Is TV better than books?
Do you think TV is better than books. For both arguments, state why you think one is better than the other.

My argument is that books are better because
1. There are no advertisements in books. Even if there are (e.g. magazines) you can simply flick through the ads.
2. TV's require electricity and power. They also need to be set up and they can break down too. There is no need for electricity or power for books. Save energy.
3. Books are portable and can be carried around. TV's are less portable.
4. On TV, you are given are limited number of programs to choose from at any one time. There is a huge selection of books in the library.
5. Watching TV only involves passively watching and listening, whilst reading involves actively engaging in the text (i.e. reading). Actively engaging in a task is better way to learn than through passively observing. Also, when reading, you improve your literacy.
6. In society, it is reading and more generally literacy that is valued. We are provided with stacks of paperwork, catalogues, handouts, academic readings (for university students), newspapers etc.