Argumentative Essay-- TV Viewing #Final

It is indisputable that the invention of television has brought a tremendous change to the life of its audience. The population of households in developed countries for the nonce who own at least one television set has exceeded ninety per cent (Sharif 1999). According to American Time Use Survey (2003), average hour spent by Americans per day in watching television is approximately 2.5 hours. Sociologists and experts are bickered over the issue of whether television is a blessing or a curse when there are claims that extensive television viewing has eaten into our lives. Correspondingly, I strongly assert that television viewing brings more advantages than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking skills, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers.

First, television viewing encourages critical thinking, a skill that is indispensable in the society and schools. Through this amusing and interesting medium, it provides food for thought regarding issues over a variety of human problems ranging from globalization to homelessness. It also demonstrates subjects like science and geography in a distinctive and diverting way that helps learners to understand the information well (Leigh 2001). A case in point, families can comment on how a dispute is settled in programmes and consequently discuss over possible measures to better resolve the conflict (Sharif 1999). Accordingly, critical thinking is developed during the discussion over an issue.

In addition, there is no doubt that television allows access to the latest local and world issues (Rutherford 2002). People receive first-hand information on the latest events around the world via news programmes aired on television. Subsequently, young people become more aware of global issues and this indirectly inspires them to participate in certain favourable activities such as charity works (Sharif 1999). According to Rutherford (2002), the knowledge attained can also motivate public to be actively involved in the issues risen, thus applying pressure on authorities like councils, major companies and even national governments. This will urge the decision-makers to deliberate the responses from the audience and by doing this, it forms a force for democracy. Hence, it is assured that television viewing is beneficial when it connects people with world’s issues.

Furthermore, television viewing is literally beneficial in the sense that it assuages and relaxes its viewers after a hard day at work or at school. The rationale is that viewers can have a peace of mind and get prepared to focus on their next task. Moreover, by engrossing in a programme, they temporarily neglect their tension and frustration that resulted from the rising requirements and anticipations put on them. This is especially vital in helping them to regroup and gain a more balanced view over certain problems (Rutherford 2002). This can be further evidenced by the UK Time Use Survey (2000) which indicates that full-time workers spend their leisure mostly on television, video and radio. Ergo, watching television is definitely advantageous as it entertains its viewers.

All in all, I am in full support of the claim that television viewing brings more advantages than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking skills, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers. Nevertheless, reports about television tend to concentrate on its adverse impacts (Leigh 2001). It is undeniable that television viewing can be harmful, yet not to the extent that it is nonsensical. Indeed, it is up to the viewers themselves to watch moderately or else television could be a scientific monster after all. Apparently, if viewers can use the medium intelligently and with discrimination over the choice of programmes, television can play a significant role in promoting positive values.

Aus News 5: Girl, 16, runs away with man twice her age

TANYA van der Merwe wants her 16-year-old daughter back - and the clock's ticking.

Mrs van der Merwe leaves the country in eight days but her daughter Cyleste Marks has run away with a boyfriend Philip Davis, more than twice her age.

"We do not know where she is. We do not know if she is safe. We know she is with a 34-year-old man I have never met and that she is in a relationship with this man," Ms van der Merwe said.

"Under the circumstances, I just want my daughter back."

Ms van der Merwe, forced to return to her native South Africa because her Australian work visa is being cancelled, is pleading for her daughter's safe return.

Cyleste has been missing for four weeks and if she does not fly home to Johannesburg with her mother, the immigration department has warned she will be an illegal immigrant and face the consequences.

Cyleste began dating a man she called her soul mate after meeting him at a butcher shop in Carlingford, Sydney, where she worked as a casual. On April 24, at 7.10pm, she walked out of the house with just the clothes on her back.

"The phone rang, she went into the basement and disappeared. That was the last time I saw my daughter," Ms van der Merwe said, adding that Mr Davis had sent SMS messages saying he couldn't live without seeing Cyleste.

Attempts to contact the pair have been fruitless: Cyleste has not been on Facebook and has only spoken to her mother briefly to tell her she was "far away".

"My heart was cut down," she said.

