I would like to open and frame this debate with a quotation from
Iranian American poet and university professor Azar Nafisi: I see
people who talk about America, and then undermine it by not paying
attention to its soul, to its poetry. I see polarization,
reductionism and superficiality. (AZIR NAFISI)
DEFINITIONS
ARGUMENTS
With the definitions for this debate clarified, we believe that the
resolution of this debate is absolutely and one hundred percent
correct. We present the following three opening arguments as
support for our position.
I.
issue. The goal was to ensure that broadcast media exposed the
public to a diversity of opinions and perspectives. Two
additional rules of the Fairness Doctrine required that any
broadcaster making an editorial attack against a person or
group also allow that person or group to respond to the attack
on their program, and that any broadcaster endorsing a
candidate during an election also give time to unendorsed
candidates during their program. The Fairness Doctrine was
ultimately abolished under the belief that American
broadcasters had the right to present only a single point of
view on any issue of public importance, if they choose. This
regrettable turning point in American history ultimately
produced the polarization of American broadcast media that we
see now in the 21st century because it allows networks such as
the Fox News Channel to present single perspective propaganda
on all controversial issues of public importance.
II.