Shouldeveryonestudymathsuntil18?

The Week Junior

Isthecinema
betterthanhome?

Is it ok to use abbreviations?

Should grey squirrels be on menus?

Should books be rewritten?
 Contents
1. Is exploring space worth the money? 25. Should screen time be limited?
2. Should kids get to stay up late for special events? 26. Is the cinema better than home?
3. Should we stop eating Maine lobster? 27. Should everyone study maths until 18?
4. Should screen time be restricted? 28. Should Easter eggs be on sale in January?
5. Should stores be allowed to refuse cash? 29. Is it ok for shops to raise prices?
6. Is it OK to sell fossils for big bucks? 30. Is shouting at youth sports acceptable?
7. Are e-books better than real books? 31. Should people move to the countryside?
8. Should we be rewilding more land? 32. Is cash more useful than cards?
9. Is writing by hand better than typing? 33. Should books be rewritten?
10. Should museum admission be free? 34. Are exclamation marks necessary?!
11. Is comedy better than drama? 35. Should clean air be a human right?
12. Is it important to have good manners? 36. Should there be live-action remakes?
13. Should fans keep home run balls? 37. Should octopuses be farmed?
14. Should chatbots be banned in school? 38. Is writing by hand better than typing?
15. Should plant-based drinks be called milk? 39. Should the House of Lords be replaced?
16. Should publishers revise old books? 40. Should the UK have more bank holidays?
17. Should dogs be allowed at restaurants? 41. Should we stop sending cards and letters?
18. Is it better to watch movies at home? 42. Should cats be kept inside at night?
19. Is taking selfies bad for nature? 43. Should grey squirrels be on menus?
20. Is shouting at youth sports acceptable? 44. Should we eat gene-edited food?
21. Should yearbooks go fully digital? 45. Should SATs be scrapped?
22. Should conservation focus on smaller animals? 46. Is it ok to use abbreviations?
23. Are exclamation points necessary? 47. Are baths better than showers?
24. Should there be live-action remakes? 48. Is AI bad for new music?
 The big debate

Should screen time be limited?

Some people think we spend too You can learn and
have fun with a screen.
much time looking at screens.
What you need to know
People living in a village in India have
agreed to turn off their televisions and
phones for one and a half hours every
evening. This is so they can have
screen-free time, which is sometimes
called a “digital detox”.

A “digital detox” is when a person stops

using electronic devices, such as
computers, games consoles, phones,
tablets and TVs for a set time. Some
TIME NT?
people say that taking a break from
EL L S PE seven to
electronic devices is good for you. W aged from early
There is a lot of research that shows People e UK spend n ine,
that too much screen time can have 16 in th urs a day onl
a negative effect on people’s physical four ho ording to a
acc eport.
and mental health.
2021 r
 Yes – screen time should be limited No – people can manage their screen time
A siren sounds at 7pm every evening in Mohityache
Vadgaon village, in India, announcing that it is
time for everyone to turn off screen devices, like
Phones, computers, games consoles and TV are great
resources for getting information and lots of fun for
Do birds dream? Does spaghetti grow on trees? What
was the biggest dinosaur ever discovered? Through
televisions and mobile phones. At 8.30pm, a second entertainment. However, they can be addictive and devices like phones and computers people can find
siren sounds, informing the 3,000 residents that some people need help to break from them. Even if answers to these questions and many more. They
screen-free time is over. The leaders of the village people are chatting on their phone or playing online can access great works of art, literature and music,
introduced it so that young people could focus on games together, they can still feel lonely. Screen-free and find out what is happening around the world. It
their homework and not be distracted by funny videos time means people can connect with family and is a great resource for homework as well as curious
or phone messages, and families and friends could friends in the real world. It’s also a great chance for minds. This shows screen time is important, so it
talk face-to-face more. However, some say that people to go outside and be active, which is good for should not be limited. Electronic devices allow friends
a screen simply gives access to information – it is their health. Too much screen time can lead to other and family far away from each other to stay in touch.
not harmful in itself. Instead of having a strict rule, a problems, such as not sleeping properly and a lack Limiting it might make people lonely. Most people
person can decide for themselves when to put down a of creativity. It is good to set limits and learn to live naturally take screen breaks, for example when they
device in favour of doing something else. What do without their devices as this will help people become eat or exercise. People should be free to judge for
you think? Should you set limits on screen time? more disciplined in other areas of their lives too. themselves how much screen time they should have.

Three points why screen time Three reasons why screen time
Scan the QR YES should be limited NO should not be limited
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Screen-free time allows people to
connect to the outside world and with
family and friends. Seeing people
1 Screen time can be productive – you can
read great works of literature, discover
fascinating facts or read about
LAST WEEK’S POLL face-to-face helps to cure loneliness. important things happening in the
Last year, we asked if you world. It can also help your school work.
thought staying up late
to celebrate the New 2 People can be more active if they are
not on their phones or watching TV all
the time, which is beneficial to health. 2 It allows people who are far from each
other to connect and to stay in touch.
Year was a good
88% 12% Too much screen time can also make it
idea. Most of you felt
it was fine to enjoy a
YES NO
harder to get to sleep. 3 People naturally take breaks anyway,
so there is no need for enforced limits.
late night for such
a special occasion. 3 It is good to set limits and give up
screens because it teaches discipline.
People should decide for themselves
how much screen time they have.
 The big debate

Is the cinema better than home?

Some say watching films at The cinema’s

B U ST E R
BLOoCstKsuccessful fi0l0m9),
home is better than the cinema. popularity is falling.

The m e is Avatar (2 4
What you need to know of all timh has made £2s
.
whic n in cinema
Cinemas are less popular since the start billio dwide.
of the pandemic. One cinema chain says worl
that audiences have dropped by more
than half in 2022, compared with 2019.

In December 1895, the world’s first

screening of a film was presented in the
Grand Café in Paris.

It became popular to go to the cinema

because it was cheap. Lots of films were
made in the US and the UK so there was
plenty of choice for audiences.

Going to the cinema used to be the only

way to see new films when they came
out. Now, it’s much easier to get them
from streaming services at home.
 Yes – it’s an amazing experience No – they’re too expensive
F or more than 100 years, going to the cinema with
friends and family to watch brand-new films has
been a tradition that lots of people have loved. Not
Going to the cinema is a really fun activity to enjoy
with friends and family. It’s a chance to leave the
It can cost a lot of money to go to the cinema,
especially when the whole family is going together.
only is it a great experience to sit in comfortable seats house, enjoy a film with other people, and even eat People don’t just have to pay for tickets but snacks
and eat a bucket of popcorn, but it’s a chance to some delicious popcorn. Also, nothing beats the and drinks too. Most popular films usually stay in the
watch the latest films on the big screen. However, experience of going to the cinema. It’s a wonderful cinemas for around four weeks, and sometimes it
with the growth of streaming services in recent years, combination of stunning visuals on a large screen, doesn’t take long before they’re available on
and the closing of cinemas during the Covid-19 with brilliant surround sound. It’s very easy to lose streaming services. In 2022, Lightyear was released in
pandemic, some people have realised it’s easier and yourself in a film while at the cinema. Lots of films are UK cinemas on 17 June, but was available for
more convenient to watch films in their own home. specially made for the big screen and films are just subscribers to Disney+ about six weeks later. There’s
Lots of exciting films have been released in the last not as good when viewed on a TV or laptop. It’s much no need to see films at the cinema if they’ll be
year, such as Roald Dahl’s Matilda the Musical and easier to be distracted by other things at home, like available to watch at home in a month or two.
Lightyear, but some people would rather watch them someone wanting to stop the film to get a drink. Streaming films is much easier too, because people
at home than at the cinema. What do you think? Are Seeing a film at the cinema avoids distractions; it have more control over when they watch the film and
cinemas the best place to watch films? requires your full attention and it feels special. can pause it whenever they like.

Three reasons why cinemas are Three reasons why cinemas are
Scan the QR YES the best place to watch films NO not the best place to watch films
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Going to the cinema is a really fun
thing to do with friends and family, and
it’s a chance to get out of the house.
1 It’s far too expensive for the whole
family to get tickets to watch a film,
along with snacks and drinks.
LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if
screen time should be 2 Seeing films at the cinema is an
experience because they’re made for
the big screen. It’s a feast of stunning
2 Films don’t stay in the cinema for that
long before they make it to streaming
services to watch at home, so people
limited. Most of you
thought people sounds and visuals. may as well wait.
57% 43%
3 3
should spend more YES NO When watching a film at the cinema, It’s far less hassle to watch a film at
time connecting with there are fewer opportunities to get home instead of going to the cinema.
family, friends and the distracted by things that could easily At home you can watch what you want,
outside world. interrupt the film at home. whenever you want.
 The big debate
Should everyone study maths until 18?
The Prime Minister wants young Most young people in the UK
SHOWDS
people to keep learning maths. OF HtAheNUniversity
must study maths until 16.

by at
What you need to know A study rpool found th
of Live anded people
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has
left-h erally better
announced that he wants to make young
are gen maths.
at
people in England study maths up until
the age of 18.

At the moment, studying maths in the

UK is compulsory up to the age of 16.
However, just half of all 16 to 19-year-
olds in the UK study the subject.

According to the Department for

Education, around eight million adults in
the UK have maths skills lower than
those expected of a nine-year-old.

Many countries – including France,

Germany, Japan and the US – already
teach maths in some form to all young
people until the age of 18.
 Yes – maths is good for you No – numbers don’t suit everyone
In his first speech of the year on 4 January, Prime
Minister Rishi Sunak announced plans to make all
pupils in England study maths in some form up to the
Making students study maths up to the age of 18
could give them an advantage in the future. Research
Even though maths might be important, it doesn’t
mean everyone is good at it. Forcing someone who
age of 18. Statistics and data are playing a bigger at the University of Oxford shows that those who stick struggles with maths to continue with it could
part in everyday life and more jobs need workers to with maths to the end of school boost their brain damage their enthusiasm for learning. Also,
have a good understanding of maths. Sunak believes power. They were found to have higher levels of a teenagers are old enough to choose what they study
that giving young people better numeracy skills will chemical known to improve memory and problem- and have a right to follow their own interests.
give them “greater self-confidence to navigate a solving. As statistics and data play a greater role in Students should be allowed to follow their passions
changing world”. However, some people have said society, mathematical skills are more important. and their skills rather than fitting into the same mould
they are concerned about the effect this could have Another study found that people who study maths as everybody else. There are still plenty of industries
on people who do not like maths. Besides, it is not until the age of 18 earn 11% more money than that don’t need you to understand complicated
clear whether there are enough maths teachers to people who do not. Understanding maths properly maths. These include acting, journalism and
cope with the huge rise in 16 to 18-year-olds studying can help you manage your finances and budget for publishing, and trades such as plumbing and
the subject? What do you think? Should everyone food and bills, or even take out a mortgage (borrow building. People who struggle with numbers can still
study maths until they are 18? a lot of money) to buy your own home. live happily and find good jobs that they enjoy.