Ms van der Merwe said she feared her daughter had been encouraged to stay in Australia despite her visa expiring.

"I need to know where she is. We have booked our flights on the 27th of this month," she said.

"She is going to be listed as an illegal immigrant, she cannot work, she is on the run. I want to know if my daughter is safe.

"She will be deported, they will put her in a holding cell and she'll be questioned. He can be charged for harbouring an illegal. I don't want this for my daughter."

NSW Police cannot help because, legally, 16-year-old Cyleste is old enough to live away from her parents.

"The police know me by name but there is nothing they can do," Ms van der Merwe told The Daily Telegraph.

"The door is always open to my daughter. I am so worried about her."

A Department of Immigration and Citizenship spokesman said it was the obligation of all visa-holders in Australia to abide by the conditions of that visa.

"Any person who overstays becomes an unlawful non-citizen and will become the subject of compliance action of the department," he said.

"We would strongly urge anyone who has knowledge of a person unlawfully having overstayed a visa, or is intending to overstay the visa, to contact the Department of Immigration and Citizenship on 131 881 to discuss their concerns."

Argumentative Essay-- TV Viewing #2

It is indisputable that the invention of television has brought a tremendous change to the life of its audience. The population of households in developed countries for the nonce who own at least one television set has exceeded ninety per cent (Sharif 1999). According to American Time Use Survey (2003), average hour spent by Americans per day in watching television is approximately 2.5 hours. Sociologists and experts are bickered over the issue of whether television is a blessing or a curse when there are claims that extensive television viewing has eaten into our lives. Correspondingly, I strongly assert that television viewing brings more advantages than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers.

First, television viewing encourages critical thinking, a skill that is indispensable in the society and schools. Through this amusing and interesting medium, it provides food of thought regarding issues over a variety of human problems ranging from globalization to homelessness. It also demonstrates subjects like science and geography in a distinctive and diverting way that helps learners to understand the information well (Leigh 2001). A case in point, families can comment on how a dispute is settled in programmes and consequently discuss over possible measures to better resolve the conflict (Sharif 1999). Accordingly, critical thinking is developed during the discussion over an issue.

In addition, there is no doubt that television allows access to the latest local and world issues (Rutherford 2002). People receive first-hand information on the latest events around the world via news programmes aired on television. Subsequently, young people become more aware of global issues and this indirectly inspires them to participate in certain favourable activities such as charity works (Sharif 1999). According to Rutherford (2002), the knowledge attained can also motivate public to be actively involved in the issues risen, thus applying pressure on authorities like councils, major companies and even national governments. This will urge the decision-makers to deliberate the responses from the audience and by doing this, it forms a force for democracy. Hence, it is assured that television viewing is beneficial when it connects people with world’s issues.

Furthermore, television viewing is literally beneficial in the sense that it assuages and relaxes its viewers after a hard day at work or at school. The rationale is that viewers can have a peace of mind and get prepared to focus on their next task. Moreover, by engrossing in a programme, they temporarily neglect their tension and frustration that resulted from the rising requirements and anticipations put on them. This is especially vital in helping them to regroup and gain a more balanced view over certain problems (Rutherford 2002). This can be further evidenced by the UK Time Use Survey (2000) which indicates that full-time workers spend their leisure mostly on television, video and radio. Ergo, watching television is definitely advantageous as it entertains its viewers.

All in all, I am in full support of the claim that television viewing brings more advantages than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers. Nevertheless, reports about television tend to concentrate on its adverse impacts (Leigh 2001). It is undeniable that television viewing can be harmful, yet not to the extent that it is nonsensical. Indeed, it is up to the viewers themselves to watch moderately or else television could be a scientific monster after all. Apparently, if viewers can use the medium intelligently and with discrimination over the choice of programmes, television can play a significant role in promoting positive values.

Argumentative Essay-- TV Viewing #1

It is indisputable that the invention of television has brought a tremendous change to the life of its audience. Nonce, the population of households in developed countries who own at least one television set has exceeded ninety per cent (Sharif 1999). According to American Time Use Survey (2003), average hour spent by Americans per day in watching television is approximately 2.5 hours. Sociologists and experts are bickered over the issue of whether television is a blessing or a curse when there are claims that extensive television viewing has eaten into our lives. Correspondingly, I strongly assert that television viewing brings more benefits than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers.

