Books are definitely way better than television. Reasons:

1. Books don’t cost electricity

2. Books are definitely true and accurate because they are well researched by the authors while TV isn’t.

3. TV causes you to get fat because you just sit in the couch doing nothing except eating. While you can walk and jog while reading books, I do this often.

4. TV causes you to decrease your eyesight.

5. TV causes you to have a poor posture because you slouch whenever you watch.

6. TV promotes violence, discrimination, etc.

7. TV gives radiation.

8. Books give complete information.

9. Books can be carried everywhere.

That’s just some of the things I came up with…the list goes on and on…

Since the purpose of a debate is to convincingly argue a side whether it is true or not, I will give you some suggestions that support the idea opposite to my personal beliefs on this topic:

First off, I would (ironic as it is) like to suggest A BOOK to help you: “Everything Bad For You Is Good.” It’s a small book I read a little bit of while waiting for a train and it argues that TV and video games are actually making America smarter.

But for points in your debate, I also have some suggestions:

1. TV is more accessible than books and is therefore educating a broader audience who would probably be playing video games, getting drunk, or playing poker if they weren’t learning from what they were watching on TV. When people flip on the TV, they are not in the mood to be reading and probably wouldn’t be learning at all from the other things that they would be doing at the time.

2. TV gives you real world knowledge. (Hold on, I might have to vomit before I finish this point….) TV ads help consumer make more imformed decisions.

3. TV is faster imformation than books (and arguably less biased); when you read books time has made the events less real. Also an author has time to suficate unwanted oppinions and throw them out of his books. When someone watches the news (especially live news), they are receiving unadulterated perspectives that they wouldn’t be in books.

4. TV actually exposes you to a wider range of experiences, etc. than books. When you read a book, you are limited by your own imagination, which is limited by your own experiences. No matter how evocative and descriptive the writing, a book cannot force you to imagine things you have absolutely no concept of. By actually showing you things, TV does temporarily hijack your imagination, but widens its horizon in the process.

5. TV is applied literature. When you read a book you are subconsciously deciding whether a character is believable or not. When you watch TV, you still do that, but you also are subconsciously seeing whether you believe the acting too. This forces your mind to (subconsciously) confront what it believes about the world around you on more levels than you have to when you read.

6. TV is better for the economy. It employs more people and it, and advertisements help the economy as well.

7. TV offers a variety of shows that give educational experiences impossible in literature. The impact of a news story covering a tragedy would be less profound in print than it is on TV. The amount of iformation that a few seconds of video feed on National Geographic can give far better knowledge about an animal than several volumes of print. A cooking show can teach even the worlds least compitant cooks how to make a meal, and the Spanish channel(s) help people learn a foreign language better than a book that was meant to teach a foreign language would.

8. TV allows viewers to share experiences with talented people. Would American Idle ever have worked in print? Can a play-by-play newspaper article evoke the intensity and excitement of a football game?

9. TV is more affordable/accessible than a library that contains nearly as much imformation would be.

10. You can socially interact while you’re watching TV, but not while you’re reading

I hope that this helps some… good luck in your debate (especially the rebuttal phase)

Sorry, I have learned far more about the Second World War from readings books than I ever did from watching television. When I was younger there was an excellent program called ‘The World At War’ on television, which I tried to watch, and to this day I still have not seen the entire program since my other family members did not like to watch documentaries, and even today this program is not shown on any television channels that I can watch.

Books are better than television.

*Wow – look at all the thumbs down! Vindictive little baby, eh wot?

You can’t convince me that television is better than books. TV is for the illiterate. People with short attention spans. Who lack imagination and have to rely on others ideas to formulate their own. Books on the other hands opens new doors, allow you to explore the endless possibilities.

well television is educational for examples Nat Geographic Chanel, Animals Planet Chanel, discovery Chanel, and some news like BBC news, the local news, Living Asia Chanel. and many others Chanel that you can leaned from it. Of course if we are talking about our two local Chanel i tell you frankly they are not showing an educational show, except the news were just for one hour witch is so pity. the local Chanel is just competing for this drama,and comedy, were people just leaned nothing at all. you know so sad they just teach the Filipino people to dream, to cry like in soap opera, to laugh like in comedy show,like in showbiz. were face it we know that we have a lot of problem to solve personally, of course it not bad to laugh sometimes or maybe all the times that’s good. That’s all i can tell you. TV is good but is defends. TV is good but take note books are better.

Watching tv is simpler but I enjoy reading catalogs more

while reading a book, you’re stimulating the human brain. You make your reading and literacy skills and you simply along the way, are more literate. Even with today’s modern technology, you should be able to read still.

While you’re watching t.v. can be good fun, it isn’t doing anything to the human brain.

how about not?

sometimes (depending on the show) TV can be educational, like say the travel channel-which i really like. but books are way more better because even if the books my be dumb, you’re not just sitting there, starring at a screen, you’re actually working your mind by reading the words (if any).

~health-freak.com

that is not possible because books are better. they challenge your thinking. do not require electricity to use. help pass the time very very quickly. TV just plays programs eating up electricity and creates zombies. Go to your library and read