Free Tuition Should Be Free

“Every person in this country who has the desire and ability should be able to get all the education they need regardless of the income of their family. This is not a radical idea” (Better World). The use of biased articles that contain fallacies and rhetorical devices that can distort the viewpoint of the readers, is the main cause of misinformation on many issues happening in the world. On the topic of free tuition, the concern for those opposed to this ideology is “how will it become free” or that there are no benefits of making college free. Those who are for the notion of a free higher education, explain how it will not only benefit students, but families and the economy as well. The issue of free tuition is not a concept of who’s wrong

and right, the point is that this ideology will have a large effect on society, as well as students, parents and teacher. Free tuition has always been an idea that was stored in the back of our minds, and as of late many articles and editorials have been able to convince readers that we should pursue free tuition or neglect this idea completely.

For a majority of our nation’s history, public colleges and universities have been much more affordable than they are today, with lower tuition and financial aid that covered a much larger portion of the costs. “Bernie sanders says wall street tax will pay for his free tuition plan” is an article, written by Lauren Carroll, that gives a neutral viewpoint on the topic of Sanders’ free tuition plan. In this editorial, the author discusses how this plan will be payed for and how the rich will be taxed in order to provide services to the non-wealthy. “Why Free College Tuition is a Bad Idea” written by Lonnie Webster Says, along with many other authors, is a heavily biased article that goes against the idea of free college tuition because of the many negative effects it could have on our economy. While articles like “Bernie sanders is right…” and ”Why free college tuition is a bad idea” are both heavily biased article, filled with fallacies and rhetorical devices in order to convince the reader, “Bernie Sanders says Wall Street…” remains neutral on the topic because it argues both sides and simply gives factual

claims. The heavy production of biased and fake information enhances the need for every reader to identify these aspects in order to avoid believing deceiving information.
The article “Bernie Sander says Wall Street Tax will pay for his free tuition plan” informs the reader of how Sanders plans to pay for the free tuition of future college students. With the intended audience being the middle class, this article lays a foundation of information for the reader to construe due to its lack of fallacies and other tactics an author would use to convince a reader of their claim. The author reveals the preconceived audience when she states, “Sanders estimates that his plan to make undergraduate tuition at public colleges and universities free would cost about $75 billion annually. Based on his proposed College Act, the federal government would fund two-thirds of that cost using tax on Wall Street trading, but participating states would have to kick in the remaining costs“ (Carroll). The credibility of this source is valid because it uses actual quotes from Sanders on the topic of free tuition and his plan for the future of America. An example of a legit statement used by Sanders is, “I think the idea is sound,” Sanders said in the March 30 interview. “It paid for, Erin, by a tax on Wall Street's speculation. When Wall Street’s illegal behavior destroyed our economy, the middle class bailed them out. It is now time for them to help the middle class” (Carroll). This article is mainly neutral on the issue of free college tuition, allowing the reader to formulate their own thoughts and opinions on the matter that the author is informing about. This neutrality is seen when the author says, “Setting aside a disagreement over how much Wall Street tax would raise, in any case, Sanders’ own proposal is straightforward about the fact that the tax revenues will not fund the free public school tuition 100 percent”(Carroll). In the statement, the author is strictly giving information about Sanders’ plan, without any strings attached to it.
Being a fairly neutral article, means that there is little to no fallacies or appeals to the reader, there isn’t a need for them when the author is strictly informing the audience on an issue. One of the only fallacies depicted in this article was given by Sanders himself and the author points it out to the reader, when she states, “Sanders has a point that his proposed Wall Street tax would cover part of the plan, but he left out the significant state contribution. And it’s not a sure thing that every state would join in. So we rate his claim Mostly False.” (Carroll). This article makes a strong argument by pointing out the fallacy used in Sanders’ claims and using real quotes and statements to prove why free tuition may or may not work. The lack of bias and fallacies has a great effect on the reader, because now they have to form their own thoughts, instead of being influenced by the author's bias. Since this article is strictly informative and makes it a point to simply provide information to the reader, it could have either a positive or negative effect on society. After reading this article, a critical reader would question whether or not to be for or against the idea of free tuition because since this is a neutral article, the questions are left up to the reader without the author’s influence. The article “Bernie Sanders says Wall Street Tax…” informs the reader about how Sanders’ free tuition plan will be paid for and how those taxes could be beneficial to the future of American college students. The lack of appeals and biased personal opinions of the author allows the reader to be responsible for how they interpret the information given to them. With the author simply giving the facts and the reader’s control of their own opinions, if there is a perpetuation of misinformation, the fault lies with the reader.
The article “Bernie Sanders is Right: Make colleges tuition-free” emphasizes that having a college degree is now a necessity unlike it was in the past, and how Sanders’ tuition plan will make going to college easier. The intended audience is students looking to go to college and their families, this is seen when the author says, “This is why Bernie Sanders has a plan that emphasizes the importance of making public higher education affordable to everyone, period. His approach goes “big” because it’s what our economy needs” (Bernie Sanders). The article is slightly biased, not in the way that will automatically make the reader question its credibility, but in a way that lets the reader get a grasp of what the topic is about and know how the author stands on the issue at hand. However the author’s thoughts on the matter are revealed when they claim, “The old financial aid system worked for a while, but now it’s broken. We know what to do. It’s time to make public high education tuition-free.” (Bernie Sanders).
The use of fallacies and certain appeals to the reader allows for the author’s viewpoints on free tuition to influence what the reader thinks or is unaware about.

