The Internet Is Closing Our Minds

1233 WordsSep 27, 20165 Pages
In the debate “When it comes to politics, the internet is closing our minds,” the side that argued for the motion is the side which best argued their ideas by providing consistency throughout the debate and successfully utilizing a number of techniques in order to win their argument. The side that was for the motion used clear and consistent arguments that were backed by data. They used examples in their argument that the audience could understand and relate to easily. The language and tone used in their argument matched that which was appropriate to the intended audience with timely and relatable examples that argued their points successfully. Siva Vaidhyanathan begins one of his arguments by first defining what the Internet is and isn 't. He then takes his case global, stating that the user experiences and the data presented to a user in one country can differ greatly for a user in another country. “The alleged network of networks is, in 2012, Balkanized, nationalized, compromised, anesthetized, supervised, circumcised and hypnotized. It 's far from global, and it 's getting less so every day” (Vaidhyanathan). He then goes on to give examples to back the descriptive words he had listed in his statement. Examples included government censorship and the different online platforms that users may use in different parts of the world compared to one another. The examples he provides make it easy for the audience to accept the magnitude of the issue at hand and that it is indeed
Open Document