Arguing Cause Peer Review Adam Lorentz

My questions for the reviewer.

*Is this a good start to my paper?
It's a good start to your paper. There is a danger that you're trying to argue a solution and not the cause of your argument right now. I would recommend re-reading it for grammatical errors and for flow. I made some changes to it (additions are underlined and things I think should be taken out have a line through them). —Michael Hanson

I did see you trying to argue a solution also. I also found a couple things and changed them with the same markings. -Courtney

*Is my argument found easily?
It is very easy to see where your stance is on this issue. —Michael Hanson

Your stance is very easy to see. -Courtney

*Does the argument answer the basic question: Why did this happen? What questions are you left with after reading the argument?
Questions I am left with would be: Is it the job of the commercials to tell the kids what they can or cannot have or the parent? What I'm saying is that you're argument states that kids see something they want on television and they say they want it and their parents will buy it. People may argue against you that it's the parents' jobs to tell kids what they can and cannot have. —Michael Hanson

Michael covered what I was going to say. -Courtney

*Does the writer establish that the problem exists and that we should care about it? What is missing?
You do mention the problem and state that it is something worth caring about. —Michael Hanson

You covered everything here pretty well. -Courtney

*What seem to be the main points of the argument?
Kids really look into what they see on TV and are easily influenced. It also states that more regulations should be put in place before commercials are approved. —Michael Hanson

Children pay attention to things that are on TV. Commercials should be regulated to try and protect children from their influence. -Courtney

*Does the writer genuinely address opposition? What additional opposing viewpoints could the writer address? Can you imagine other objections to the argument?
I already stated in the first question a possible opposition. Not a lot of opposition is mentioned yet in the paper, but it's still in its early stages and opposition may be addressed in the future. —Michael Hanson

I agree. There isn't much for opposition quite yet. -Courtney

*What were your reactions to the text as you were reading it?
It seems like a very strong argument to opposing commercials aimed at children. I'm not sure if the paper is attacking specific ads that are aimed at children or all ads that are aimed at children. I felt that it had good examples of relating back to adults. —Michael Hanson

You have a strong argument, but like Michael said, does it attack specific ads or all ads?

*What is the argument's greatest weakness?
It doesn't address much opposition yet. —Michael Hanson

No opposition yet, some grammatical issues. -Courtney

*What is the argument's greatest strength?
Good examples of relating back to adults. —Michael Hanson

Research is good. -Courtney

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License