The document discusses whether college athletes should be paid to play. It provides background on the grueling schedules of high school athletes who strive for college scholarships. While college athletes work extremely hard, paying them could financially burden smaller colleges and lead to corruption. The document argues college athletes are students first and should not be considered professionals like in other sports leagues. Their schedules are intense but aimed at achieving an education, and paying them could undermine the academic mission of colleges.
ENG2001 Editing Checklist When reviewing your work o.docx
1. ENG2001
Editing Checklist
When reviewing your work or that of your peers, make check
marks on any of the items
below that appear in the writing sample. There is space below
for any additional
comments you might have regarding the writing.
There are examples of:
______ incorrect subject-verb agreement
______ run-on(s)
______ fragment(s)
______ omitted words that interrupt meaning
______ incorrect verb usage
______ shifts in verb tenses
______ incorrect use of common words (homonyms)
______ incorrect use of pronouns
______ capitalization problems
______ comma problems
______ apostrophes used incorrectly or missing
______ semicolons misused or missing
Additional comments:
Page 1 of 1
Composition III
3. 6. Paper has an ending that adequately concludes
the piece
7. The paper is fr ee or virtually free of grammatical, 4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
mechanical, and spelling errors (Use of the
editing checklist should clarify this.)
In addition to using the Peer Critique Evaluation Checklist, you
will also be
asked to use the Peer Editing Checklist. You need to take the
time to become
familiar with both of these checklists each week. Although the
Peer Editing
Checklist will remain the same throughout the course, the
Critiquing Checklist
will change with the di�erent assignments. These checklists
are of value to you
when you go over your peers' papers and when you are r
eadying your own
papers for having them critiqued and/or for submission.
Page 1 of 1
5. incorrect use of pronouns
capitalization problems
x comma problems
apostrophes used incorrectly or missing
x semicolons misused or missing
Running head: Television commercials 1
Television Commercials 7
Robert Polacca
South University
August 24, 2013
Composition III | ENG2001 S04
Instructor: Gary Henry
Television Commercials
Commercials, we see and hear then every day, whether it’s from
the radio or the television. For as long as television has been
around and maybe even further there have been commercials
that have had an impact on society. The commercials that we
see on TV every day may seem harmless at first, but there is
more meaning in these commercials then you think.
Commercials influence us to buy the latest gear or technology,
but what are some of their methods to achieving this result; so
6. that they can gain the most consumers and get the most profit
from their customers.
Commercials use a variety of different methods and
techniques to draw a person into viewing their commercial. The
advertising company has to understand what would be
appropriate for any given commercial. They must be able to
persuade whoever is watching the commercial, through the use
of miscommunication or false promises. Most of the
commercials seen in television may say that their product is
better than other products. Some may even suggest that is better
for your health and well-being.
They may not be telling you the whole truth about their product,
like the some of the recent soda or energy commercials like Red
Bull® and Coca-Cola®. They depict their drinks as a good
tasteful drink to have on a hot sunny day with your friends and
family. Although there has been a lot of recent studies in
today’s time, which shows that too much sugar based drinks can
have a huge impact on your health and can lead to obesity and
even diabetes (Highsmith, 2013).
Especially in the younger generation, because when you are
young, you have the basic concept of life and you are just
starting to learn the rights and wrong of certain things. So they
are more than likely to buy the things that they see on the
Television. When a child at a young age has diabetes from too
much surgery drinks that they see on commercials today; then
they have to live with the consequences for the rest of their
lives. Stretching the truth and hiding it behind false promises
needs to be stopped and more of the truth should be shown.
This is just one of the methods that they utilize, to get you to
purchase their products, like an empty promise. Another way
that they are able to capture people attention is to understand
the age group that is going to view these commercials more
often than others. They achieve this by hiring a popular
celebrity to endorse their produces. This drives people to
believe that that one person uses this product a lot so they
decided to buy it themselves, because they see that one
7. particular person utilize it in a commercial (Majeed, Razzak
2013).
Celebrities in commercial influence people to believe that they
can look just like the person that they see in the commercials. It
also gives credibility to a product that the company is trying to
sell, which is what consumers want to see in their products.
