The Instigator
sulayman
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Emilrose
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

Media are...

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Emilrose
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/30/2014 Category: News
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 571 times Debate No: 67653
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

sulayman

Pro

The media are portraying all muslims to be terrorist.
Emilrose

Con

Accepted.

Pro claims: "The media are portraying all muslims to be terrorist.", without any additional argument or evidence in support.

For Pros assertion to be correct, he/she would not only have to prove that the media potrayes some muslims to be terrorists but rather all Muslims to be terrorists--which no media outlet, whether televised or in written publication, has ever done.

Case

The only Muslims or people that identify themselves as Muslims that are reported are those that have committed crimes (in many cases, the religious identity is not referenced) or if they have been actively involved in extremism. The British media, and in some cases the American, often use the term "Asian" in replacement for "Muslim" to purposely avoid offense and religion-based generalization. Additionally, when the media reports on militant groups such as ISIS it is generally very careful not to denote the same kind of image to other Muslims and refers to them as an individual group that is not representative of the entire Muslim population, that not only exists in African and Asian regions but also expands to the West.

There has also been numerous examples, particularly this year, when the media has placed particular emphasis on non-extremist Muslims who denounce the actions of Islamic State, al-Queda, Syrian rebels, etc. and have provided interviewes to these Muslims.

Such as this example from a U.S media outlet: [1.] https://www.youtube.com...

The Muslim CAIR representative being interviewed here states that the actions of Islamic State are "horrific", "shocking" and that they are "essentially hijacking the religion to advance their own political agenda and goals", further stating that they are not only "un-Islamic" but "anti-Islamic". After giving her condolences to the families of journalists executed by ISIS, she went on to emphasize that Islamic State were also targeting other Muslims, including both Sunnis and Shias. She also stated that the U.S government needs to "tackle the problem that ISIS poses", and that "we have to eliminate them".

Naturally, if the media portrayed all Muslims as terrorists, such interviews would not be held. Initial statement by Pro is thus refuted.
Debate Round No. 1
sulayman

Pro

sulayman forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con

Forfeit by Pro, no additional arguments to refute.
Debate Round No. 2
sulayman

Pro

sulayman forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Hud4 2 years ago
Hud4
Max Wallace I belive your argument is very true ive seen a video on the matter

https://m.youtube.com...

That is it
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
The media is portraying all terrorists as Muslim. That is a lie, because there are more .govs that commit terror then all Muslim terrorists combined, that is the truth.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by warren42 2 years ago
warren42
sulaymanEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit. Had Pro said "most" instead of all, I would have agreed with him, but even had this debate gone forward without forfeit, it's impossible to prove "all" as the resolution suggests.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
sulaymanEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: No arguments to fulfill BoP by Pro, whilst Con provided counter-arguments. So, arguments go to Con. Conduct to Con for Pro's round forfeits. The video gave a clear example which negated the resolution, so I think that this deserves source points.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
sulaymanEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 2 years ago
TheJuniorVarsityNovice
sulaymanEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit