Identify the claim and supporting reasons in the essay "The Internet Should Be Free" from earlier in the lesson.

Evaluate how the essay "The Internet Should Be Free" uses evidence to back up its supporting reasons and respond to a counterargument. Are some pieces of evidence more effective than other pieces of evidence? Is any of the evidence weak or ineffective? Why or why not?

Between the essay, "The Internet Should Be Free," and the two political ads you examined earlier, which do you think is the most convincing? Explain your answer.

Identify at least one logical fallacy from the essay, "The Internet Should Be Free," or either of the two political ads you examined earlier. Explain why the example is a fallacy and how it affects the persuasiveness of the text.

1 answer

Claim and Supporting Reasons

In the essay "The Internet Should Be Free," the main claim is that access to the internet is a fundamental right and should be free for everyone. The supporting reasons include:

Equity and Accessibility: The internet serves as a vital tool for education, job opportunities, and social connection, and free access would promote equity among diverse populations.
Economic Growth: Providing free internet access can stimulate economic growth by allowing small businesses and entrepreneurs to thrive without the burdens of excess costs.
Democratic Engagement: The internet plays a crucial role in political participation and democratic processes; free access enables a more informed and active citizenship.

Evaluation of Evidence

The essay uses various pieces of evidence to back its supporting reasons, such as statistics about internet access disparities, examples of economic benefits from free internet initiatives in several countries, and studies indicating higher rates of civic engagement in internet-connected populations.

Effectiveness of Evidence:

Some pieces of evidence may be more effective than others. For example, statistical data showcasing the correlation between increased internet access and economic growth is compelling and concrete, making a strong case for the economic benefits of free internet.
On the other hand, anecdotal evidence regarding individuals' experiences of internet access might feel weaker without broader statistical backing; while personal stories can be impactful, they don't provide the same level of persuasive authority as hard data.

Weak or Ineffective Evidence:

If the essay relies heavily on outdated statistics or lacks citations for its claims, this could weaken its overall persuasiveness. Unsupported assertions about the social benefits of free internet might also detract from its credibility.

Comparison with Political Ads

When comparing the essay "The Internet Should Be Free" to the two political ads, the more convincing piece depends on the audience's values. If the readers value logical arguments and detailed evidence, they might find the essay more persuasive due to its structured approach and reliance on facts. Conversely, if the audience responds better to emotional appeals or charismatic messaging, one of the political ads might be more effective.

Identification of Logical Fallacy

One potential logical fallacy found in the essay "The Internet Should Be Free" could be an appeal to emotion (pathos). For example, if the essay emphasizes devastating personal stories of individuals unable to access the internet without addressing systemic solutions or broader contexts, it may play too heavily on emotional appeals rather than presenting a well-rounded argument.

Effect on Persuasiveness: While emotional appeals can be powerful, overly relying on them can lead to manipulative tactics, making the argument seem less objective or rational. This could alienate readers who prioritize facts over feelings, thus limiting the essay's persuasiveness among more skeptical audiences.