Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Blondes 'to die out in 200 years' (Location: BBC News (Date: Sep…
Blondes 'to die out in 200 years'
Location: BBC News
Date: Sep 27, 2002
Article review by: Shannon Edwards
Blondes 'to die out in 200 years' (
News Artical
)
What ethical issues were raised by the article?
An ethical issue presented in the article, was in singling out and blaming the people who dye their hair blonde, saying that this was the cause for the soon to be "extinction" of natural blondes. This allegation is based upon no scientific evidence or upon any substantial evidence.
My Reaction:
My second thought was, "Wow, people actually believe this type of thing, even though it has no scientific evidence to back it up."
The last thing that came to my mind was, " Even if this theory in the soon to be extinction of blondes, why on earth would you blame someone who has no power to change the course of nature?
My first reaction was pure shock. Not shock in a way where I thought "Wow this is crazy!", but I was shocked that someone was actually willing, to put the time and effort to write something so laughable.
Play devils advocate, what opposing view could be expressed?
If Scientist are so afraid of natural blondes dying out, but what are they doing about it?
The artitcle states that, "dye rivals" (par. 5) are the cause of the problems, but maybe it is because blonde hair is caused by a recessive gene. Meaning this gene trait has to come from both parents, maybe there just aren't enough parents with similar genes.
What is your opinion about the issue, and what caused you to form that opinion?
I believe that the extinction of naturals blondes due to dye blondes is absolutely unethical.
As a professor, Jonathan Rees, stated in the article, "unless there is a disadvantage of having that gene or by chance. They don't disappear," Blondes won’t die out any more than brunets or red heads.
How could using a balance in research and reporting tactics have made a difference in the outcome of what was reported?
First point:
Had the writer added scientifically proven evidence to back up the claim he/she was presenting, they it would have helped greatly in the social acceptance of this article. Because there were no references, no data analysis given to aid in the development of this theory, then it causes the viewers to disbelieve the information given.
Second point:
Finger point, huge mistake. If I were a bottled blonde, because of the lack of scientific facts and references given, I would have felt highly offended by this article. The use of references makes a great difference in the acceptance of articles and facts being presented through media.