Three reasons everyone should Three reasons everyone should

Scan the QR YES study maths until 18 NO not study maths until 18
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Researchers have shown that studying
maths beyond the age of 16 can boost
your brain development and improve
1 It is unfair to make everyone study
maths because it could harm a person’s
love of learning.
LAST WEEK’S POLL your memory.
Last week, we asked if the
cinema is better than
2 Students who study maths for their
A-Levels (exams taken at the age of 18)
2 Teenagers should have a right to choose
what they study and it’s important that
students follow their passions, which
home for watching
films. Most of you seem to earn more money than those might not be maths.
57% 43% who stopped maths at 16.
felt that a trip to the
cinema is more of an
experience than just
YES NO

3 Maths can help people look after their

money when they grow up. It’s useful
3 Many industries and jobs don’t need
maths, so it won’t harm career choices.
Other subjects such as English, history
watching at home. for everyday life. and science are also very important.
 The big debate
Should Easter
Christmas is only just over and
eggs be on sale in January?
Easter eggs are already on sale. A R R U SHn
SUGhan 80 millio ld
What you need to know More t e eggs are so
t
chocola ain every year.
Some shops in the UK started selling in Brit
Easter eggs as early as December. That’s
more than three months before Easter
Sunday, which is on 9 April this year.

Easter is a Christian festival that marks

the Christian belief that Jesus died then
rose from the dead two days later.

Unlike Christmas, the date of Easter

changes every year because it is set
according to the Moon.

Many people celebrate Easter by giving

each other chocolate eggs. The tradition
comes from medieval times when most
people weren’t allowed to eat animal
products during Lent (the time between
Easter eggs have been
Ash Wednesday and Easter Sunday).
on sale since December.
 Yes – customers have a right to choose No – it makes Easter less special
E aster is still more than two months away but
supermarkets have wasted no time putting
chocolate eggs on the shelves. Easter Sunday falls on
From biscuits and brussels sprouts to Marmite and
marmalade, supermarkets offer loads of items for
Easter only comes around once a year… or at least it
should do. Occasions such as Christmas, birthdays
9 April this year but some people have taken pictures sale all year round. Customers have the right to and Easter are special because they are unusual.
of Easter eggs on sale as early as December, just after choose what they want to buy and when they want to Selling eggs for months beforehand only makes the
Christmas. Some supermarkets are already stocking buy it, so they should also be allowed to choose when actual day feel less important. The reason that
Easter eggs and Easter-inspired chocolate treats. they fancy tucking into chocolate eggs. Selling supermarkets sell Easter eggs in January is just to
Many people are surprised that such items would be chocolate eggs for a longer period also means that make even more money. It also means children go to
on sale so far before Easter, especially as other there isn’t a rush to the shops in the last few weeks the supermarket and pester their parents for Easter
occasions such as Valentine’s Day come sooner in the before Easter, when they could run out. People like eggs for months on end. At a time when many
year. However, the supermarkets defended their to be organised because it reduces stress and builds families are having to watch how much money they
decision by saying that many people wanted to buy excitement before the big day. Easter eggs and treats spend, it isn’t fair or responsible to encourage even
in advance, or even give themselves an early are also some of the yummiest chocolates you can more spending on luxuries like Easter eggs. These
chocolatey treat. What do you think? Should Easter get. Who wouldn’t want to eat Easter eggs and treats are also not good for you. They are full of sugar,
eggs be on sale in January? chocolate bunnies for as long as possible? which is bad for your health and your teeth.

Three reasons why Easter eggs Three reasons Easter eggs

Scan the QR YES should be on sale in January NO should not be on sale in January
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Customers have a right to choose what
they buy and supermarkets are simply
helping people buy what they want.
1 Easter should be special. Selling Easter
eggs for months in advance means
when Easter does finally come round, it
LAST WEEK’S POLL doesn’t feel very special.
Last week, we asked if all
students should have 2 Even though Easter isn’t until April,
some people like to get organised in
advance. This avoids a rush of people 2 Supermarkets are just trying to sell
more Easter eggs, to make more
to study maths up to
buying eggs at the last moment, when money, which isn’t fair when the cost of
the age of 18. Most 44% 56% they could run out. food and energy is rising all the time.
of you felt that young YES NO
people should follow
their passions, even if
they’re not maths.
3 Easter eggs are some of the nicest
chocolates around so why not eat them
in January, February, March and April?
3 Having exciting Easter chocolate on
display encourages people to eat more
unhealthy foods.
 The big debate

Is it ok for shops to raise prices?

Some say it is unfair for shops to
charge a lot for popular items.
What you need to know
One bottle of the Prime hydration drink,
promoted by influencers KSI and Logan
Paul, should cost £2.

The drink’s popularity has led to

shortages and some shops have raised
their prices. One shop said it has been
selling bottles of Prime for £100 each.

Products often have a recommended

retail price (RRP), which is suggested
IP O FF! ic
by the maker of the product. This is the
price the maker says is fair.
R he pandem
During tp was found to
However, retailers can sell an item for one shoing a packet of .
higher or lower than the RRP. Sometimes be sell et rolls for £16
shops charge far more when the product Some shops have been four toil
is popular or in short supply. selling Prime for £10 a bottle.
 Yes – it’s a way to make money No – it’s taking advantage of customers
In December 2022, the Prime drink, promoted by
online influencers KSI and Logan Paul, went on sale
in UK shops. The sports drink comes in a few fruity
Business owners have to make money. If certain
products are very popular, such as popping fidget
It’s not fair that customers can buy items for different
prices depending on where they go shopping. When
flavours, including orange, grape and blue raspberry, toys, and customers will buy them at a higher price, Squishmallow toys became popular in 2020, stocks
and has been very popular with young people. Many then there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s a clever way ran low and it was difficult to find them in shops or
shops sold out and others have had customers to make a profit and that’s business. Running a online. If shops use moments like this to sell things at
queuing before they open just to buy the drinks. business can involve having to pay for products, staff, higher prices, it’s taking advantage of customers who
Although its official price is £2, it’s been such energy bills and delivery costs. Putting up prices can want or need whatever it is. Business isn’t only about
a hit that some shops have been selling it for £10 or help business owners to cover these costs. Also, shops money, it’s also about customers feeling like they
more per bottle. One shop has even said it has don’t always put prices up. Sometimes, supermarkets have paid a fair price and had a good experience.
charged £100 for a bottle. During the pandemic some will sell something for less than the recommended Also, when shops put up the price of a product, it only
shops heavily increased the prices of masks, toilet roll price, which is good news for the customer. Shops do benefits the shop. The manufacturer (the people or
and hand sanitiser because they were in demand. this to attract more customers and encourage more company who made the product) won’t get any more
Lots of people think this is unfair. What do you think? people to buy some of the other goods on display. money, which doesn’t seem fair. It’s selfish and treats
Should shops be allowed to charge what they like? It’s a smart move. both customers and the manufacturer badly.

Three reasons it is ok for shops Three reasons it is not ok for

Scan the QR YES to raise prices NO shops to raise prices
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Increasing the prices of products is a
simple way for business owners to
make money, so why shouldn’t they?
1 It doesn’t seem fair that, depending on
where they shop, some customers could
end up paying more than others.
LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
Easter eggs should be 2 Business owners may need to make
more money to cover the costs of
products they sell, staff that work for
2 When an item gets really popular,
increasing the price is taking advantage
of customers who want or need it.
on sale in January. 29%
YES them, bills and delivery costs.
Most of you thought
that was a little too
early in the year for
71%
NO 3 Retailers may also sell a product for a
lower price to attract more customers
3 Increasing the prices of products only
benefits the shop or business selling
them to the public. The people who
the chocolaty treats to and encourage people to spend money made the product won’t make any extra
hit the shelves. there. It works both ways. money. This is unfair.
 The big debate
Is shouting at youth sports acceptable?
Some parents on the sidelines
D CA R D
can get very carried away. RE r, hundreds
e s
In Octobootball matchee
f s
What you need to know of youthancelled becauy
were c d behaviour b
In recent years there have been several of ba ctators.
incidents at young people’s sporting spe
events, as adults on the sidelines get far
too competitive and they have even
become abusive and violent.

Some schools give parents a set of rules

telling them how to behave at sports
events. Other schools have banned
parents from matches and sports days.

In November 2022, the Football

Association ran a Silent Support
Weekend in England, asking spectators
not to shout at youth matches and to
only clap. The second Silent Support
Weekend is coming up this year on
25 and 26 February.
 Yes – sport should be noisy and passionate No – shouting makes things stressful
A cross the UK, hundreds of thousands of boys and
girls take part in sporting events at school and for
sports clubs. In recent years, there have been more
You can’t tell parents not to cheer when their child is
competing – they are proud of their children and want
The focus of junior sport should be fun – not just
winning. Shouting puts too much pressure on young
cases of parents becoming emotional and aggressive to encourage and support them. Besides, shouting players. It could make them anxious and afraid to
as they support their children from the sidelines. encouragement motivates all the players to try their lose. It could even put them off sport. When people
As well as shouting and arguing, there have been best. Sport is, after all, about competing. A lot of adult get aggressive it can be scary and creates a bad
reports of bad language, rude gestures and sports – amateur and professional – are noisy and atmosphere for everyone. It can also be hard for the
threatening behaviour – towards the referee, the raucous and it is important that young people get referee or teacher to control, which is unfair. Players
opposing team and other parents. Some people shout used to it. Sport is about passion, and shouting for need to focus on the sport and make their own
instructions to their children. Many sports clubs and your team or an athlete is a part of the experience decisions without being distracted by yelling from the
schools hand out rules on how to behave – and some and helps create an exciting atmosphere. Most sidelines. It can also be embarrassing. Clapping is a
have banned parents from coming to events at all. parents are sensible and respectful, even if they do positive, supportive way to show support. Sport is
Some parents say they are just supporting their shout. Why should a few badly behaved people ruin it also about good sportsmanship and respecting
children and trying to help them. What do you think? for everyone else? It is the aggressive parents who everyone involved – parents should set a good
Is it ok to shout at youth matches? should be banned – not shouting. example and control their emotions.