Something that they can rely on and that is dependable or so
they think, with the endorsement of a celebrity. But what
consumers don’t realize is that the product that they are using
may be equal to other products on the market. It is just that
when people see celebrity use it, which makes people think that
it is something good to use (Suttle, 2013).
It is just another idea that commercials show to the consumers
that draw people into buying their commercials. There is also
the usage of colors in any commercial, because colors have been
known to influence a certain emotions a certain emotion in some
people, through the use of the sense of sight. Things like usage
of the color red in food commercials make people a hungry, and
drives them to want to buy something that they see on
commercials based on what they feel or experience.
The use of the color blue and green, makes people feel relaxed
and at ease when they watch a commercial. The reason is that it
sets a tone of tranquility and serenity which is a pretty effective
strategy to be used for high end luxury products. While the
usage of bright colors like yellow and white catches the
people’s attention, and instills the feeling of energy and purity
(Team, 2009). Each color that you see in any commercial has a
lasting and powerful effect on the consumers. It draws out a
certain emotion specific to each commercial, so that the
consumers will feel more intrigued into buying something.
Emotions and mood also play an important role in the selling
market of the commercials. Studies have shown that a positive
or even funny commercial has a positive effect on the
consumers. People feel more inclined to buy the stuff that they
see on commercials, because it sends a positive message to the
people that view it. When a commercial sends a positive image
8. people feel a lot more confident about the product that they are
buying and even puts them in the buying mood.
Whereas if a person sees a negative commercial, they would
feel less inclined to purchase a product, because it just doesn’t
put a person in the buying mood. Positive commercials have a
greater emotional richness, over negative auditory emotional
contents. So companies try to utilize the feelings that people
feel through the use of colors and the emotions that it sparks
within a person.
Although not every commercial sends an image of an empty
promise or try to get just money form their consumers but also
support. There are some that have a huge impact within our
society; like during the WW2, when the US was pulled into war
with the bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 7. The US at the
time was in a bad position after the crash of the stock market,
which gave rise to the Great depression. So the US didn’t have a
whole lot of funds to support the war effort after the first initial
months of the war (Norris, 2013).
In order to raise money for more supplies and funds, the US
utilized advertising to sell war bonds to the American people.
So that they can help build up more supplies and things that we
needed to win the war. If this wouldn’t have succeeded, then the
war would have been a very short one. The United States may
be a different place from the one that we know today, we may
even have lost the war.
There have also been some recent catastrophes in the past
couple of years, like the Katrina hurricane and the tornados over
in regions of Oklahoma and the surrounding areas. Without the
use of advertising to raise money to help the people in need,
harder times may have fallen on those that lost their homes.
These are just some small perks that come out of advertising,
but their influence is more for profit rather than for your own
benefit.
In conclusion, Commercials in television today have had a huge
impact on society in many ways. Whether it’s a small one or a
big difference, depending on how powerful the message is to the
10. Norris, David A. "Life on the Home Front during WWI."
History Magazine (Toronto, Canada) Vol. 7, No. 6 Aug. /Sept.
2006: 21-25. SIRS Renaissance Web 04 Aug 2013
1
College Athletes Should Not Be Paid To Play
Week 5 Assignment 1
By: Katie Lewis
Instructor Gary Henry
ENG 2001 S04
August 23, 2013
Introduction
Long brutal practices, time away from friends and family, and
having a grueling work out schedule are only some examples of
what athletes go through on a daily basis. College athletes in
particular have worked immensely hard their entire lives to
11. achieve a sports scholarship to an amazing college. Most of
these athletes have missed huge family events because of
practice, or have had to change their entire lives to be
committed to their sport. The most recent debacle among the
sporting world, especially college sports, is whether or not
college athletes should be paid to play. Most people that hear
about the grueling situations these athletes go through would
automatically jump to the answer of “yes, they should be paid
for their hard work” when in reality most people don’t
understand the hurt it would cause smaller colleges as well as
the athletes themselves. From the extensive research conducted
on this issue; college athletes should not be paid to play due to
several issues; such as financially hurting smaller colleges, and
inabilities to focus on an education with scandals brewing
within the leagues.
A Glimpse into the Life of a High School Athlete
Basketball and football are the top two sports in which high
school students strive for excellence in order to be recruited and
offered a scholarship to a top name school. A normal day for
these athletes is waking up at the crack of dawn to get a practice
in before school starts. After a long 8 hour day at school, these
students then proceed to their after school practice that last
anywhere from 2-4 hours. Once the after school practice is over,
these students then go home to complete 2-3 hours of vigorous
homework, go to their part-time job, and some of them will
even through in an extra work-out before bed. This is an
everyday process for these students in hopes that they will
succeed well enough to achieve a full ride scholarship to
college. Should these students be paid as well? If college
students should be paid for their outstanding athletic
performance, why shouldn’t high school students be paid as
well?
College Athletes
The biggest issue throughout college sports in today’s
society is whether or not college athletes should be paid to play.
The day of a college athlete consist of at least 3 practices a day,
12. a full day of classes, and perhaps a job to support them in
between. Similar schedules to when they were high school
athletes. Most of these college athletes are between the ages of
17-21, barely adults in their right mind. What constitutes that
these young athletes should be considered as “professionals?”
“First, if many Division 1 athletes stop playing, they stop
receiving pay. And if it were not for their playing, they
wouldn't have been paid in the first place. To claim they are
paid primarily to be students, which colleges use to classify
them as amateurs, is an assault on common sense. Second, while
some Division I athletes receive no financial compensation, all
of them - paid or not - put in arduous work schedules. An
NCAA study released in 2008 showed they average about 40
hours per week at their sports. Other studies show that college
students spend about 25 hours per week on academic activity
(class time and preparation). And time for sports isn't only
greater in amount but also in importance. Athletes sign up for
courses that will accommodate their work schedules (usually
avoiding afternoon time slots). Further, it's understood that
they'll miss some classes because of work, yet it's risky to skip
practices in favor of their studies. Third, by an NCAA rule,
Division I athletes are required to sit out a year from their
sports if they transfer to another school (Florida Times Union,
pp. 4-16).” Does this sound like a professional, or does this
sound like a college student?
Revenue from College Sports
For the athlete’s outstanding sporting abilities, they contribute
huge earnings for the colleges. What many people do not know
is that the money that is earned from these sporting events
actually goes back into the schools to help pay for the athletes
scholarships as well as many other tools and technology.
“According to the NCAA, college athletic programs are big
money makers for colleges. Ticket sales, television, radio,
alumni donations, royalties and NCAA distributions, combined
bring in over $6.1 billion in annual revenue to colleges. This is
big money for the schools. It also is a wonderful marketing tool
13. for colleges.” (Sulmasy, pp.2).” Would it be fair to take this
money away from the schools as well as the millions of other
students that receive scholarships from this money just to pay
these select few athletes? Why was it okay for them to conduct
similar rigorous routines in high school for no profit, but it’s
not okay in college? Well, it’s not okay and it’s not fair to the
millions of other students that receive scholarships from this
money. These college athletes should feel good about
themselves for what they are doing because of the way they are
helping these other students be able to attend college, when they
normally would not have been able to attend because of not
being able to afford the expenses. More of like a “pay it
forward” type of view. What would happen if the athletes did
receive money for their sporting abilities? Would they continue
to be regular college students obtaining an education? What
would happen to the leagues?
Splitting up leagues
There have been many suggestions made to split up the Big
10 and the SEC schools to make them into minor leagues. This
would allow the athletes to be paid, but what affects would it
have upon the other colleges? Not only that, what affects would
it have on these athletes as students? “One of the ideas I've
come to champion with is the establishment of a kind of
superleague, consisting of marquee names like Kentucky,
Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, U.C.L.A. and the like: maybe
72 or so football teams and 100-plus basketball teams. These
teams would openly serve as the minor leagues for professional
football and basketball. The players would get wages. They
could get an education if they chose -- and that would be a good
thing, of course -- but there would be no more pretending that
football players were actually students first.” (Nocera, pp.3)
Splitting these leagues up gives college athletes the opportunity
to choose whether or not they want an education while at
college. As a parent, this is a terrible idea. These athletes have
had the morals of attending college imbedded into their heads
since they were little tikes. Now, to go against what these
14. athletes’ parents have been instilling into their child since the
beginning of their life, is not an ethical choice. In today’s
economy, is it more important to have a strong education or
more important to play sports and not learn any information to
help them further in life.
