Argument Analysis 12

The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.

"Ever since the 1950's when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television — programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. — should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."

My response:

The argument states that television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time to lower the rate of teenage crime in the country of Alta. The argument presented by the author is flawed and unconvincing as it fails to address many important assumptions.

First, the argument assumes that the rate of crimes conducted by teenagers in the country of Alta is directly related to the increase of violence shown on television. Without more specific information, we cannot come to a definite conclusion. The increased rate of crimes committed by teenagers could be caused by any other number of reasons. Teens could be driven to violent crimes due a higher divorce rate in the country, which could affect the psychology of teenage children, or it could be due to increased level of poverty which drives teens to conduct violent crimes. The author should address or acknowledge these other possibilities which could be the cause of the increased teen crime rate instead of omitting it from the argument prompt.

The argument uses several references of studies conducted nationally to bolster their claims. The author failed to mention the authenticity of these studies, or the manner they were conducted. Take for example the national studies mentioned. There are several factors that should be considered while evaluating the qualities of these studies. There was no mention of the geographic regions of where the study was conducted, nor was there any mention of the sample size of the data collected. If the studies were conducted in a concentrated region, it cannot be a sufficient representation of the overall issue. Also, if the sample size of data that was collected was too small, the results of the study can be potentially skewed and biased. Without strong numerical and statistical evidence, the argument is rendered weak and unconvincing.

Turning to the survey conducted by the Observer, one should question the neutrality of the survey. Since it was the Observer that conducted the survey itself, the results could be potentially biased to reflect the views of the local newspaper itself. Not only that, the argument is further weakened by the subjective reasons for supporting less violence on prime time television. Just because 90 percent of the respondents of the survey were parents who supported this argument is not a solid enough evidence for reducing less violence shown on prime time television. Also, for all the reasons I listed above that rendered the national studies as weak evidence, we should also consider the validity of the survey conducted by the Observer. How was the survey conducted? Was it just conducted in one neighborhood? Was the sample size of the survey respondents sufficiently large enough? What was the demography of the respondents ie were they mostly parents or other non-parents? Those are several of the questions that come to mind while looking at the Observer survey. Had the author included these information, it would have strengthened his or her claims.

For all the reasons I have enumerated above, I believe the argument is not logically sound. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the argument irrefutable.