First, television viewing encourages critical thinking, a skill that is indispensable in the society and schools. Through this amusing and interesting medium, it provides food of thought regarding issues over a variety of human problems ranging from globalization to homelessness. It also demonstrates subjects like science and geography in a peculiar and diverting way that helps learners to understand the information well (Leigh 2001). A case in point, families can comment on how a dispute is settled in programmes and consequently discuss over possible measures to better resolve the conflict (Sharif 1999). Accordingly, critical thinking is developed during the discussion over an issue.

In addition, it is literally true that television allows access to the latest local and world issues (Rutherford 2002). People receive first-hand information on the latest events around the world via news programmes aired on television. Subsequently, young people can become more aware of global issues and this may inspire them to participate in favourable activities such as charity works (Sharif 1999). According to Rutherford (2002), the knowledge attained can also motivate public to be actively involved in the issues risen, thus applying pressure on authorities like councils, major companies and even national governments. This will urge the decision-makers to deliberate the responses from the audience and by doing this, it forms a force for democracy. Hence, television viewing is beneficial when it connects people with world’s issues.

Furthermore, television viewing is beneficial in the sense that it assuages and relaxes its viewers after a hard day at work or at school. The rationale is that viewers can have a peace of mind and get prepared to focus on their next task. Moreover, by engrossing in a programme, they can temporarily neglect their tension and foiling that resulted from the rising requirements and anticipations put on them. This is especially vital in helping them to regroup and gain a more equivalent view over certain problems (Rutherford 2002). This can be further evidenced by the UK Time Use Survey (2000) which indicates that full-time workers spend their leisure mostly on television, video and radio. Ergo, watching television is advantageous as it could entertain its viewers.

All in all, I am in full support of the claim that television viewing brings more advantages than disadvantages as it develops critical thinking, informs people about global issues and acts as a relaxing tool for its viewers. Nevertheless, reports about television tend to concentrate on its adverse impacts (Leigh 2001). We cannot deny that television viewing can be harmful, yet not to the extent that it is nonsensical. Indeed, it is up to the viewers themselves to watch moderately or else television could be a scientific monster after all. Apparently, if viewers can use the medium intelligently and with discrimination over the choice of programmes, television can play a significant role in promoting positive values.

Argumentative Essay-- Junk Food #Final

Should the sale of junk food in school canteens be banned?

The term ‘junk food’ refers to any food that is perceived to be unhealthy and of low nutritional value (Smith 2005). The issue of junk food in schools has been raised when it is being accused for leading to the increase in childhood obesity. ‘The nutritional value of food eaten by Australian children has been falling progressively over the past 30 years’ (Tran 2005, p. 6). Accordingly, I strongly agree that the sale of junk food in school canteens should be banned as it will degrade students’ health level, cause behavioural problems as well as create litter problems in the school compound.

First, junk food is indisputably bad for health. Most of the junk foods are of low nutritional value. For instance, chips, confectionery, soft drinks and hamburgers contain a high level of fat, salt and sugar which could aggravate the health of schoolchildren (Health Foundation 2005). Besides, according to Weekend News (2005), junk foods like instant noodles and chocolate bars have the potential to raise the kilojoules intake and subsequently bring to weight gain. That is why a lot of complaints on childhood obesity have been directed at junk food as it could contribute to further health problems such as heart disease, osteoarthritis and even cancers. Furthermore, the decline in the dental health of Australian primary school children acts as a significant evidence that the health level is worsening (Weekend News 2005). Hence, the sale of junk food in school should be banned as it is unhealthy for schoolchildren.

In addition, additives from the junk food such as synthetic flavour and colour enhancers have been proven to trigger behavioural problems, for examples, hyperactivity and poor concentration amongst children (Smith 2005). In fact, students’ learning potential is reduced when junk food is sold in schools. According to Food Show (2005), there is a response from Jack Green who mentions that an obvious improvement in students’ attitudes has been noticed when the school removed the sale of junk food. He points out that the students became calmer after lunch. Ergo, the sale of junk food in school canteens should be banned in order to cut down the behavioural problems in children.