Three reasons shouting at Three reasons shouting at

Scan the QR YES youth sports is acceptable NO youth sports is not acceptable
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Shouting creates an exciting,
competitive atmosphere and inspires
the players to try and win – that’s the
1 Shouting puts too much pressure on
young players. It takes away the fun.

LAST WEEK’S POLL point of sport. 2 Shouting can lead to aggression,

which is disrespectful, hard for the
Last week, we asked if it
was ok for shops to
raise prices for 25%
YES
2 Young people need to handle noisy
matches and events because that’s
what sport is like when you’re an adult.
referee or teacher to control and
creates a bad atmosphere for everyone.
It can also be embarrassing.
popular items. Most
of you felt that some
shops were being
greedy and taking
75%
NO 3 Most parents are respectful and only
shout encouragement – why should
they be told they are not allowed to
3 Clapping is a better way of showing
support than shouting and it sets a
good example for children to respect
advantage of customers. cheer for their children? everyone who is competing.
 The big debate
Should people
Cities are bursting at the seams
move to the countryside?
Around 37 million people live in
as remote areas are left behind. L
Tokyo and the surrounding area.

P RAW
S egacities
RB A N
U re are 28 m s with
What you need to know The citie an
orld –
In many countries, most of the people in the wions of more th
live in or around cities. populat illion people.
10 m
The World Bank, an organisation that
lends money to countries, predicts that
by the year 2050, 70% of the people on
Earth will live in cities.

In Japan, 30% of the population (around

37 million people) live in the Kanto
region, around the capital city, Tokyo.
Meanwhile, lots of people have left rural
(countryside) towns and villages to live
in big cities.

The Japanese government now wants

people to move away from big cities.
To encourage them, it is offering families
one million yen per child (£6,380) to
move away from Tokyo.
 Yes – the countryside is much nicer No – cities are exciting places to live
C ities are made up of buildings and roads and
buses, packed with people rushing to school or
work. On the same morning, country villages might
Many cities cannot grow fast enough to meet the
demands of so many people. In big cities people often
Cities are supposed to be big, busy and bustling.
People arrive bringing lots of new energy and exciting
see a handful of cars on narrow country lanes, and are have to live in small or low-quality homes and spend ideas. Most jobs and opportunities are found in cities,
quiet and peaceful after dark. Most people in the a lot of their money on rent. People work hard to earn too – that’s why people move there. There is also
world live and work in cities. The Japanese enough money to move out of the cities and into the much more to do in a city than in the countryside,
government hopes to make it more appealing for countryside. They want more space to enjoy nature such as theatre, street festivals, parties and fun.
people to move away from cities to the countryside. and lead a quieter life. The countryside is a good Cities are for people who like energy and excitement;
In Japan, rural communities are at risk of place to grow up because you know your neighbours villages are for people who want a quiet life. Plus, if
disappearing without new people and young families and the roads are smaller and carry less traffic. You lots of people move to villages then they would all
moving in. Is it a good idea to encourage people to can easily go out for walks and ride your bike and get need somewhere to live. This makes it harder for local
move out of cities? Or is that unfair on countryside close to nature. It’s much easier to have a garden in people to find homes. In the countryside, people can
communities, which suddenly have to deal with lot of the country too. Many cities are so big now that they often only travel by car, but in cities there is lots of
new people moving in, buying or renting houses so just don’t function properly. It takes ages to travel public transport like buses and trams, which are more
local people can’t afford to stay? through them. The countryside is just nicer. eco-friendly. Cities are designed for people.

Reasons why people should Reasons why people should

Scan the QR YES move to the countryside NO keep on living in cities
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Cities can’t grow fast enough to
accommodate everyone who wants
to live there. People have to live in
1 Cities are meant to be busy, bustling
and exciting. Lots of people arrive with
new ideas. Cities are big enough to
LAST WEEK’S POLL uncomfortable places as they try to cope with a huge population.
Last week, we asked if earn enough to pay high rents.
shouting at youth
sports events was
2 People want the space and to enjoy 2 If lots of people move to a village they
might take up homes that local people
acceptable. Most 37% nature, and they move to the would have lived in.
YES 63% countryside for a quieter life.
of you thought
that shouting puts
pressure on players
NO

3 The countryside is a good place to grow

up because it is more relaxed than
3 Cities are designed and built for people
to live in and travel around. Public
transport is cleaner and greener than
and takes away the fun. living in a city. travelling everywhere by car.
 The big debate

Is cash more useful than cards?

Keeping coins in piggy banks
LY C A S H y
could soon be a thing of the past. EARtypes of monere
The firstjects from natuhich
What you need to know were obowrie shells, wom
c r
such as used in China f.
In 2020, only 17% of payments in the UK were und 1200BC
were in cash. Most were made using aro
credit and debit cards or phones.

With a debit card you can only spend the

money that is in your account. A prepaid
card must have money put on it before
you can use it, like a lunch money card.

Lots of banks offer debit cards for

under-18s, and there are companies –
like GoHenry, Osper, nimbl, Rooster
Money, HyperJar – that offer prepaid
cards to children from as young as six.

53% of seven to 14-year-olds keep their

money at home, and those with a card
still hold on to some cash.
 Yes – cash helps you understand money No – cards are quick and easy
T he number of people using cash has been falling
for several years. During the pandemic, many
shops stopped accepting cash (actual notes and
Young people should understand the value of money.
Using cash shows you how much you’re paying and
The world is going cash-free so you need to learn
about using a card, banking and taking care of your
coins) to help prevent the spread of Covid-19, and how much you have left. Working out the cost and money. A prepaid card teaches safe spending – you
lots of these shops still only take payment on a card change is good maths practice too. Using a card may can only use the amount your parents or guardian
or phone. Children used to put their coins and notes be quick and easy but it can mean that you don’t have put on it, and they can monitor your purchases.
in a money box or piggy bank and took some out to notice how much you are spending, which may There are blocks so you can’t over-spend or buy
buy something. However, many now have their own encourage you to buy things you don’t really need. anything inappropriate. You can check how much
cards that they can use in shops and online. Some What’s more, some places – such as small shops and money you have on an app, which also has budgeting
parents think that cards help young people with food stalls – don’t take card payments. Also, if you tools. Pocket money, payment for chores and birthday
money management but others think it is better to lose your card, waiting for a replacement to arrive is cash can be put straight onto your card and you can
stick with cash. Research suggests that people who inconvenient and annoying. Besides, it is exciting and then spend it online, as well as in shops. A card is
look after their own money from a young age have a fun putting pocket money and birthday cash into your easy to carry, and using it is quick and simple. If it
good understanding of finances in later life. What do money box, counting it and seeing it pile up. Bank gets lost or stolen, it can be blocked and replaced;
you think? Is cash more useful than cards? transfers are boring. if you lose cash, it’s gone for ever.

Three reasons why using cash Three reasons why using cards
Scan the QR YES to buy things is better NO to buy things is better
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Children need to understand how real
money works. That’s why handing over
cash, getting change and seeing how
1 With cash-free shops and online buying,
cash will soon be a thing of the past – so
what’s the point of learning to use it?
LAST WEEK’S POLL much there is left is important.
Last week, we asked if
more people should
2 Buying things on a card is too easy and
could lead you to buy silly or expensive
2 Using a card is quick and easy and you
don’t need to carry annoying change in
a wallet or purse. If the card gets lost
move from cities to
things you don’t really need. you can block it from being used, so
the countryside. The 54% 46%
YES NO no-one can spend your money.
vote was quite close,
but most of you liked
the idea of living with
3 Not all shops and stalls take cards, plus
bank transfers are dull. Saving coins
and notes in your piggy bank and 3 Debit cards have apps that allow you to
check your balance and manage your
more green space. watching them build up is fun. money. They encourage you to save too.
 The big debate

Should books be rewritten?

Some people are upset with
changes to Roald Dahl books. RY S H EDis
STODahl wrote h
Roald in a garden
What you need to know stories ing a pencil.
Puffin, the company that publishes
shed, us
books written by Roald Dahl, has slightly
rewritten the stories to remove words
that might offend people.

The changes were made to avoid

upsetting people and make sure that the
books can be enjoyed by all readers.

Roald Dahl, who died in 1990, wrote lots

of well-known books including Matilda,
The Twits, The Witches, James and the
Giant Peach, Charlie and the Chocolate
Factory and The BFG.

Dahl has sold more than 300 million

books and his stories have been Changes to Roald Dahl’s
translated into 63 languages. books have sparked debate.
 Yes – times change and so does language No – books should be left as they are
T he book publisher, Puffin, has changed some of
the words in stories by the popular author Roald
Dahl to remove language that it believes to be
Society’s values are always changing. What would
have been acceptable to say or do 100 years ago
Censorship is the banning of ideas, words or images.
It’s considered dangerous because it limits what
offensive. The publisher said it made the changes might not be acceptable any more. People are rightly people can say and how they express themselves.
so that the books “can be enjoyed by all”. The quick to point out when somebody says something No individual or organisation should be able to ban
changes were recommended by people whose job it hurtful, so the same should apply to books where another person’s views or words. Besides, even if
is to study books and highlight words readers might offensive language might appear. All old books are somebody dislikes an opinion or is offended by an
find upsetting. They include removing words that reviewed carefully by the publisher when they are idea, it does not mean that no one else should hear
describe characters as “fat” and “ugly”. This has upset reprinted. This is a normal part of publishing books it. After all, everybody has different tastes, likes and
lots of people because they think the changes aren’t and even though Dahl is very popular, his books dislikes. This is a good thing and a sign of a healthy
needed and could lead to lots of classic books being should be looked at in the same way. The most society. If some people find certain words or
changed. However, other people think that there is important thing is that children (and adults) read descriptions upsetting, the best way to deal with that
nothing wrong with slightly changing outdated and books, and lots of them. Any steps and small changes is not to ban it or change it, but to discuss, debate
hurtful language in books written many years ago. to the text that make Dahl’s stories more accessible and make people aware of why the material is
What do you think? Is it ok to rewrite old books? and inclusive is surely a good thing. hurtful. It can help people to learn and understand.