“Only a tiny minority will ever make a living competing in
professional sports. The four major sports employ fewer than
5,000 people at the major league level. According to the
National Football League Players Association, the average NFL
career is now 3.3 years. Moreover, most of these college
athletes will end up working in a career unrelated to their
athletic prowess or requiring substantial additional skills. The
truth is most Division I athletes are fortunate that they received
their degree or made substantial progress toward it while
competing athletically. For many athletically talented students,
college communicates one of the most valuable lessons in life.
Whatever one's athletic talents, getting prepared to do
something else is essential. Paying students as "professionals"
would communicate the worst message possible, that
universities can value an individual for athletic prowess only
and abandon their educational calling with impunity. Far better
to convince talented athletes to get an education and training
they will need as they grow than to throw in the towel to
"professionalism." (Florida Times Union, pp. 27-29).” Is
splitting up these leagues and giving these athletes an option to
an education a good idea? What about what would happen to the
tiers if these colleges break apart from the rest. “If the big five
conferences break away, the impact will be felt throughout
college sports. It would force some schools that currently field
teams in the top tier of college football to drop to the second
tier. It could also mean less revenue-sharing money for some of
the smaller schools. There are also smaller schools in the top
five conferences that might have difficulty competing
financially with the bigger schools.” (McClatchy, pp.8) It’s
okay to pay these players and allow the risk for smaller schools
to close and lay off thousands of employees? Or how about it’s
15. okay to not educate these students and allow the risk of failure
to adulthood. Does this sound like the ideal America you grew
up learning about? Are these athletes mature enough to be paid,
or have they already shown they are not responsible enough by
the scandals presented throughout some athletes?
Scandals
One of the biggest issues throughout these two sports is
“boostering”. A booster is someone that sells their name or
items with their name on them for money. It is against the rules
for college athletes to accept any type of money, good or
service for money pertaining to their sporting ability. This is a
big problem with young athletes because they are still amateurs
when dealing with these types of situations, which is another
reason for them not to be paid. One of the most recent,
debatable booster issues is one with famous college football
player Johnny Manziel. “In the latest and by far most serious
report concerning the off-the-field activities of Johnny Football,
the NCAA is investigating whether Manziel received money for
autographing hundreds of photos, footballs, helmets and other
memorabilia in January. ESPN's "Outside the Lines," citing two
sources, reports that Manziel received a "five-figure flat fee"
from autograph broker Drew Tieman while he was in Miami for
the Discover BCS National Championship. Both sources told
ESPN they saw him signing but not receiving money (Boren,
pp.2).” Do you feel as if these young athletes are responsible
enough to be paid if they are already breaking the rules?
“Although this is likely to rekindle debate about whether
college athletes should be paid, Manziel isn't the best poster
child for the movement. He has been a magnet for criticism
throughout the offseason, tweeting about being eager to leave
College Station, crashing a University of Texas party and
having to leave the Manning Passing Academy early. In a press
conference, he vowed not to change his behavior, reminding
everyone that he's only 20. Shortly after that, his father said in
an ESPN profile of his son: "Yeah, it could come unraveled.
And when it does, it's gonna be bad. Real bad." (Boren, pp.6-
16. 7).” So what is an alternative suggestion made to pay these
amateur athletes that would not result in negative behavior? A
stipend.
Offering athletes an extra stipend
An alternative suggestion to paying athletes is offering them an
extra stipend to help with college expenses. “The biggest issue
for the big five conferences is paying players a small stipend in
addition to room, board and tuition. The larger schools favor the
idea, but haven't been able to get it approved by the NCAA
because of opposition by smaller schools, which argue they
can't afford the additional cost. The pay issue is a slippery one.
Once institutions pay players, what's to keep Texas from
outbidding Iowa State for a player's services? (McClatchy, pp.5-
6).” This is not a good idea because it will severely hurt the
smaller colleges as well hurting the budget for more
scholarships, technology, and supplies. “It should also be noted
that the life of a major college athlete bears no resemblance to
the life of an ordinary college student. These athletes receive
the best in accommodations, food, training and tutoring
(McClatchy, pp.7).” Is it fair to give these athletes this extra
stipend and tell thousands of other hopeful college students that
they are unable to receive a scholarship due to lack of money?