One example of a fallacy that the author uses is a straw man, which is when the author makes the opposing side look worse than it actually is. This is seen when the author makes a statement about Hillary Clinton, “Sadly Hillary Clinton decries bold efforts to make college affordable because she thinks Gov. Scott Walker won’t like it, or one of Trump’s kids might actually benefit. Should the Democrats really support a leader with a defeatist attitude about a critical 21st century problem?” (Bernie Sanders) By claiming that Clinton will not support Sanders’ free tuition plan, the reader now believes that the opposing side is automatically

wrong.
With the author’s use of straw man , the reader is convinced that the opposing side is not the option and will not have any benefits to people, so they are forced to side with the article's claims supporting free college tuition. When it comes to informing the reader on a topic that they have no previous knowledge about, the article could have either a positive or negative effect on society. In the end, the reader can be somewhat convinced that free college will only have a positive effect on the society because of how the author presented their claim. Appealing to the reader and using certain fallacies, the author convinces the reader that their claim is correct. At the end of the article, a critical reader would ask, “Is this claim correct because it’s the author’s bias or am I able to form my own opinions on the matter after being well informed about it?” Often the reader automatically formulates their opinions on the author’s bias, instead of creating their own thoughts and interpretations of the information that was presented to them. The article “Bernie Sanders is right” greatly informs the reader about free tuition for colleges in America and its benefits to our society. Though a credible and somewhat convincing article, it is also slightly biased because of the personal opinions that the author uses, so if there is any perpetuation of misinformation, the fault lies with the reader and not the author.
The article “Why free college tuition is a bad idea” written by Lonnie Webster Says and many others, emphasizes how the implication of free tuition will have a strongly negative effect on not only college students and their families, but also our society and the economy. The intended audience of this article is future college students, informing them about the free tuition plan and how it's not really “free.” The audience that the author is aiming for is seen when they say, “If you’re a young person, a college student or the parent of a soon-to-be college student, free tuition might sound like a great idea. The prominence of these proposals certainly warrants a closer look” (Luebke). The credibility of this article is made clear with the use of statistics, seen when the author states, “According to the Economic Policy Institute, wages for university grad are 2.5 percent lower in 2015 than they were in 2000. The research found that the real hourly wages of recent college grads in 2015 was $17.49. In 2000, the average hourly rate was $18.41” (Luebke). This article, although heavily biased, is somewhat credible because it cites other authoritative sources, as well as using statistics. The use of outside sources and statistics let’s the audience know that the information that they are getting can be believed because the numbers and statements helps support the author’s claim. In the previous statement, the author is claiming that the common belief of needing a four-year college degree in order to make more money and be successful is false as seen in recent studies of hourly wages. The author’s bias is revealed when they claim, “Our society values a college degree - maybe too much. Over the last two decades, we’ve funneled too many young people toward a four-year degree, when the truth is that many probably would have done better elsewhere” (Luebke). The reader is easily able to tell this article’s level of bias just from it’s title, “Why free college tuition is a bad idea” (Luebke). The authors of this article use outside sources to add to their information, however this article is full of opinions on why they think that free tuition is anything but beneficial. Using personal opinions on what’s supposed to be an informative article, allows the reader to be convinced that the author's viewpoint on the topic is the correct one.
The authors of this article use numerous rhetorical devices and fallacies, allowing for their claims to be seen as correct according to the reader. For example, there is a common theme of circular reasoning, reiterating the same claim in different words, used by the authors that makes the reader see this claim as important. This is evident when the author states, “College, unfortunately, has become a proxy for talent. However, the reality is a college education doesn’t always translate into social and economic mobility” (Luebke). Then, later on in the article says, “Providing free tuition to institutions that graduate a little over 50 percent of their students does not make economic sense. It would likely attract more students that are ill-suited for the college environment who will end up dropping out anyway” (Luebke). In these two fairly similar statements, the authors are claiming that free tuition won’t solve any of our economic problems, if anything it’ll make them worse.