Three reasons books should Three reasons books should

Scan the QR YES be rewritten NO not be rewritten
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Attitudes change over time and what
was once acceptable might no longer
be ok. So it’s right to review whether
1 Censorship is dangerous and leads to
voices and opinions being silenced.
Being able to speak freely and express
LAST WEEK’S POLL language in a book is appropriate. yourself is an important right.
Last week, we asked if
cash is more useful
than cards for 2 All books are considered for changes
when they are reprinted. Roald Dahl
books should go through the same
2 Just because you don’t like something,
it doesn’t mean other people won’t
enjoy it. The books should be left alone
managing your 44% 56%
money. Most of you YES NO process as other books. and read by those want to read them.
think cards are
quicker and easier to
use for most payments.
3 Anything that makes books more
accessible and inclusive is a good thing
because it encourages reading.
3 It’s better to leave books unchanged so
people can discuss them and find out
why some words are unkind.
 The big debate
Are exclamation marks necessary?!
A simple vertical line and a small
dot can stir up strong feelings.
What you need to know
Children’s author Michael Rosen recently
interviewed punctuation expert Dr
Florence Hazrat about her new book
An Admirable Point: A Brief History of
the Exclamation Mark!

In her book, Dr Hazrat explores how

exclamation marks came into writing
600 years ago and why so many people
don’t like them.

The Chambers Dictionary defines

exclamation marks as being “used in
place of a full stop to indicate emphasis
or strong emotion”.

Exclamation marks are sometimes called

“bangs”, “shrieks”, “gaspers” and
“screamers” by journalists and writers.
 Yes – they’re a useful punctuation mark! No – they are shouty and annoying
P unctuation is so important in writing that it is one
of the first things you learn in school. It is a
universal code with different marks to help with the
An exclamation mark is a valid form of punctuation
whose origin can be traced back to a 14th century
Famous author Terry Pratchett (who wrote The
Amazing Maurice) writes that someone who uses
meaning of what is being written. It can indicate the Italian scholar. No one could say the question mark multiple exclamation marks is likely to wear
end of a sentence, a question or – in the exclamation was unnecessary – without it, how would the reader “underpants on his head”. Perhaps this is because
mark’s case – a strong feeling or emotion. Without an know the writer is asking something? Likewise the they seem shouty and forced, giving away a writer’s
exclamation mark in the correct place, a warning road exclamation mark informs the reader that there are need to tell the reader how to read a sentence. It’s
sign might read, “Children please drive slowly” rather strong feelings in the words before it. It is up to the much better to leave them out and let the reader
than “Children! Please drive slowly”. It matters how reader to work out exactly what that emotion is but react to the words on their own terms. A good writer
punctuation is used. However, some writers would it’s a useful signal. Also, exclamation marks on road can create emotions with just words and sentences,
say that exclamation marks are never truly necessary. signs help to keep people safe. As punctuation expert whether that’s fear, wonder or joy. Exclamation marks
Others think it’s a misunderstood piece of Philip Cowell writes, “There’s a meaningful difference make the writer seem desperate and can be tiring to
punctuation, and Dr Hazrat points out that they have between ‘duck’ and ‘duck!’” Of course, using them too read. One writer in The Atlantic magazine described
stood the test of time over hundreds of years. What much makes exclamation marks lose their purpose them as “the cockroach of the punctuation world”,
do you think? Are exclamation marks necessary? but that doesn’t mean they are useless. meaning they are everywhere, and they are pests.

Three reasons exclamation Three reasons exclamation

Scan the QR YES marks are necessary NO marks are not necessary
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Exclamation marks are just as necessary
as any other form of punctuation. Their
purpose is to change the tone of voice.
1 The famous author Terry Pratchett
really did not like exclamation marks
because they’re unnecessary. They’re
LAST WEEK’S POLL shouty and annoying too.
Last week, we asked if
books should be 2 They lift the words on the page by
expressing wonder, amazement or a
wide range of strong emotions and 2 They tell the reader how to read, rather
than letting them figure out the tone
rewritten to reflect
modern opinions. feelings. They are a useful signal. for themselves.
12% 88%
3 3
Most of you thought YES NO Exclamation marks on road signs serve The skill of writing is in crafting words
that works by writers a very useful purpose by protecting and sentences that carry emotion. It’s
such as Roald Dahl road users by making them aware of lazy to rely on the short-cut of the
should be left alone. hidden dangers. exclamation mark.
 The big debate
Should clean air be a human right?
Some want the law to ensure
E ET A IR
that the air we breathe is clean. SW ropean city
The Eu cleanest air
with the , in Sweden.
What you need to know is Umeå
Last year, the United Nations (an
organisation of 193 countries that work
together) declared that clean air was a
human right, which has encouraged
some countries to turn this into a law.

The UK Parliament is considering

whether to pass a law making it a
human right to breathe clean air. This
would be known as Ella’s law, named
after Ella Kissi-Debrah, who died in 2013,
aged nine, because of air pollution.

Air pollution is a big risk to public health

in the UK. This pollution comes from lots
of sources, including farming, transport
and the production of energy such as gas Air pollution is a big
and electricity. risk to people’s health.
 Yes – clean air saves lives and money No – it won’t improve air quality
T he UK Parliament is debating whether to pass a
law that would make breathing clean air a human
right. This would mark the 10-year anniversary of the
Passing a law that makes clean air a human right
would force the Government, local councils and
Real change will happen when people want to adapt
to less polluting activities and when they have the
death of Ella Kissi-Debrah, the first person in the UK businesses to make changes to reduce pollution. resources and support to do that. Trying to force
officially to die of air pollution. In the UK, around People could challenge activities that pollute clean change by introducing a new law isn’t likely to work.
36,000 people die of air pollution every year. air. Even though children aren’t responsible for air Most European countries already recognise the right
Campaigners argue that by passing this law, people pollution, they’re often most affected by it, especially to a clean environment, including the right to breathe
will be able to challenge polluters and improve air when it comes to conditions like asthma (which clean air, but many still have very polluted air. It’s also
quality across the UK. Opponents question the impact affects the tubes that carry air in and out of the lungs). not fair to make the Government, local councils and
of a law like this. They say the Government should be It’s only fair that their interests are put first. Also, it businesses responsible for all the air pollution in the
encouraging change, rather than trying to force it. The costs a lot of money to care for people who fall ill UK because some of it is not caused by them – the
introduction of “low emission zones”, discouraging because of air pollution – about £1.6 billion from weather, for example, carries air pollution from
polluting vehicles from being used in certain areas, is 2017 to 2025, says the UK Government. That money overseas. Businesses especially are still recovering
met with protest. What do you think? Should clean air could be better spent. The UK would also cut its from the pandemic; they shouldn’t be forced to make
be a human right? output of gases that cause climate change. expensive changes too quickly.

Three reasons why clean air Three reasons why clean air
Scan the QR YES should be a human right NO should not be a human right
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Changing the law sends an important
message. It’s a way to challenge
polluting industries
1 People need to be encouraged and
supported to make changes that will
curb air pollution, not forced by law.
LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if
exclamation marks are
7%
2 Children are heavily impacted by dirty
air, even though they’re rarely
responsible for the pollution. Their
2 Other countries have a human right to
a healthy environment, including clean
air. Yet air pollution levels remain high
really necessary NO
when you are health should be protected. in many of these countries.
writing. Most
of you gave
exclamation marks
93%
YES 3 Cleaning up the air people breathe
would make the UK wealthier and,
most importantly, it would help to
3 It’s not fair to make the Government,
local councils and businesses
responsible for all air pollution – some
a resounding yes!!! protect the planet. may have travelled from overseas.
 The big debate
Should there be live-action remakes?
Some people think that animated
MEOavW !
films should be left as they are. iour and
The beh of Toothless in
nts on
What you need to know movemeTrain Your Dragthe
How to sed on one of
The DreamWorks Animation film studio were baimators’ cats.
has announced that it will be turning the an
How to Train Your Dragon films, based on
the books by Cressida Cowell, into
live-action films.

Live-action films mix real-life actors with

the latest special effects to make fantasy
creatures and places look real.

The original How to Train Your Dragon

film series was three animated movies
about a Viking named Hiccup who
befriended a dragon called Toothless.
How to Train
In recent years, lots of popular animated
Your Dragon.
films have been re-made into live-action
films, including The Lion King, Aladdin,
and Beauty and the Beast.
 Yes - they bring old stories to life No - it’s not very creative
O ver the years, animated films have proven to be
one of the most popular types of children’s films.
Whether it’s Frozen, Puss in Boots, or Toy Story, there’s
The original film version of The Jungle Book came out
in 1967. It’s popular with older generations who grew
One of the reasons that animated films are so popular
is because they have beautiful styles of animation
something for everyone. The unique animation styles up watching it years ago, but it can seem old- that can be unique to that particular story. Some
used in these classic films helped to build a magical fashioned to young audiences today. The live-action films use classical two-dimensional sketch-style
world and create a unique experience for the adaptation, which came out in 2016, was a chance to animations, while others have a more modern
audience. However, recently it’s become popular to introduce a classic and popular story to a younger three-dimensional style, and these contribute to the
remake animated films, such as The Lion King, into generation. Young audiences have access to modern magic of the film. Creating animation takes a lot of
live action films. How to Train Your Dragon is the latest televisions and would rather watch state-of-the-art time and effort from the people who work behind the
animated film to get a live-action remake, which will special effects than an animation that’s decades old. scenes. Live-action remakes make it seem as if the
be in cinemas in 2025. Some people who love the Years ago, filmmakers didn’t have the technology to hard work of the original animators is not good
series are excited to see it brought to life again but make fantasy worlds or situations look real. Now that enough or is too old-fashioned. It’s not very creative
others think the animated films were so good that they do, it might as well be used. It’s exciting for to simply re-make a film in a different style. Instead,
there’s no need to remake them. What do you think? people to see what their favourite characters or film studios should be coming up with original ideas
Should animated films be given live-action remakes? fantasy creatures would look like in the real world. and stories to make into new films.

