Editorials

Paper Summary:

This paper uses a 1999 article by George F. Will, "Judicial Silliness," that appeared in the Washington Post to form the basis of a discussion about editorials and journalistic integrity. The writer presents the different points about the case that are raised in Will's article. These include a summarization of the Judge's ruling in the case and the methods used by Will to challenge this ruling. The four arguments that Will uses are first analyzed individually and then assigned truth-values in order to assess whether or not they are actually sound. Using this method, the author is able to illustrate where and when Will's personal views influenced the logic he used in the writing of the editorial.

From the Paper:

"The overall conclusion of the Will's editorial is two-fold. Firstly, Will concludes that the parents of students at Bedford Central were silly to attempt to resolve what they perceived as problematic state of affairs through litigation (in both the extent of what they viewed as problematic, and the route taken to resolve the state of affair). Secondly, Will concludes that the legal decision handed down by Judge Brieant was also silly in his adjudication of the matter (specifically, how he choose to define what constitutes religion with respect to the First Amendment, and what constitutes academic freedom). On Will's view, it was these respective silly acts that led to an overall silly state of affairs."

More papers on Editorials:

• Comparison Essay # 56632 : "Gaza Pullout through Editorials"
• Analytical Essay # 88329 : "The Gomery Report"
• Comparison Essay # 90484 : "Scowcroft v. Baker"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: