“Executions Should Be Televised,” written by Shemtob and Lat, defends the idea that executions should be possible to view by the public. They take this side because they say there is a high demand in liability and clarity in order for a democracy to function properly. Their argument is that not permitting executions to be recorded inhibits the world from knowing exactly what happens during the event. Rather than, reading about it the next day in the newspaper. They state in the essay that there is a dramatic difference between reading or hearing it than visually seeing it with sound. Shemtob and Lat use three different paths to support their belief. They take these paths to address the counter arguments of their audience. The first advance the authors take an example of an execution that happened in Georgia. Two examples were given. Both had completely opposite outcomes. Shemtob and Lat described one as painful and torturous behavior, and the other with no signs of pain, which was released by the press the next day after getting a quote from the medical examiner. By using this example, they address an audience that expects truth from their governmental officials and the press. This case does builds …show more content…
There was a claim that had been made by a professor that believe that televising executions would have an immobilizing effect on the viewers. The authors, Shemtob and Lat, took under consideration of the truth in this argument, but furthered the discussion that the beginning effect of broadcasting executions would start enough publicity to make its mark. This view of the argument appeals to the viewers who think that recording executions would create disregard. Shemtob and Lat do believe this; however, they also want to single out the fact that it would originally help people to actually see what goes on in the room that is the behind closed