Apart from that, fast food packaging is the major contributor to litter problems (Smith 2005). Subsequently, it will not only burden the cleaning costs but also downgrade the image of the communities for the rationale that litter is a safety and health hazard. Moreover, in a response by Jack Green in Food Show (2005), he states that litter such as cans, crisp packets, cartons and plastic containers are everywhere when junk food is sold in school. As a result, the school grounds man has no much time to spend on maintenance projects that benefit the school as he has to spend the time on cleaning the grounds. Overall, the sale of junk food has to be banned to reduce the litter problems in school.

All in all, I strongly assent to the ban of selling junk food in school canteens as it will worsen the health of students, cause behavioural problems as well as create litter problems in the school compound. Despite it shows an apparent decline for the canteen profits at Cook High School after reducing the sale of junk foods (School News 2005), this should never be the excuse to make junk food available in school canteens. In brief, school authorities should put the welfare and safety of students in precedence by banning the sale of junk food in school canteens.

Argumentative Essay-- Junk Food #2

Should the sale of junk food in school canteens be banned?

According to Jemma Smith (2005), the term ‘junk food’ refers to any food that is perceived to be unhealthy and of low nutritional value. The issue of junk food in schools has been raised when it is being accused for leading to the increase in childhood obesity. ‘The nutritional value of food eaten by Australian children has been falling progressively over the past 30 years’ (Tran 2005, p. 6). Accordingly, I strongly agree that the sale of junk food in school canteens should be banned as it will degrade students’ health level, cause behavioural problems as well as create litter problems in the school compound.

First, junk food is indisputably bad for health. Most of the junk foods are of low nutritional value. For instance, chips, confectionery, soft drinks and hamburgers contain a high level of fat, salt and sugar which could aggravate the health of schoolchildren (Health Foundation 2005). Besides, according to Weekend News (2005), junk foods like instant noodles and chocolate bars have the potential to raise the kilojoules intake and subsequently bring to weight gain. That is why a lot of complaints on childhood obesity have been directed at junk food as it could contribute to further health problems such as heart disease, osteoarthritis and even cancers. Furthermore, the decline in the dental health of Australian primary school children acts as a significant evidence that the health level is worsening (Weekend News 2005, p. 6). Hence, the sale of junk food in school should be banned as it is unhealthy for schoolchildren.

In addition, additives from the junk food such as synthetic flavour and colour enhancers have been proven to trigger behavioural problems, for examples, hyperactivity and poor concentration amongst children (Smith 2005). In fact, students’ learning potential is reduced when junk food is sold in schools. According to the website ‘The Food Show’ (2005), there is a response from Jack Green who mentions that an obvious improvement in students’ attitudes has been noticed when the school removed the sale of junk food. He points out that the students became calmer after lunch. Ergo, the sale of junk food in school canteens should be banned in order to cut down the behavioural problems in children.

Apart from that, fast food packaging is the major contributor to litter problems (Smith 2005). Subsequently, it will not only burden the cleaning costs but also downgrade the image of the communities for the rationale that litter is a safety and health hazard. Moreover, in a response by Jack Green in ‘The Food Show’ website (2005), he states that litter such as cans, crisp packets, cartons and plastic containers are everywhere when junk food is sold in school. As a result, the school grounds man has no much time to spend on maintenance projects that benefit the school as he has to spend the time on cleaning the grounds. Overall, the sale of junk food has to be banned to reduce the litter problems in school.

All in all, I strongly assent to the ban of selling junk food in school canteens as it will worsen the health of students, cause behavioural problems as well as create litter problems in the school compound. Despite it shows an apparent decline for the canteen profits at Cook High School after reducing the sale of junk foods (School News 2005), this should never be the excuse to make junk food available in school canteens. In brief, school authorities should put the welfare and safety of students in precedence by banning the sale of junk food in school canteens.