The reading states that appearences of professor in the TV programs would benefit various areas. However, lecturer refutes the reasonings of the reading. She expresses against the points made by the reading that it would benefit the Professor and the general public.
First, the reading states that professors benefit by getting exposure to the wide audience. This reasoning is challenged by the lecturer by saying that it would in contrast, create a negative image among his fellow professors. She notes that the other professors would view the professor as not so serious scholar, rather one who indulges himself in entertainment. This would negatively impact the reputation of the professor as he would be less invited into intellectual conferences or obtaining fundings for his research due to prejuidices.
Second, the lecturer adds that the professor would waste his time on other non productive activities like rehersing for the programs, maintaining his appearance and so on. This would take up his time that would rather have been invested in researches. Moreover, she also adds that it would impact the students as well due to his absence. He would have to go off campus frequently and this would hinder the students who would want to reach up to him.
Finally, the reading states that the public benefits by the appearance of professors on TV is that they get real expert insights which would otherwise be inaccessible to them. This point is refuted by the lecturer by stating that the Program runners do not prefer to provide highly intellectual content in their programs. On the contrary, they prefer the title, and, the professors mainly talk about general topics. Such topics could be even delivered by a journalist, if a little deep research and investigation were to be done.
The
reading
states that
appearences
of
professor
in the TV
programs
would
benefit
various areas.
However
,
lecturer
refutes the
reasonings
of the
reading
. She expresses against the points made by the
reading
that it would
benefit
the
Professor
and the
general public
.
First
, the
reading
states that
professors
benefit
by getting exposure to the wide audience. This reasoning
is challenged
by the
lecturer
by saying that it would
in contrast
, create a
negative
image among his fellow
professors
. She notes that the other
professors
would view the
professor
as not
so
serious scholar,
rather
one who indulges himself in entertainment. This would
negatively
impact the reputation of the
professor
as he would be less invited into intellectual conferences or obtaining
fundings
for his research due to
prejuidices
.
Second, the
lecturer
adds
that the
professor
would waste his time on other
non productive
activities like
rehersing
for the
programs
, maintaining his appearance and
so
on. This would take up his time that would
rather
have
been invested
in researches.
Moreover
, she
also
adds
that it would impact the students
as well
due to his absence. He would
have to
go off campus
frequently
and this would hinder the students who would want to reach up to him.
Finally
, the
reading
states that the public
benefits
by the appearance of
professors
on TV is that they
get
real expert insights which would
otherwise
be inaccessible to them. This point
is refuted
by the
lecturer
by stating that the
Program
runners do not prefer to provide
highly
intellectual content in their
programs
.
On the contrary
, they prefer the title, and, the
professors
mainly
talk about general topics. Such topics could be even delivered by a journalist, if a
little
deep research and investigation were to
be done
.