Three reasons there should Three reasons there should

Scan the QR YES be live-action remakes NO not be live-action remakes
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Remaking films is a great way to
introduce a classic and timeless story to
a whole new generation, who are used
1 Part of what makes animated films so
good is the beautiful animation styles,
which are unique to different films.
LAST WEEK’S POLL to modern special effects.
Last week, we asked if
clean air should be a
8%
NO
2 We have amazing technology that
allows film makers to make fantasy
2 Animators put a lot of hard work into
making films. Doing new live-action
remakes doesn’t value the work of
human right. The
result was very look like reality – we should use it! talented artists.
one-sided, showing
that most of you feel
strongly about
92%
YES 3 It’s great to see fantasy worlds brought
to life, and see what your favourite
characters and magical creatures would
3 It’s not very creative to just re-make
an old film again. Studios should be
coming up with new stories and making
reducing pollution. look like in the real world. original films.
 The big debate

Should octopuses be farmed?

Octopuses could soon be farmed
as well as being fished in the wild.
What you need to know
Demand for octopus meat is increasing U
– the number of octopuses caught in the
wild doubled between 1980 and 2014.

A study in 2020 showed that populations

of fish that people like to eat, including
octopus, are falling fast.

A Spanish company called Nueva

BIG S
Pescanova has revealed plans to build

BRAseIeNm to have of
the world’s first octopus farm on the
island of Gran Canaria.
es h
Octopuses will be bred and raised for Octopuseir brain in eac arm
h y
their meat in 1,000 tanks. The company part of t ht arms – everwn.
aims to produce around 3,000 tonnes of their eiga mind of its o
octopus meat a year, the equivalent of An octopus in has
one million creatures. the wild.
 Yes – it’s the best way to source octopuses No – keep the octopuses swimming free
A site in Gran Canaria, Spain, could become the
first intensive octopus farm in the world.
Octopuses are usually caught in the wild with fishing
Eating farmed octopuses is the best way to sustain
the wild population. As populations of some fish
Octopuses are sentient creatures, meaning they are
aware of their surroundings, they feel things like
rods and traps. The company behind the plans, Nueva species – like cod – fall, fishers are catching more pleasure and pain and they have a long-term
Pescanova, says that farming octopuses will mean cephalopods (octopus, squid and cuttlefish) to feed memory. To pluck a creature from its natural
fewer are caught in the wild. Others say that farming the world. In Europe, cephalopods are not protected environment and plop it into an unnatural one is
them is cruel and unnecessary. Millions of octopuses by fishing quotas (the amount of fish someone is cruel. They will be squashed into tanks with many
are eaten all over the world every year. In 2020, a allowed to catch each year). The number of wild other octopuses, and have bright lights shone at
documentary called My Octopus Teacher followed a octopuses could fall further if something isn’t done. them. This will cause them stress because they are
filmmaker as he got to know an octopus, and showed Around 350,000 tonnes of octopus are caught every used to swimming freely in natural light and resting
how intelligent the species is. Many scientists say this year and demand is going up. It’s a nutritious and alone in dark dens. Aquaculture (farming underwater)
shows that octopuses shouldn’t be farmed. Professor delicious meat, full of vitamins and minerals. Lots of has a negative effect on the environment. Chemicals
Peter Tse told the BBC that octopuses are as clever as animals are intelligent but humans farm and eat are needed to keep tanks clean and fish healthy. Also,
cats. So what do you think? Should humans be them. If we can farm pigs then why not octopus? It’s a third of wild fish that are caught are used to feed
allowed to farm octopuses? hypocritical to make an exception for them. farmed fish, so farming can still lead to overfishing.

Three reasons why octopuses Three reasons why octopuses

Scan the QR YES should be farmed NO should not be farmed
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Farming octopus allows authorities to
manage the number that are produced
each year, so that wild populations
1 Octopuses are very intelligent
creatures. They are aware of their
surroundings and feel pain. We
LAST WEEK’S POLL aren’t overfished. shouldn’t eat them at all.
Last week, we asked you if
the UK should get rid of
royalty and become a 2 Octopuses provide delicious and
healthy meat that is enjoyed all around
the world.
2 It’s cruel to keep octopuses on farms,
which are nothing like their natural
environment.
republic. Most of you 39% 61%
YES NO
thought it would be
a good idea to keep
the tradition of the
3 Why should people decide which
animals should be farmed for food and
which should not? Octopuses are no
3 Farming underwater creatures is well
known to be damaging to the natural
environment and it can still lead to
royal family going. better than other species we farm. overfishing in the wild.
 The big debate
Is writing by hand better than typing?
Some people think that writing
KEYSETSOS
To type, or to write,
that is the question.
by hand is a better way to work.
SUCCing machine
What you need to know The first typ ed in
elop
was dev London.
The earliest known form of writing, 1714 in
called Sumerian script, came into use
about 5,500 years ago.

Some countries, including Finland, India

and parts of the US, are no longer
insisting that school students have to
learn joined-up handwriting.

In the UK, the National Curriculum

teaches handwriting skills like forming
capital and lower-case letters in the right
size, and how to hold a pen correctly.

During the pandemic, when pupils had

to learn from home, many used
computers all day long. Schools have
hired special instructors to help students
improve their handwriting.
 Yes – writing by hand has lots of benefits No – typing is faster and more efficient
S ince the earliest known examples of writing,
people have made marks to record important
information, communicate with others and tell
Writing by hand may take longer than typing, but it
seems to improve learning. Research shows that
People can get their ideas and thoughts down more
quickly when they type. It’s a more efficient way of
stories. However, these days we have a new way to when we use a pen or pencil to write down ideas, we working and saves time. Typing also makes it easy to
note things down: typing on a keyboard. We send activate parts of the brain that help us learn, revise and edit your work because you can make
emails or texts instead of letters, and most of an remember and think. Writing by hand lets people changes with the click of a few keys. Once something
adult’s work is done with the help of a computer show their creativity, whether they’re printing letters, is written by hand, there’s no delete button. If you
rather than a pen. During the pandemic, schools gave using joined-up writing or practising calligraphy (the want to make a change, you have to write it all over
pupils computers so they could connect online with art of beautiful handwriting). No two people have the again. Handwriting can look pretty and individual but
their classes and send their typed homework to their same handwriting, which makes it a very personal some people’s is messy and hard to read. Typed
teachers. Many people think typing is a good thing expression of each individual – it’s lovely to receive words are always clear, no matter who types them.
because it is quick, efficient and easy to read. Others a handwritten letter. Writing by hand can also help Many people have physical problems that make it
say writing with a pen and paper is a valuable skill people focus. It’s easy to get distracted when you’re difficult for them to write by hand. Typing ensures
that shouldn’t be lost. What do you think? Is writing using a device like a phone or laptop, which also that no one will have to worry about their words
by hand better than typing? offers easy access to the internet, games and apps. being legible (easy to read).

Scan the QR Three reasons why writing by Three reasons why writing by
YES hand is better than typing NO hand is not better than typing
code to vote in
Junior the debate

1 Writing by hand is a brain booster.

Using a pen and paper to write helps 1 Writing by hand is much slower than
typing. People can get their ideas down
LAST WEEK’S POLL people to learn more, remember better faster and work more efficiently when
Last week, we asked you and think more deeply. they type.
if octopuses should be
farmed. Most of you
think that the 11% 89%
2 Handwriting lets people be creative
and show their artistic side, and it’s
more personal.
2 Typing lets you edit and revise your
work easily, rather than having to
rewrite everything.
eight-limbed sea YES NO
creatures should be
left to live in their
3 Writing by hand helps people avoid the
distraction of a computer, where the
internet is just a click away.
3 People who have messy handwriting or
trouble keeping their hands steady can
communicate clearly when they type.
natural environment.
 The big debate
Should the House of Lords be replaced?
Some people think the House of
HO US E
Lords is out of date and unfair. FULL members, the
6
With 78 of Lords is theal
What you need to know House argest politic
l
second in the world.
The House of Lords, also called the upper body
chamber of Parliament, has roots in the
12th century. Its members, called “peers”,
are responsible for studying and voting
to pass or reject bills (suggested laws).

Unlike MPs, none of the 786 peers in the

House of Lords have been voted into
their position by the public. Most peers
have been appointed by the King or
Queen on the advice of a Prime Minister.

The Labour Party wants the House of

Lords replaced with a smaller upper
chamber of experts, elected by the
public. Leader Keir Starmer says it would
be “the biggest ever transfer of power
A debate in the
from Westminster to the British people.”
House of Lords.
 Yes – it’s not a fair system No – it does a good job so why change it?
T he House of Lords acts as an extra layer of the UK
Parliament, making sure that bills approved by
MPs are right to become law. Since 2000, the House of
What’s the point in voting for a Government when its
decisions can be influenced by people you haven’t
The House of Lords plays an important part in helping
the Government run the country. Its members work in
Lords Appointments Commission, an independent chosen? Some peers are appointed because they have groups, called committees, and give expert advice to
public body, checks possible peers to make sure they been born into a particular family, or because they MPs. For example they persuaded the Government to
are suitable. There are also 92 peers with titles like support (or give money) to a political party. Peers ban smoking in cars that carry children. They may not
duke or earl because of the family they are born into. don’t represent the population. They have an average be voted for by the public but this means they are less
Peers are often experts in certain areas, such as age of 71, just 29% are women and more 50% are likely to be influenced by popular opinion and can
business or science. Members are not paid but can from London, the south-east or east of England. We base their decisions on what is best for everyone.
claim £305 for each day they attend, although they live in a democratic country, which means people There are rules in place to limit the House of Lords’
don’t always turn up. Lord Lebedev has been to about should have a say in how our Government is run, but power. Members aren’t allowed to reject tax bills, for
1% of Lords sessions since he became a peer in 2020. most of us have no say. Members are given a lifetime example, or anything that is heavily supported in the
Some say the House of Lords should be changed for a of power, so we can’t even replace them. The House of House of Commons. The House of Lords may not be
more modern system; others think they do a good job. Lords has an important role but this is even more perfect but it’s been an important part of Parliament
What do you think? Should it be replaced? reason for it to be run by people chosen by the public. for 1,000 years, so why replace it now?

Three reasons why the House of Three reasons why the House of
Scan the QR YES Lords should be replaced. NO Lords should stay as it is.
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 What’s the point in voting for a
Government when its decisions can be
overturned by people who haven’t
1 Most members are chosen because they
are experts who can advise MPs and
help them make important decisions.
LAST WEEK’S POLL been elected by the public?
Last week we asked if
writing by hand is
2 Members don’t fairly represent the
population and are given the job for
2 Members don’t have to win votes to
keep their job, which means they can
give honest advice that might not be
better than typing.
life, so we can’t replace them. popular at the time.
The vote was quite 46%
54% NO
close but most of you
felt that handwriting
adds a more personal
YES
3 A new, smaller elected upper chamber
could be filled with people who have
earned their position and represent the
3 There is already a system of rules in
place which limits the power of the
House of Lords and it works well – so
touch to messages. whole country. why change it now?
 The big debate
Should the UK have more bank holidays?
Campaigners say the UK is mean
compared with other countries. OU
DID YW
NO ?
K there were 33–
34, K
What you need to know Until 18 olidays in the Uhan
t
public hds up to more r.
The UK has eight bank holidays each that ad nth every yea
year. These are public holidays, when a mo
Ba
banks, schools and businesses close. Holi nk
day
This year there will be an extra bank
holiday on 8 May to mark the coronation King’s
Bank on
of King Charles III. The same happened Holiday Coronati
last year, to celebrate Queen Elizabeth
II’s Platinum Jubilee (70-year rule).

Campaigners, including groups who

speak up for workers’ rights, want the
UK to introduce more public holidays.

Last year the Government said no to

a public campaign asking for an extra
bank holiday as a “thank you” to those k
who serve the public. Ban day This May has three
i
Hol bank holidays.
 Yes – the UK is behind many countries No – having more would be too costly
M onday 8 May has been declared a bank holiday
in the UK to mark King Charles III’s coronation
(an official ceremony to crown him as King). Prime
Bank holidays allow people and communities to come
together. It’s easier to socialise with friends, family
Bank holidays aren’t good for everyone. Businesses
often lose earnings because they either have to close
Minister Rishi Sunak said the public holiday was and neighbours when most people are off work and for the day or pay staff more money to stay open.
created “in recognition of this historic occasion”, school at the same time. Bank holidays aren’t as Although the day is fun for some, others suffer
and that it would be a one-off holiday rather than expensive as the Government says. Research for the because public services are affected – hospitals for
an annual tradition. Campaigners, however, want “thank holiday” campaign showed that the cost can be example, offer fewer services. Just one extra bank
there to be more bank holidays every year because reduced by scheduling them on a Friday, when people holiday costs the UK around £1.36 billion, according
this helps to bring people together. They argue that tend to do less work. Not all businesses close during to the Government. Some industries, like tourism,
the UK is less generous than many other countries bank holidays. Hotels, shops and restaurants benefit benefit but the overall cost is big and it’s not fair
when it comes to official days off. On the other hand, from people being out and about and spending to favour some businesses over others. In the UK,
others say bank holidays disrupt important public money. Other countries are far more generous with if a bank holiday falls at a weekend, people can take
services and cost the UK a lot of money because most days off. In Europe, the average number of public the next Monday off – unlike in many other countries.
workplaces close. What do you think? Should the holidays is around 12 days a year, with every country The UK is struggling with money as it is, so now is not
UK have more bank holidays? having more bank holidays than the UK. the time to add more national holidays.

Three reasons why we should Three reasons why we shouldn’t

Scan the QR YES have more bank holidays NO have more bank holidays
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Making joyful memories is more
important than money. Bank holidays
help to bring loved ones and
1 Bank holidays are supported by some
but not everyone. Business owners can
lose out. Others are harmed because
LAST WEEK’S POLL communities together. public services are disrupted.
Last week, we asked if you
thought the House of
Lords should be 2 The cost of an extra bank holiday has
been exaggerated. Also, people spend 2 Even if a handful of businesses benefit,
many more suffer. The Government
replaced. It was 44% more money on bank holidays, which is says an extra bank holiday would cost
NO
quite close but just 56% good for UK businesses. the UK more than £1 billion.
YES
over half of you
thought we needed an
elected upper chamber.
3 The UK is mean with public holidays.
Other countries are more generous and
it doesn’t harm their wealth.
3 The UK is already generous with bank
holidays by letting people take the
Monday off if it falls on a weekend.
 The big debate
Should we stop
Some people say that snail mail
sending cards and letters?
AL W IS H d
should be a thing of the past. ROY ervice starte
st al s ing Henry
Th e po
, w hen K town to
What you need to know in 15 16
e re d every ady
VIII or hree horses re .
d
Between March 2021 and March 2022, have t rry his letters
the Royal Mail – Britain’s postal service to ca
– delivered almost eight billion letters
and cards around the country.

That number is falling. A report in 2022

revealed that about a third of UK
children have never sent or received
a handwritten letter.

The British have been sending greetings

cards since the 19th century and send
more cards per head than any other
country. They spend an estimated
£1.7 billion on cards every year.

Environmentalists say that sending post

is bad for the planet because it uses a lot Many children have
of energy and resources. never posted a letter.
 Yes – It is old-fashioned and wasteful No – It is meaningful and brings happiness
B illions of letters and cards are posted in the UK
every year but people are sending less post than
they used to. Some people think that writing cards
We live in a digital world and using snail mail is not
necessary. Carrying letters and cards around the
The tradition of writing to friends and family has been
around for hundreds of years and should stay.
and letters is an important and meaningful way to world produces pollution that is harmful to the planet. Sending someone a handwritten letter or carefully
connect with others. However, some think it is out of Making paper uses up energy and resources, and chosen card shows that you care and you made an
date and unnecessary in our digital world. Many some cards are hard to recycle. What’s more, cards are effort – and the recipient can keep it as a memento.
cards are fully recyclable (with no plastic packaging), expensive to buy and so is posting them (a first-class Electronic messages are so quick and easy to create
but there are still lots that come with decorative foil, stamp is now £1.10 just to send in the UK). With the that they can seem meaningless, and they can easily
stuck-on “gems” or glitter, and these are not. recent postal strikes, you can’t even guarantee that be missed. Sending letters is good for children
Transporting post can be harmful for the environment your cards and letters will reach their destination on because it is a chance to practise writing skills, be
– it uses lots of energy and can cause pollution. The time. Electronic alternatives are quick, easy, reliable creative and express feelings. Plus, it’s fun! Not
Royal Mail is trying out drones (remote-controlled and usually free, plus you can use video and other everyone likes using technology and not everything
flying devices) to deliver post, but many people think clever effects to make them extra special. Traditional needs to be digital. Receiving post makes you feel
we should just communicate electronically. What do cards and letters are outdated and boring. It’s no special and it’s important if someone lives far away or
you think – should we stop sending cards and letters? surprise that most of them end up in the bin. is lonely – just imagine a birthday without cards.

Three reasons to stop posting Three reasons not to stop

Scan the QR YES cards and letters NO posting cards and letters
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 The making, carrying and disposing
(or even recycling) of cards and letters
uses up a lot of energy and is bad for
1 It takes effort and thought to send a
card or letter so it shows you really care.
By comparison, speedy texts and emojis
LAST WEEK’S POLL the environment. mean far less.
Last week we asked if
there should be more
bank holidays in the 2 Cards and stamps are expensive – with
the rising cost of living we should save
our pennies for essential things.
2 Writing letters and making or choosing
cards is fun and uses your imagination
and creativity – plus it’s good writing
UK. Most of you felt
76% 24% practice.
there should be,
because other
countries have more
YES NO
3 Technology today means that there are
lots of more efficient, reliable and
stylish ways to get in touch than an 3 Getting a letter is exciting for anyone
but it’s essential for people who don’t
public holidays. old-fashioned card or letter. have access to phones or the internet.
 The big debate
Should cats be kept inside at night?
Some wildlife campaigners
are calling for a cat curfew. FURRY S
FRIEtaNmDed cats
What you need to know Humans rs ago becaus
e
2,00 0 yea and mice
In the UK, one in four households has at 1 trats
least one cat. There are nearly 11 million cats kepf food stores.
pet cats around the country. out o
A recent study has found that UK cats kill
between 160 and 270 million animals
every year – a quarter of them birds. In
fact, it’s estimated that one cat can kill
around 22 birds each year.

Between 2015 and 2020, 48% of the UK’s

bird species have declined.

In Australia, some local councils have

introduced cat curfews, a rule that
makes people keep their cats inside
between certain hours to protect the
local wildlife. In some areas, cats can Cats enjoy
only go out if they are on a lead. hunting.
 Yes – cats kill too many birds No – cats should be free to roam
H owever cute, cuddly and well fed a cat is, it will
most likely still enjoy hunting and killing wildlife,
such as birds and mice. This is because hunting is a
Many wildlife species in the UK are struggling to
survive and 30% of the UK’s birds are threatened with
Cats are natural hunters, especially at dawn and dusk.
A UK law called the Animal Welfare Act says pets
basic survival instinct in cats. They teach hunting skills extinction. Garden birds like starlings are especially in must be allowed to behave “normally”, so it’s not fair
to their kittens and will sometimes share their catch need of help. It’s important that everyone plays their to trap cats inside overnight. There are lots of other
with their owners, by leaving gifts of small dead or part in protecting our wildlife, and keeping pet cats ways to protect birds, like fitting cats with brightly
injured animals in or near their home. Cats are known indoors is a simple way to do this. Some animal coloured collars and attaching bells to their collars,
to hunt more at night, especially just before sunrise charities say it’s good for cats too. According to the which alerts their prey so that they have time to run
and just after sunset, and this has led campaigners to charity Cats Protection, 78% of all traffic accidents or fly away. According to the RSPB, a bird charity, this
say they should be kept indoors overnight to help involving cats happen at night, so the charity can reduce by a third the number of birds that cats
protect wildlife. However, some people say this is recommends keeping the pets indoors for their own catch. The main reason for the decline in the UK’s
unfair because forcing cats inside, away from their safety. If cats get restless or bored there are plenty of wildlife is a loss of natural habitats, which is mostly
natural environment, will make them restless and ways to keep them happy, like playing with them, caused by farmland or human homes replacing
stressed. What do you think? Should cats be kept providing them with toys or climbing frames or just meadows and woodland. This has nothing to do with
indoors at night? snuggling up with them on the sofa. cats so it’s unfair to punish them for it.

