"What bothers me is the fact that something so unexact has passed under our government. I feel like it was written quickly just to appease hundreds of [angry] constituents. Granted i do not know if there is causal evidence that show that kids are more likely to smoke a lot if they tried flavored cigs as a kid, nor do i know if the cigs underage kids smoke are predominantly flavored ones. And with this evidence not expressed in any article i have read about the subject, i am unsure if the ban will even affect kids smoking habits."
I am still curious if there is evidence to show kids like flavored cigarettes more, but in hindsight i assume that a causal link was found between trying flavored cigs underage and a smoking addiction. However, i am also a naive student who assumes that government organizations prove their points instead of just stating them. My main problem is that from the looks of the article i posted above, the legislation itself is lacking a concrete definition of what will be banned. If there was a more concrete definition of what would be banned and it was stated concisely enough so the director of the F.D.A. could explain it well then i would support it.
As the debate went on, my classification of the New York Times as unbiased happened to come under fire. It was implied that the political affiliation of the owner of the newspaper was at play in the article. Last semester i took a class called Principles of American Journalism, which inspired me to write this response:
The idea that a magazine owners political affiliations trickle down to the extent that a lowly beat reporter would make sure to give his story subliminal support for whatever political party or position to appease said owner is ludicrous. Not every reporter hired for an organization shares the owners ideals. To discriminate by political affiliation is illegal, and being that the NYTimes is a news organization, it is under the microscope of other news organizations for competition purposes. Not to mention pressures to remain a credible news source and to eliminate bias as much as possible, a cornerstone of journalism.I really do believe that these news organizations work to eliminate bias as much as possible, and i'm sure there are many people who believe the exact opposite.
