Thinking Critically About Evidence

Thesis: The federal government should not have the right to censor websites such as youtube.com or wikipedia.com. Censoring these websites would indicate that the federal government has the ability to exploit their power to benefit corporations instead of the majority of American citizens. Many Americans would consider the censorship of these websites to be oppressive.

• The strongest piece of evidence that I came across is a logical. In my thesis I argued that I the government would be exploiting their power by censoring websites such as Wikipedia.com or youtube.com to benefit industries, especially the music industry. This is my most compelling piece of evidence because the government is considering a law to censor these websites, not to regulate what the public watches but because musicians and record labels are losing money. In this essay I can logically appeal to the audience by arguing that the government looks out for industries instead of looking out for the people, because they are overlooking how people benefit from websites such as youtube ans wikipedia.

• The weakest piece of evidence that I could of brought about in my essay is the idea that if the government can pass a law the controls what citizens do online, what can't they pass a law about? There are many countries that  have passed a law that regulate what the public watches in line. This is a form of oppression to people because the government is dictating the way people live their lives. This is my weakest piece of evidence simply because I need more back up information to make my evidence credible.