The reading and the lecture are both about the value of television appearances by university professors. The author of the reading argues that they are very worthwhile for academics and their universities. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He believes that these appearances are not particularly useful.
First of all, the author claims that television appearances help university professors broaden their audience, and also help them to be viewed as experts in their fields by more people. The author believes that this can increase their importance as academic professionals. This point is challenged by the lecturer. He says that professors who go on television are viewed by their peers as entertainers rather than as true educators. The lecturer claims that being a celebrity could even affect their ability to get funding for their work.
Secondly, the author states that television appearances can be beneficial for the universities themselves. It is argued that the prestige of a university is increased when one of its faculty members makes a high profile media appearance. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He suggests that universities can suffer because celebrity professors do not have much time for their research and students. He argues that rather than carrying out their duties, they spend a lot of time rehearsing, traveling and getting made-up for their appearances.
Finally, the author mentions that there is a net benefit to the public when a professor appears in the media. It is suggested that television is usually quite shallow and that professors can provide a very useful remedy to this problem. The lecturer, on the other hand, feels that television networks are just interested in the academic titles of the professors. He says that the abbreviated presentations that professors give on television are no more useful than what a regular reporter could deliver.
The reading and the lecture are both about the value of
television
appearances
by
university
professors
. The
author
of the reading argues that they are
very
worthwhile for academics and their
universities
.
The
lecturer
casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He believes that these
appearances
are not
particularly
useful.
First of all
, the
author
claims that
television
appearances
help
university
professors
broaden their audience, and
also
help
them to
be viewed
as experts in their fields by more
people
. The
author
believes that this can increase their importance as academic professionals. This point
is challenged
by the
lecturer
. He says that
professors
who go on
television
are viewed
by their peers as entertainers
rather
than as true educators. The
lecturer
claims that being a celebrity could even affect their ability to
get
funding for their work.
Secondly
, the
author
states that
television
appearances
can be beneficial for the
universities
themselves. It
is argued
that the prestige of a
university
is increased
when one of its faculty members
makes
a high profile media
appearance
. The
lecturer
rebuts this argument. He suggests that
universities
can suffer
because
celebrity
professors
do not have much time for their research and students. He argues that
rather
than carrying out their duties, they spend
a lot of
time rehearsing, traveling and getting made-up for their appearances.
Finally
, the
author
mentions that there is a net benefit to the public when a
professor
appears in the media. It
is suggested
that
television
is
usually
quite shallow and that
professors
can provide a
very
useful remedy to this problem. The
lecturer
,
on the other hand
, feels that
television
networks are
just
interested in the academic titles of the
professors
. He says that the abbreviated presentations that
professors
give on
television
are no more useful than what a regular reporter could deliver.