Both
Wootan and Liodice have strong standpoints and make really good arguments. In
Wootan’s argument, he talks about why the legislation is able to regulate food
advertising to children with the support of CSPI. His intentions are good since
their goal is to protect our nations children and to keep the healthy, I kind
of felt like he was going a little too far. Personally, I feel like it’s the
parents duty and responsibility of what their child is consuming. His arguments
faced towards what advertisement agencies need to fix or not to provide any
facts but to talk about how child obesity exists. Liodice, takes an opposite
standpoint of this situation. His argument is based of from many opinion and
responses to Wootan’s article. Additionally, he also talks about protecting the
first amendments and how he feels like it is wrong that the guidelines are so
restricting. When evaluating both arguments of Wootan and Liodice, I would most
likely agree with Liodices position because it is more valid and effective.
Hey Shortie,
ReplyDeleteI am also on the side of Liodice, although there is a pandemic with obesity, I really do not think it will get fixed by changing the advertisements. This article is such a powerful one. I got two parties to argue about a certain matter. I truthfully think kids will be kids. They should be able to try something "bad" for them or else they will be sheltered with carrots and garbonzo beans. It is ultimately a a rights thing. How could one deny the right to a hamburger on a advertisement, especially if the person wants others to try one. It was kind or absurd to be reading what MArgo had to say. Anyways, good job analizing the arguments.
Thanks,
GreekGuy
Hello Shortie,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that parents should be the one to take the responsibility of their own children’s diet. Wootan mentions that in his argument, but he contradicts himself when he states that there should be regulations to stop and reduce the commercials. In Liodice’s argument, I think he addresses the issues from different perspectives and goes more in depth. For instance, he points out the error of the guidelines by CSPI and states that the government should find alternatives but not regulating commercials. I think he is right when stating regulating commercials will violate the 1st amendment. Therefore, I think Liodice has stronger and valid argument than Wootan does.
Thanks,
Adrian