EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
746

That reality television should be banned

(PRO)
4 points
(CON)
WINNER!
8 points
iamtherealest123iamtherealest123 (PRO)
Reality Tv shows should be banned because it leaves a huge impact on the people that are in the show. It alters the way others act upon them and the way they act upon themselves it changes what they do and their behavior in the real world. An implication of this dates back to 2013 when Kylie Jenner admitted that she only really had three of four hours of a school day bearing in mind that she was one of the people in the reality tv show 
'Keeping Up With The Kardashians' this show that being a part of a reality tv show does effect what you do in every day life.



Return To Top | Posted:
2017-11-21 21:03:33
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
ikosikaziikosikazi
I think reality t,v shows shouldn't be banned because you get people watching the series/show, that relate to what is being put on a play...actors are not forced to take play in the entertainment industry...however they are convinced by the fame and fortune.,,
Posted 2017-11-23 22:21:19
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2017-12-14 01:46:27
Reynold JupudiJudge: Reynold Jupudi
Win awarded to: Mharman
2017-12-11 18:12:46
MeshhJudge: Meshh
Win awarded to: Mharman
Reasoning:
First off, although iamthereleast123 offered a legitimate argument, after Mharman came up with a simple rebuttal, iamthereleast123 began forfeiting rounds until the end of the match. Mharman obviously wins this debat because his opponent only offered one argument that was disproven by Mharman.
1 user rated this judgement as good
1 user rated this judgement as exceptional
0 comments on this judgement
2017-12-14 21:56:30
adminJudge: admin    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: Mharman
2017-12-15 23:21:12
Kevintran72Judge: Kevintran72
Win awarded to: iamtherealest123

Feedback:
iamtherealest123 constructed a proper argument in the debate format, presenting a solid point supported by an example. They further reinforced their argument by explaining their example and how it correlates to their point. To end his argument, iamtherealest123 provided a summary of what they just said. iamtherealest123 essentially followed the PEEL format for his argument. In contrast, Mharman simply provided a one-line rebuttal that had no real format or structure. Mharman did not elaborate on their ideas.
1 user rated this judgement as a vote bomb
1 user rated this judgement as good
0 comments on this judgement
2017-12-23 02:18:27
bencarter759Judge: bencarter759
Win awarded to: iamtherealest123
Reasoning:
The facts provided show the reality television should not be banned.
1 user rated this judgement as biased
0 comments on this judgement
2017-12-24 11:37:45
AnonymousJudge: Anonymous
Win awarded to: iamtherealest123
Reasoning:
The pro debater give explanation and support that expresses his concern using logic with emotion yet not enough reason for reality television being banned. The con debator spoke a statement and logic but not convincing enough for reality television to not be banned.

Feedback:
Pro debator
Critical thinking:5
Ethic:5
Delivery:7
Total:17/30

Con debator
Critical Thinking:3
Delivery:3
Ethic:3
Total:9/10

Nice one. I appreciate the debate instead of having 1 round surrender.
1 user rated this judgement as exceptional
0 comments on this judgement
2017-12-27 06:28:21
itsameJudge: itsame
Win awarded to: iamtherealest123
2018-01-02 17:45:16
angsonamJudge: angsonam
Win awarded to: Mharman
2018-01-05 03:33:45
nzlockieJudge: nzlockie    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: Mharman
Reasoning:
PRO made a single argument, that Reality shows negatively impact the participants. They backed this up with a single, very specific, example.
CON effectively rebutted this one example by pointing out that the participants choose to participate.

With no other arguments to go on, the win had to go to CON. PRO simply failed to make their case.

Feedback:
PRO: You need to give multiple arguments and examples and then support them when they are attacked.
Also, spelling and grammar matter.

CON: Probably could have elaborated more, and presented a counter argument, but the brevity and effectiveness of your rebuttal is actually pretty effective. You were lucky the debate didn't continue though.
1 user rated this judgement as constructive
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 4 rounds
  • No length restrictions
  • Reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 5 days
  • Time to vote: 1 month
  • Time to prepare: 1 hour
This is a random challenge. See the general rules for random challenges at http://www.edeb8.com/resources/General+rules+for+random+debates+%28version+2%29