Three reasons why cats should Three reasons why cats should
Scan the QR YES be kept indoors at night NO not be kept indoors at night
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 It’s important to protect wildlife species
around the UK, such as small mammals
and birds that cats like to catch.
1 It is a natural instinct for cats to hunt,
especially at dawn and dusk. It’s simply
part of who they are and it’s not fair to
LAST WEEK’S POLL deny them this.
Last week we asked if
people should stop 2 Keeping cats indoors also keeps cats
safe, because they are more likely to be
hurt in a road accident at night. 2 There are other ways to protect birds
from cats, like putting a bell on the cat’s
sending cards and
collar that warns birds.
letters by post. Most
of you felt that a
handwritten
14%
YES
86%
NO 3 There are plenty of ways to keep cats
entertained if they are kept indoors at
night – like playing with toys or 3 The main reason for the fall in the
number of birds and other types of
message shows how snuggling up on the sofa. Anyway, they wildlife is habitat loss, which has
someone really cares. can still go out during the day. nothing to do with cats.
 The big debate
Should grey squirrels be on menus?
Some say eating grey squirrels Grey squirrels are
would help the environment. an invasive species.

What you need to know

Wildlife campaigners say that eating
grey squirrels could be good for the
planet and the endangered red squirrel.

Red squirrels have lived in the UK for

around 10,000 years. The larger grey
squirrel only arrived here from North
America in the late 19th century. Red
squirrels were forced out of many areas
and their population fell dramatically.

A wildlife campaign group, Exmoor

IGH T IMEve
Squirrel Project, is talking to some
That idea
is nuts! H quirrels ha
restaurants about introducing grey Grey s inted ankles. r
jo o
squirrel meat to their menus. double- face forwards s
et lp
Chefs say that grey squirrel tastes a bit Their fe ards, which he.
backw climb trees
like rabbit. It was eaten in the UK until them
the middle of the 20th century.
 Yes – it’s a way to help red squirrels No – it’s cruel and pointless
W e see grey squirrels all the time – scampering
up tree trunks in woods and parks and
sometimes stealing from garden bird feeders. There
Squirrel meat is lean, nutritious and delicious if cooked
well. Some chefs say it tastes slightly nutty and a bit
Squirrel meat has a strong flavour and needs expert
preparation and slow cooking to make it tasty.
are fewer than 280,000 red squirrels in the UK – like rabbit. With food so expensive at the moment, It’s unlikely ever to be as popular as beef or chicken.
compared with 2.6 million grey squirrels. In the UK, grey squirrels could be a cheap and readily available Besides, people should be eating less meat, not more.
reds have only survived in Scotland, in remote areas source of meat. Eating wild British squirrels is better Putting squirrel on menus just encourages carnivores.
of countryside and on some islands. Grey squirrels for the environment than eating farm-raised meat or Before they are killed, grey squirrels must be trapped,
have pushed red squirrels out by competing more importing it (bringing it in from other countries). The which is cruel because it’s stressful for them. Grey
successfully for food and passing on squirrel pox, a UK imports 26% of its meat. Cutting the grey squirrel squirrels might be pests but it’s not their fault they
virus that is deadly to reds. Some conservationists say population will help to boost numbers of red squirrels, arrived in the UK. There are better ways to reduce the
that the only way to restore the UK’s red squirrel which are threatened by their American relatives. Grey number of grey squirrels. Some wildlife experts say
population is to cull (selectively kill) grey squirrels. squirrels also destroy trees by gnawing bark, and that pine martens, a critically endangered native
Some people have suggested that eating them would some scientists think they compete for food with animal that is being reintroduced in the UK, could
ensure their meat isn’t wasted. What do you think? dormice, which are also under threat. Plus, if we have help. Pine martens hunt and eat grey squirrels but
Should grey squirrel be on menus? to cull them, we might as well eat them. they leave red squirrels to live in peace.

Three reasons why grey squirrel Three reasons why grey squirrel
Scan the QR YES should be on menus NO shouldn’t be on menus
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Squirrel meat is tasty if cooked well,
and is good for you, too. Plus, there are
plenty of them to go around so they
1 Squirrel meat is not easy to cook and
has a strong taste which won’t appeal
to everyone. It will never be popular.
LAST WEEK’S POLL are a cheap source of food. Plus, we should be eating less meat,
Last week we asked if cats not adding more to menus.
should be kept indoors
at night. The vote 2 If people are going to eat meat, which
many do, wild squirrels are an
environmentally friendly source of it. 2 Trapping and killing grey squirrels is
cruel and unnecessary.
was quite close but 55% 45%
YES NO
most of you felt it
was important to
save wildlife from lots
3 Grey squirrels are an invasive species.
They destroy trees and force out native
red squirrels. Culling them is a good
3 There are better ways of controlling the
grey squirrel population, like restoring
the population of pine martens, a
of cats on the prowl. idea, and we might as well eat them. natural predator of grey squirrels.
 The big debate
Should we eat gene-edited food?
Some people say that gene-
FRUITT
edited food isn’t natural.
What you need to know TW(IthSe science
y
In botants) a banana is
All living things have genes, which are
of plan e of berry.
chunks of DNA, the instructions that tell a typ
plants and animals how to grow. Genes
control things like a vegetable’s size,
flavour and shape.

In March this year, the Government

made a new law that allows companies
to develop and sell gene-edited (GE)
food in England.

The law allows scientists to take away

some of a plant’s genes to make it bigger
or better for you. GE is still illegal in
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

It is not the same as genetic modification

(GM), which involves adding genes from Food technology
one species to another. is changing.
 Yes – it’s a natural next step No – we should leave breeding to nature
Imagine being able to eat raspberries and not
having to worry about getting seeds stuck in your
teeth. In the US, a company is developing seedless
Humans have been altering plants and animals for
thousands of years by breeding them carefully to
GE is not the same as careful breeding over many
years. We don’t know enough about how it could
blackberries using GE. In Japan you can buy tomatoes boost certain characteristics. A peach from 4000BC, affect different animals, plants or the environment.
that contain a natural chemical that can help people for example, was 64 times smaller and a lot less For example, it could cause extreme allergies. David
feel calm. In England, the Government hopes the new sweet than today’s. How do you think Chihuahua Bowles from the animal charity RSPCA says GE could
law will allow farmers to produce better crops for dogs developed from wolves? GE just allows cause “unintended changes with unpredictable
eating and make farming more sustainable (better for scientists to speed up the process. It’s the natural effects”. He thinks using GE on animals is harmful.
the environment). The law will eventually allow GE to next step to improve our food. Why would we not There’s also nothing to stop it being used to create
be used on animals that people eat, like cows and want crops and animals that can avoid diseases, custom-designed pets with exaggerated features,
pigs. Supporters say it could help farmers produce vegetables that are bigger and tastier, or fruit that’s which can lead to suffering. Other countries have
more food and make vegetables tastier and better for healthier? The world’s population is growing and spent lots of money developing GE technology and
you. Others think it’s unnatural and might cause improving food production is a priority. GE food will the results have not always been successful. It would
problems for humans and the natural world. What do have to go through testing before it is sold, so it be better to spend money on helping people to afford
you think? Should we eat gene-edited food? will be perfectly safe to tuck in. the healthy food already on supermarket shelves.

Three reasons why we should Three reasons why we should

Scan the QR YES eat GE food NO not eat GE food
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 We have been tinkering with our food
to make it better for thousands of
years. With more humans to feed than
1 GE isn’t tested enough. It’s impossible
to know how it could affect every plant
or animal. It might cause new allergies
LAST WEEK’S POLL ever, we shouldn’t stop progress now. or damage the environment.
Last week we asked if
grey squirrel meat
should be on
20%
YES
2 Gene-editing can make food tastier
and better for everyone, and make
life easier for farmers who are under
2 Using GE to create the animals we want
is cruel. The law is intended to improve
farming but it could also be used to
restaurant menus.
Most of you felt there pressure to produce food for a growing create designer pets.
80% global population.
were better ways to
control their numbers
than eating them.
NO

3 GE food will have to go through lots of

testing, so it will be safe to eat.
3 It’s a waste of money that could be
spent on helping the many people who
can’t afford healthy food.
 The big debate

Should SATs be scrapped?

Some people think that SATs put
unnecessary stress on pupils.
What you need to know
SATs stands for Standard Assessment
Tests. These are exams taken by pupils in
England in Year 2 and Year 6 to assess
their progress at primary school.

The tests are used to identify pupils’

skills in English grammar, punctuation
and spelling, maths and reading. Year 6
SATs results are used by secondary

G
schools to identify levels of ability in
their first year pupils.
EST
T ESIN
Pupils in Northern Ireland, Wales and TIMschool pupilse
Scotland don’t have to take SATs. In
Ch in a , high at takes nin
Northern Ireland and Scotland they are In e x am th over
take a n re ad
assessed as they learn. Pupils in Wales
u rs an d is sp .
ho s
do online tests.
Exams are part
of school life.
two day
 Yes – they’re not fair on pupils No – they help teachers and pupils
F or at least 25 years, the progress of primary school
pupils in England has been measured using
Standard Assessment Tests (SATs). However, the most
Exams can be very stressful for pupils. The build-up
can be nerve-wracking, and afterwards people
At secondary school, all pupils have to do exams for
their GCSEs, and many go on to do more, such as
recent set of SATs completed by Year 6 students were sometimes feel upset if they think they have not done A levels and university exams. Doing SATs at primary
criticised for being too difficult. There were reports well enough. Year 2 and Year 6 pupils are too young school is a gentle way to get younger pupils familiar
that some pupils were in tears about it. Parents and to be put under this much pressure. Also, it’s not fair with the format of exams. SATs also help teachers to
teachers were very upset, saying the papers were too to assess pupils just based on exams taken at certain identify pupil’s strengths and weaknesses in the core
difficult and some pupils didn’t even have time to times and in a narrow range of subjects. Instead, they subjects of maths, reading and writing. It’s important
finish them. Some people have called for the exams should be assessed on all subjects and frequently, for pupils to get the support that they need, especially
to be scrapped, suggesting that there are better ways as they are learning. This would be a much better when they are joining a new school. The Year 6 SATs
to assess children’s skills. However, others say that way to measure children’s progress. Exam questions marks help the Year 7 teachers understand their new
exams should be difficult and that they’re an aren’t the best way to prepare pupils for real life. students. Also, not everyone hates exams. Sitting
important way to prepare pupils for exams that Testing people on their creativity, problem-solving tests can be quite a satisfying way to check you have
they’ll have to do when they’re older. What do you and teamworking skills is much more useful if the aim understood your lessons. Exams are a good way to
think? Should SATs be scrapped? is to prepare young people for life and work. wrap up everything you have learnt through the year.

