Some people think that secondary school children should study international news as one of the school subjects. Other people think that it is a waste of valuable school time. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

The importance of global media appears to increase year after year, so much so there have been calls to introduce news channels into the classroom. I believe this to be politically dangerous and potentially damaging due to the nature of international media. Firstly, considering the importance education has in a modern society, it is extremely worrying and dangerous to even consider substituting school subjects with international news. This is because the danger lies in choosing a correct, balanced, unbiased and neutral news source, if one even exists. For example if a child spent their school days watching FOX NEWS, they would potentially have a skewed opinion of the world due to its unabashed right-wing credentials. Therefore, changing a child's information diet from traditional subjects such as music, PE, or geography to watching a potentially partisan news channel is an extremely worrying and risky idea. Secondly, if international news were to become a new subject it could have a detrimental emotional impact on young minds. This is because in general the majority of news is of a negative nature, hence the expression, "If it bleeds, it leads". For example, studies by the EFE News Agency show that 85% of headlines are negative in nature, usually referring to natural disasters, war, famine, etc. The logic of having these types of stories beamed into a school to those of an impressionable age has to be challenged. Thus the obligation of watching news of a negative nature makes for a convincing argument against such an innovation. To conclude, due to the risk from political influences and the harsh reality of global news, I am strongly in favor of maintaining the current curriculum.