The use of fallacies, like circular reasoning, has the potential to greatly impact the reader's’ viewpoint on the topic, especially if they have no previous knowledge about it. By stating the same claim multiple times in different words, the reader is made to think that it must have a high significance if it’s been repeated so many times. Informative articles can have a positive or negative impact on society, it just depends on the credibility or bias of the article and what type of information the author is producing. By the end of this article, the reader would most likely have a negative viewpoint on the free tuition plan because that’s the information that the author produced. This article can end up having a negative effect on society because it convinces readers that free tuition will do nothing for the economy and the main issue isn’t money, it’s that students will end up dropping out in the end. The use of circular reasoning makes the article slightly effective for the reader, however, it also makes the reader question the credibility and bias stand points of the article. By the end of this article the critical reader should question, “do I believe this claim is correct because it was repeated so many times or is it legitimate information that could further my knowledge?” The article “Why free college tuition is a bad idea” is an enlightening article that the ability to give the reader a lot of information on the topic of free tuition college in America. Although greatly informative and credible, this article is heavily biased by the use of author’s opinions. Due to the content provided by the authors, the one who is responsible for the perpetuation of misinformation are the authors because they gave the readers their biased opinions about free tuition on a silver platter, this makes the reader believe that their claim is correct.
“Bernie Sander says Wall Street Tax will pay for his free tuition plan” informs the reader of how Sanders plans to pay for the free tuition of future college students. This article lays a foundation of information for the reader to construe due to its neutrality, lack of fallacies, and other tactics an author would use to convince a reader of their claim. “Bernie Sanders is Right: Make colleges tuition-free” emphasizes how Sanders’ tuition plan will make going to college easier and states how his plan will bring the economy great benefits. “Why free college tuition is a bad idea” written by Lonnie Webster Says and many others, highlights how the implication of free tuition will have a strongly negative effect on not only college students and their families, but also the economy and society.
Free tuition is something that can have a large effect on our nation, whether it be a negative or a positive impact. Within these three articles, authors give facts and opinions on a free higher education. While some were extremely biased and opinionated, others solely gave information to the reader. The purpose of these articles was to inform potential students, some hit it spot on and made the reader formulate their own thoughts, others gave facts laced with personal opinions, which eliminates the reader’s chance of having their own stance.
In a time when the media has taken over, information has commonly been found incorrect. Due to the enhancement of technology, the answers and solutions are at one’s fingertips, however the validity of these answers is something that is never questioned. In today’s society we automatically think that anything that comes from the internet is correct. We’re spending too much time trusting the source and not enough time questioning it. More often than not, readers are either convinced by the author’s claims because of actual information given or because of the way the author presents that information. The perpetuation of misinformation is either blamed on the reader or the author. The reader is at fault for believing false information or having their opinion influenced by the author's bias, or the author is blamed for providing fallacies and personal opinions. Being misinformed can have an exceptionally sizable outcome on society, but this can be avoided by evaluating and analyzing the credibility or bias of the source of information.

Work Cited

Carroll, Lauren. "BERNIE SANDERS SAYS WALL STREET TAX WOULD PAY FOR HIS FREE TUITION PLAN." Tampa Bay Times [St. Petersburg, FL], 4 Apr. 2016. 15 May 2017.

Luebke, Bob, Lonnie Webster Says, Larry Says, Lonnie Says, Mike Says, Billy Bob Says, Ben Johnson Says, and John Kantor Says. "Why Free College Tuition is a Bad Idea." Civitas Institute. N.p., 04 Feb. 2016. Web. 15 May 2017.

"Bernie Sanders is right: Make public colleges tuition-free." IIS7. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2017.

Better World Quotes - Bernie Sanders on College Education. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2017.

"The Argument for Tuition-Free College." The American Prospect. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2017.

"Tuition Quotes." BrainyQuote. Xplore, n.d. Web. 15 May 2017.