A Probing Analysis: Finding Common Ground in a Debate

E-Page 46
 Analyze 
Use the basic features.

As observers of televised political debates can attest, many debates offer little incentive for finding common ground. Participants try to make their points as forcefully as possible. For the most part, they do not want to be seen as “giving in” to the other side and thereby coming off as a weak candidate. Consider whether this printed debate does or does not differ in this regard.

ANALYZE & WRITE

After reading the three essays (Let's Abolish This Modern-Day Coal Mine, Why Mess With a Win-Win Situation?, and A Valuable Idea, If We Follow the Law), write one or two paragraphs analyzing efforts to find common ground in the internship debate:

  1. Skim the essays, looking for places where the debate participants address similar topics. (See, for example, the discussion of unpaid intern Xuedan Wang’s lawsuit against Hearst Corporation.) To what extent do the participants succeed in addressing, even in a minimal way, criticisms or concerns that are raised by those with different points of view?
  2. Of all of the debaters, Camille Olson probably does the most to find common ground between those who believe that more must be done to protect unpaid interns and those who are happy with the status quo. What points of consensus does she suggest? Can you think of any other areas in which the debaters might find common ground?

    Question