Books provide better entertainment than television
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
No information
Yeah, pretty boring debate.. I believe pro covered mostly all of cons arguments, but I believe con dropped most if not all of pros arguments.
This is honestly straight forward, I vote pro.
Pro in short started talking about making your own scenery, such as looks of characters rather than a movie showing you something. Books put less strain on your eyes than movies and also is possible to increase your creativity. It includes less brain power than a movie. And after that he basically repeats his first argument, but stating "better emotional entertainment".
Con's only rebuttal:
"1. I know that this can apply to poor movies as well but if I book is written poorly or with typos it can ruin the impact and make it harder to understand, more so than Tv in my opinion."
I'm not sure how this even related to con's argument? He never responded towards any of the claims made by pro meaning he dropped them.
Any questions? I'll handle them through messages or comments.
Sorry, I wasn't aware of the time limit. I was busy. I will try my best to finish up on my next round.
Since this is a subjective discussion, you can turn this argument in your favor by citing sources of the amount of people who read books vs watching TV, and how much time they spend doing both of these on average.
This is relative, but you’d win the debate if you prove that books appeal to a larger audience than television.