SpringBoard
Level 6 – Unit 2
2.4 – Debating Newspaper Part I
Purpose of 2.4:
• To evaluate the role of
newspapers in a democracy
• To identify an author’s use of
support (reasoning +
evidence)
2.4 – Key Terms
LT/AV Notes:
• Reasoning is the thinking or
logic used to make a claim in
an argument.
• Evidence is the specific facts,
examples, and other details
used to support Reasoning.
2.4 – Key Terms
LT/AV Notes:
• Inductive Reasoning is a process
of looking at individual facts
leading to a concluding
thesis/claim.
• Deductive Reasoning starts with
thesis/claim/question, and
provides reasoning for support.
2.4 – Debating Newspapers Part I
Read pages 115-117:
• Mark the text for reasoning
and evidence provided by Cass
Sunstein in his article “How
the Rise of the Daily Me
Threatens Democracy”. Be
prepared to explain his
opinion and line of reasoning.
2.4 – Debating Newspapers Part I
Quick Write (First Reaction):
• (Daily Work) Do you agree
with Sunstein’s ‘argument’
(that the Rise of the ‘Daily Me’
threatens Democracy?
Explain your reasoning in a
paragraph response.
2.4 – Debating Newspapers Part I
Partner Questions (separate sheet of paper):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
How does Sunstein define ‘Daily Me’?
How is the ‘Daily Me’ becoming reality?
What rhetorical question does Sunstein ask?
What three cause-effect conclusions does
Sunstein explain about the impact the Daily
Me has?
Why do these three cause-effect conclusions
occur?
Explain Sunstein’s final conclusion.
Is Sunstein’s article an example of Inductive
Reasoning or Deductive Reasoning? Explain.
2.4 – Debating Newspapers Part I
Page 118:
• In the left-hand column, identify
key support (reasoning and
evidence) Sunstein uses to justify
his claim that the diminished role
of the newspaper is a problem for
American Democracy.
2.4 – Sunstein’s Reasoning
Page 118:
• People ended up with more extreme positions
• Discussion had another effect – it squelched
diversity
• The result is group polarization
• They became more skeptical
• Confident in position – willingly ‘extreme’
• Social Comparison
• Increased contempt for contrary views
• Ultimately leads to less ‘mutual
understanding’ and ‘constructive problemsolving’ – Daily Me vs. Daily Them