MY professor notes (This counterargument is on the right track: the point that s

MY professor notes (This counterargument is on the right track: the point that s

MY professor notes (This counterargument is on the right track: the point that social media can boost political engagement and activism works well as an argument regarding polarization, and Bernard Matisi’s article seems like it could be used effectively to explain that position. Similarly, the pew research article is promising as a source that may explain why people in many countries see social media as beneficial for politics.
Things to work on:
– The introduction needs to be reorganized: place the full restatement of your position first, then pivot to the counterclaim second.
– One big thing to work on is using the sources to develop the counterarguments more thoroughly: first, provide more details from the sources that show the evidence and reasoning that support the counterclaims: what examples and specific data do these sources base their conclusions on? You also need to use and explain direct quotes from sources: this is good practice in academic writing in general and a fundamental requirement for this course.
– The rebuttals similarly need to make more effective use of sources: use a quote from Allcott and Gentzkow to help show more engagement in politics also leaves people more vulnerable to misinformation. The second rebuttal (filter bubbles exist, based on Pariser) seems to circle back to the argument in paper one. The rebuttals to counterarguments should advance the argument rather than restating it.
– Both counterarguments and rebuttals need more elaboration: the paper is about a page short.
– Use author’s last name for in-text citations (so, Matisi, not Bernie).
– There are some examples of confusing wording marked in the paper.)