The Instigator
cha-the-politician
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Emilrose
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Media is giving the Paris terrorist attacks disproportional and unreasonable attention.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Emilrose
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2015 Category: News
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 504 times Debate No: 82798
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

cha-the-politician

Pro

The debate focuses on three essential questions.

1, Is the mainstream/news media overreacting to the Paris terrorist attacks

2, Is social media and the general public overreacting to these attacks.

and

3, Is the attention given to this attack disproportional and unreasonable?

I personally believe the answer to all the question are yes. Burden of Proof will be with whomever presents a new point, which may be pro or con. However, the BoP will be assumed on Pro.

If forfeiture happens, you could present your argument in the comments section.
Emilrose

Con

**Accepted**

Though Pro failed to specify if round one was exclusively for acceptance, they have stated in the comments that it is.

Therefore--I will leave it to Pro to outline their opening case first.

>>Points of Contention:

All of the questions that Pro has put forward in round one will be addressed and featured in my own argument[s]

These questions are:

1. Is the mainstream/news media overreacting to the Paris terrorist attacks?

2. Is social media and the general public overreacting to these attacks?

3. Is the attention given to this attack disproportional and unreasonable?

It will be my opponents BoP [burden of proof] to affirm their resolution and their position on these points, which is of course, Pro. Whereas mine will be to negate the resolution and each question proposed. The key words here will be overreacting, disproportional, and unreasonable--three words that I will show to be erroneous when applied to media and public reaction to the recent Paris terrorist attacks.


Debate Round No. 1
cha-the-politician

Pro

cha-the-politician forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con

Emilrose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
cha-the-politician

Pro

cha-the-politician forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
cha-the-politician

Pro

cha-the-politician forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con

Hm, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by cha-the-politician 1 year ago
cha-the-politician
To clarify

Basically, the first round is just acceptance.

The second round I will post my first argument, evidence, etc. and you will offer your rebuttal as well as your argument if you have one.

The third argument I will offer a rebuttal to your rebuttal, and a rebuttal to your point, and then present my third point.

No new points will be discussed in the last round, it will be a summary, along with last rebuttals if still existent.
Posted by gavinjames10 1 year ago
gavinjames10
I'm interested in accepting this debate as the Con. Question - How will this debate be formatted? Will this be a formal Lincoln-Douglas debate, a Policy Debate, or a free-structured debate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
cha-the-politicianEmilroseTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, and no arguments presented