No it’s not okay and it should not be acceptable to any
educational institution. These institutions were created to
educate society not to pay them for their sporting abilities.
Scholarships
The scholarships that college athletes earn are more than
enough compensation. Not only do these scholarships cover
room, board, and tuition; these scholarships also provide these
students an education of a lifetime from a top name school. This
in turn allows these students to go out in society with the skills
and abilities to obtain an outstanding career for the rest of their
adult lives. If colleges were to choose to pay their players, this
will cut these scholarships for the players as well as other
college students. With the cuts, these players would be paid to
play but would have to worry about covering these expenses
17. that were already once covered under the scholarship. Wouldn’t
this lead back to the same scenario of when the athletes didn’t
get paid? One source states “Despite some abuses and
irregularities, scholarship programs benefit both students and
universities. The students receive substantial financial rewards
to be used for educational expenses, enhancing their growth and
development. Universities enrich their campus life through
athletic discipline, achievement and esprit de corps. To pay
students as "professionals" would cause colleges and
universities to bolster false hopes of professional sports as a
lasting career option and betray the very goals and values they
embody as educational institutions.” (Florida Times Union, pp.
27-36)
Another source says “The Colleges recruit young men and
woman to play for their respective schools awarding them with
athletic scholarships. The reason we have Colleges and
Universities is to educate our young people. The colleges expect
star performances for their upfront investments, rewarding
college players with full paid 4 year college education.
(Sulmasy, pp. 11-12).” So, are scholarships still more than
enough for athletes or should we pay them and risk offering
students an education as well as risking the closure of smaller
colleges?
Conclusion
Overall, college athletes receive more than their fair share of
“free” money for their playing and hard work, and to pay them
would only lead the players to false hopes and failure. It’s not
fair to the millions of regular college students to take away
their scholarship money to pay the select few outstanding
college athletes. They receive more than enough publicity and
recognition for their hard work, as well as more than enough
free services at a top name school. These athletes have the
option to be recruited by professional leagues well before their
college years are over, and if they feel as if they should be paid
to play, then they have the option to accept that offer. The fact
that they have options is more than enough reason to not pay
18. them while they are still considered “amateurs” and they receive
more than enough compensation for their age levels. Paying
these athletes could result in many of the smaller colleges to
close, laying off thousands of workers, as well as not providing
our society with the necessary tools and education needed to
succeed in life. Education is more important than sports, and
colleges are educational institutions that are here to provide just
that. Making education a choice among athletes that are already
receiving all of these free accommodations from the schools is
absurd, and society needs to be reminded that these athletes are
still “young adults” with the need to still learn many decision
making skills.
References
Allen Sack Christian, S. M. (2008, Mar 16). College athletes are
students first and should not be paid. Deseret News. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/351615303?accountid=13931.
Boren, C. (2013, Aug 06). Johnny manziel accepted money for
autographs, report says (posted 2013-08-06 02:46:08). The
Washington Post. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
19. ocview/1417787896?accountid=13931.
College athletes need fair treatment. (2013, Aug 06). Bozeman
Daily Chronicle. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/1417958274?accountid=13931.
EDITORIAL: Should college athletes get paid? (2011, Sep 21).
McClatchy - Tribune Business News. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/893136457?accountid=13931.
EDITORIAL: College sports have their own pay-to-play issue.
(2013, Aug 04). McClatchy - Tribune Business News. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/1417339398?accountid=13931.
Kenneth, J. C. (2011). Should college athletes be paid to play?
Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 28(10), 12-13. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/874652804?accountid=13931.
March madness - should college athletes get paid? (2013, Mar
26). PR Newswire. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/1319493943?accountid=13931.
Nocera, J. (2013, Aug 06). The plot to rule college sports. New
York Times. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/1417816171?accountid=13931.
PRO & CON. (2013, Jul 02). Florida Times Union. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/d
ocview/1376140979?accountid=13931.
