The editorial, Treat Medicines Like Netflix Treats Shows, focuses on the issue that essential medicines are too expensive and the way that companies are selling the products to manufacturers is not the most cost efficient way. The author, Tina Rosenberg, brings up the point that streaming services never go backrupt, and the reason is that they “sell products with a very low marginal cost”(Rosenberg 1). If pharmaceutical companies had the same marketing strategy as streaming services did, more people would be able to afford medication. The drug that represents this scenario is hepatitis C. Hep C is one of the most deadly diseases in the United States than other diseases. It is very expensive and many people who have this disease do not have access to the cure because it is too expensive.
The United States has not taken huge measures to fix the cost of Hep C and other medications, but Australia has. Australia has made drastic changes which has allowed low income Australians to afford treatment. I agree with Australia’s way of allowing every person no matter how much money they have, to receive treatment for Hep C. I believe the United States needs to find funding instead of reserving “the drug for the sickest patients”(Rosenberg 2). America needs to use, “the Netflix model,” because, “it is an example of delinkage: pricing schemes that decouple rewards for pharmaceutical innovation from a drug’s price”(Rosenberg 4). This model is a brilliant way to expand the field of pharmaceuticals at lower prices. Medicine is a vital aspect of any person’s life. It can save a human’s life and it should be affordable to everyone.
The author was able to make a strong argument by using a captivating opening sentence. Relating a very serious topic to a very popular streaming site, Netflix, allows readers to want to know how medicine could be related to a move site. The author also wrote with clarity and backed her opinion with reliable facts. Rosenberg wrote in a very compelling way that allowed readers to want to help change the cost of medicine so that it is available to everyone.

The editorial: A plastic bottle ban that’s so crazy it just might work, is an opinion essay on the reason plastic water bottles should be banned and why. It also focuses on San Francisco Internatinal Airport’s plan on not selling single-use plastic bottles. SFO has created a plan that they won’t sell single-use plastic bottles but they will sell a reusable non-plastic refillable bottles. They will then implement 15 filtered water fountains which would be accessible to everyone in the airport. “The immediate effect will be the elimination of an estimated 4 million plastic water bottles that would otherwise be sold each year, most of which would have ended up in the trash or littering the landscape” (The Times Editorial Board). This will make a huge impact on the environment in a beneficial way. If more places would stop selling single-use water bottles, less plastic would be wasted.
This editorial was written in a call to action format. The author starts out the first paragraph by asking questions. He does this to make the reader go through a journey throughout the essay to find the answers to the questions. He wrote the essay in search of an answer. This writing strategy caught my attention because it made me eager to know the answer to the questions.
The author makes a very important point that people are wasting plastic everyday. Many people say that getting rid of single-use water bottles, plastic bags, and plastic silverware would be an inconvenience. Yes, it may be annoying to have to go to a water fountain to refill your water instead of grabbing another bottle, but by getting rid of unnecessary plastic would help save the environment. The environment is a very sensitive and crucial place. This essay is written as a wake up call to realize that the environment is being harmed by an overload of unnecessary plastic.

The editorial, End Legacy College Admissions, is about how many colleges accept students just because they have relatives who have gone to the school. The article continues to say why this is not okay because it takes away the opportunity for minority’s and lower income students to attend the school. Giving students preferential treatment for legacy admissions has been going on for years. But now many colleges are no longer following that tradition. Many colleges believe it is not fair to other students who have as much potential as legacy students.
I believe preferential treatment for legacy admissions is acceptable. Carrying on the tradition of a family’s education at a school is very important. Another benefit of accepting legacy students is that, “it helped with donations, which in turn helps fund financial aid programs for needy students and the construction of facilities that help the entire organization” (The Editorial Board 3). Many colleges can afford new advancements and better facilities due to legacy admissions. Also, if a student is being offered the opportunity to follow a parent’s educational path, the child’s chance for academic success increases. On the other hand, legacy admissions are unfair. Admitting less qualified students based on their family history of enrollment takes away space from those who actually deserve to attend.
The author wrote this editorial clearly and specifically. He wrote the article so that the paragraphs flowed with one another. He also included statistics and quotations from different universities to support his claim. If the author did not do this, his claim would not have been as strong. This editorial is also mainly informative but at the same time it persuades readers to learn more about universities that favor legacy admissions. The author made his point clear that favoring legacy admissions is unfair.

The editorial, End Legacy College Admissions, is about how many colleges accept students just because they have relatives who have gone to the school. The article continues to say why this is not okay because it takes away the opportunity for minority’s and lower income students to attend the school. Giving students preferential treatment for legacy admissions has been going on for years. But now many colleges are no longer following that tradition. Many colleges believe it is not fair to other students who have as much potential as legacy students.
I believe preferential treatment for legacy admissions is acceptable. Carrying on the tradition of a family’s education at a school is very important. Another benefit of accepting legacy students is that, “it helped with donations, which in turn helps fund financial aid programs for needy students and the construction of facilities that help the entire organization” (The Editorial Board 3). Many colleges can afford new advancements and better facilities due to legacy admissions. Also, if a student is being offered the opportunity to follow a parent’s educational path, the child’s chance for academic success increases. On the other hand, legacy admissions are unfair. Admitting less qualified students based on their family history of enrollment takes away space from those who actually deserve to attend.
The author wrote this editorial clearly and specifically. He wrote the article so that the paragraphs flowed with one another. He also included statistics and quotations from different universities to support his claim. If the author did not do this, his claim would not have been as strong. This editorial is also mainly informative but at the same time it persuades readers to learn more about universities that favor legacy admissions. The author made his point clear that favoring legacy admissions is unfair.

I can be extraordinary because I am determined. I will never give up while doing a task. I am eager to try new things and learn new topics. Just like Tara I am confident. Tara always wanted to learn new ideas and lifestyles and so do I. I can offer many things to Sir Morrisey’s future adventures. I can offer the qualities of patience, determination, being passionate, and being eager to learn knew things. Tara, from the start, was so curious about education and wanted to learn about so many topics and she wanted to take so many classes. I also feel the same way as Tara. This year I plan to focus on school and not get distracted. By doing all my work and having the sense of being willing to learn new things, I will be successful this year. Being extraordinary can be very hard to achieve but with a lot of practice, it can be achieved. As well as being smart in schoolwork, being smart mentally is also v rn important. Making the right decisions and having a good mindset can get you far in life. Being well rounded- academically and mentally can make me wanna extraordinary this school year.

I had to have traits perseverance when I got bullied at a summer program I went to because I wasn’t the smartest in the class and because I was different then everyone. I was determined to do well in the class and I proved to everyone that I am not different. I am smart.

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton