temp] argument196 难题自己觉得分析的还可以 [复制链接]

Leonie
UID: 2347447

新手上路

Rank: 1

声望: 0
寄托币: 45
注册时间: 2007-6-8
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-8-2 16:43:25 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

sorry，刚才写错了题号

这篇argument没有范文，且许多人说是难题，很多人还作了许多我看不懂的数学运算。我自己觉得思路还是对的，语言不怎么样。贴出来听听大家意见
另外我有一篇issue一篇arguement贴上来N年都没人给拍，郁闷死了。难道就因为我是新手所以没人理？8月8号要考试了，每天还有上班实在是没有时间多做准备。希望得到各位的鼓励。

"Sadly, widespread negative images of businesspeople have been created in large part by television. Consider the fact that, although they make up a mere 10 percent of the characters in dramatic roles on television, businesspeople are responsible for about one-fifth of all the crime on television shows. In fact, in a recent survey of television producers, only 35 percent of the television roles for businesspeople were viewed as positive ones."

The speaker concludes that the widespread negative images of businesspeople have been created basically by television. To support this assertion, he points that businesspeople consist 10 percent of the TV dramatic characters while are responsible for 1/5 of the crimes shown on TV. As a further support, he also cites a survey among TV producers, showing that only 35% of businesspeople on TV were positive roles. A close scrutiny of this assertion reveals it these facts lend little support to this conclusion.

Firstly, the fact that businesspeople make up a mere 10 percent of the characters in dramatic roles while account for 1/5 or all crime on TV show does not justify that TV creates negative images of businesspeople. The speaker confuses the dramatic show and all types of TV shows. Moreover, the speaker offers no detail on what percentage of the 10% dramatic businesspeople are in positive or negative, or neutral roles respectively. Besides, he provides no information on what kind of TV program that 1/5 crime rate involves. Probably these TV shows include news and some legal shows which just reflect the natural truth. If that is the case, then it is what businesspeople really do, not TV shows makes them negative images.

Secondly, the speaker overlooks the possibility that TV producers in the recent survey might not necessarily represent all producers. It is highly possible that in TV shows produced by producers out of this survey, the percentage of businesspeople being viewed as positive ones is much higher. Without ruling out this possible scenario, the speaker's conclusion is unpersuasive.

Thirdly, the fact that 35% of television roles for businesspeople were positive is not equal to saying 75% of them were negative roles. It is possible that the remaining majority were neutral roles--neither bad nor good, which actually accomplishes nothing in undermining business people’s images.

Finally, the speaker unfairly assumes that the negative images of businesspeople have been largely created by TV. There are many media and art forms other than TV that can influence the image of a person: films, newspapers, magazines and Internet. So without ruling out other explanations, the speaker's sweeping conclusion is problematic.

In sum, the speaker's conclusion is specious. To bolster his argument, he must provider dear evidence that TV shows do distort the image of businesspersons and that compared with other forms of art and media, TV shows account for the majority of this distortion. To better evaluate his conclusion, I need to know whether producers in the survey could typify all their peers.