Three reasons why SATs should Three reasons why SATs

Scan the QR YES be scrapped NO shouldn’t be scrapped
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Exams are a source of lots of stress for
pupils and can be very upsetting. 1 It’s a good way to introduce younger
pupils to exams, which they have to
take at secondary school anyway.
LAST WEEK’S POLL 2 It’s not fair to assess pupils’ ability
Last week we asked if
people should eat
based on a few exams. Instead, they
should be regularly assessed and on
many different subjects.
2 They’re a helpful way to identify a
pupil’s strengths and weaknesses,
which means that teachers can provide
gene-edited food.
them with the support they need.
Most of you felt that
it could have bad
effects in the future
34%
YES
66%
NO 3 Answering exam questions on English
and maths doesn’t prepare pupils for
real life. People should be challenged 3 Exams can be fun and give students a
sense of satisfaction. Studying for and
that we don’t know on the skills that will help them in life sitting an exam is a good way to make
about yet. and jobs, such as working with others. sure you’ve understood your lessons.
 The big debate

Is it ok to use abbreviations?
Some say skipping letters makes
messages harder to understand.
What you need to know
Abbreviations are shortened forms of
words or phrases. An example would be
using “btw” instead of “by the way”.
They can be used to save time when
writing or speaking.

Forms of abbreviation include acronyms.

This is when the first letters of a series of
words are said as one word – like ASAP
instead of “as soon as possible”. An
initialism is similar but the letters are
read out – like “BBC” instead of British
Broadcasting Corporation.

The use of mobile phones for texting, as

well as social media, means people use
Abbreviations are
abbreviations far more often nowadays.
useful for texting.
 Yes – they simplify writing No – they’re confusing
W e encounter abbreviations every day in all kinds
of places. When people talk about medical
services in the UK – or United Kingdom – they’re likely
Since humans started speaking, language has
constantly changed. If it hadn’t we would still be
Abbreviations can actually make reading or speech
harder to understand if they aren’t used correctly.
to mention the “NHS”, rather than the National Health saying “thine” instead of “your” and “thou” instead If a word or phrase isn’t written out in full the first
Service. The SATs (or Standard Assessment Tests) are of “you”. Some abbreviations, like the BBC, are so time in a piece of writing, the reader may have to
referred to as “exams” – short for examinations. common that it would sound odd to say them in full waste time finding out what it means. If someone has
Some abbreviations are so common that we say and you don’t need to because people understand to ask another person what an abbreviation means
them without thinking but others are less well known the shortened version. Abbreviations can be used to it can be embarrassing for them and make them feel
or only used by certain groups of people. Last year make text and speech shorter or quicker and easier left out. For example, if someone has just started at
was Queen Elizabeth II’s 70th year on the throne and to understand. Shortening phrases can help people in a new school it might make them feel like they aren’t
during the Platinum Jubilee “platty joobs” was a top a hurry – for example, telling someone you’ll “BRB” is fitting in very well. Abbreviations make it harder for
phrase on Twitter. Some people say abbreviations quicker than writing “I’ll be right back”. Abbreviations people learning a new language too. Skipping letters
make reading and writing easier but others think that can make language less wordy and more lively and can cause misunderstandings and confusion because
shortened words or phrases can be confusing. What it’s fun to make up new ones with your friends. Better some have multiple meanings. For example, “LOL”
do you think, is it ok to use abbreviations? communication brings people together. can mean “lots of love” or “laughing out loud”.

Three reasons we should Three reasons we shouldn’t

Scan the QR YES use abbreviations NO use abbreviations
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Language has been evolving and
changing ever since humans started
using it, we shouldn’t stop now.
1 Uncommon abbreviations can make
reading or listening take longer if you
have to find out the meaning.
LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week we asked,
should SATs exams be 2 Abbreviations can make text more
concise (shorter and clearer) and
interesting to read and help people to
2 Abbreviations can make people feel left
out, or embarrassed if they have to ask
someone what it means.
scrapped? The vote
speak more quickly and get their point
45% 55%
was quite close but
most of you think YES NO across more effectively. 3 Some abbreviations have several
meanings and it’s not always clear from
SATs provide a useful
guide for teachers and
pupils, and should stay.
3 Abbreviations improve communication
and bring people together. They can be
fun to use and make people laugh.
the context (the circumstances and
background information) which one is
being used – that’s just confusing!
 The big debate ON AL
RS
PE IENE
HYGtudy fou nd that
ts le
A recen of British peopr
a third t wash all ove
Having a bath is relaxing but do no ery day.
ev
showers are more efficient.
What you need to know
A hundred years ago this month, British
politicians debated a law about how
local authorities built new homes. An MP
(Member of Parliament) insisted that
there must be room for a proper bath.

At the time, many people did not have

toilets in their homes, let alone baths or
showers. Instead they shared toilets
with their neighbours and took baths
in a tub they put out in their kitchen.

Showers were first patented by William

Feetham in the 18th century. A patent is
a legal notice allowing just one person
the right to make or sell a particular
invention. It was in the 1960s that many Which is the best
people had showers in their homes. way to wash?
 Yes – a bath washes the mind and body No – showers are quick and cheap
W e turn on the tap and hot water comes out.
It seems so straightforward that we forget that
it has taken thousands of years to achieve this feat of
Baths are about so much more than cleanliness. They
are a place to unwind, to pause and reflect on the
The price of electricity and gas is much higher than
usual and you need one or the other to heat water.
plumbing. One of the earliest known baths dates day to come or the one that has passed. You can Money experts recently worked out that a year of two
back to the Indus Valley civilisation that existed in choose to relax and do nothing in a bath other than baths a day costs £438 but a year of two showers a
modern-day Pakistan around 2500–1700BC. wiggle your toes, or you can learn something by day costs just £161. Baths are now a luxury, like flying
Showers were invented a lot later. Today, many reading a good book. You can even eat in the bath on a private jet or eating a steak. What’s more,
people have both a bath and a shower in their if you are hungry (although it takes skill not to drop showers are better for the environment because they
homes, so are lucky enough to be able to choose how anything). Even babies like baths. For the first few use much less water and less energy. You don’t have
to wash. Some people swear by showers to wake years of a person’s life, they are bathed before bed, to be in the shower for very long to scrub yourself
them up in the morning, whereas others say a bath not showered. This is because baths can be calming clean, but after a long soak in a bath, you emerge
at night helps them to unwind and sleep soundly. or fun – and importantly they give time out from the from a pool of your own dirt. Showers are efficient
A shower is quick and rinses away soap efficiently day. Humans have been soaking for thousands of when you don’t have much time in the morning. That
but a good soak in a bath is a special occasion. What years – the Romans valued bathtime so much they means you can stay in bed for an extra few minutes
do you think? Are baths better than showers? built special public bathing places in towns. – which is much more relaxing than sitting in a bath.

Three reasons why baths are Three reasons why showers are
Scan the QR YES better than showers NO better than baths
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Having a bath helps you to take proper
time out. While soaking you have time
to think about the day you’ve just had,
1 Having a quick shower is far cheaper
than running a bath, and many people
are trying to save money.
LAST WEEK’S POLL to daydream and to make plans.
Last week, we asked
if it is ok to use
2 In the bath, people can do all kinds of
things, like chatting, eating, reading
2 Speedy showers are also better for the
environment, as you waste less water
and energy. Get wet, switch off the
abbreviations.
Most of you felt that and relaxing tired muscles – all while shower, soap up then rinse off. Done!
77% 23% getting clean.
language is always
evolving and
abbreviations can
YES NO

3 We are bathed from the first day of our

lives. Getting into warm water is a very
3 When you know that a shower only
takes three minutes, you can stay in bed
for longer. That extra bit of sleep is
make writing simpler. natural human activity. more relaxing than a bath anyway.
 The big debate

Is AI bad for new music?

Some people say that computers STILLNG
ROCKthIey broke up
could replace real-life musicians. en th ough eatles are
Ev 0 , The B ng music
1 9 7
in est-selli e.
What you need to know e b
still th up of all tim
gro
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a type of
computer system that can perform tasks
that usually require human intelligence.
These tasks include making decisions
and solving problems.

AI is being used to create music. It learns

to do this by analysing lots of different
types of music and learning details and
patterns from those songs.

Based on what the AI has learned, it can

then create music by mixing different
bits of existing music together. It can
also be used to experiment. For example,
it could show what Harry Styles would
AI music is
sound like singing a Taylor Swift song.
getting popular.
 Yes – AI music isn’t creative No – AI can help spark new ideas
T he world’s oldest known musical instruments are
more than 40,000 years old. For tens of thousands
of years, humans have been making music for
Using AI might be cheaper than paying a musician.
If companies can use AI to produce popular music that
When people turn on their radio or headphones and
a great new song comes on, it makes them feel good.
pleasure and to express themselves. Recently, there makes lots of money from people buying and listening A catchy tune brings people together to sing and
has been a rise in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to it, it could put musicians out of work. If musicians dance. If people are enjoying music, does it matter
to create music. Some AI music has become so can’t earn money from music, there will be far fewer whether it was made by a human or a machine?
popular that it’s gone viral online. The technique of them creating new songs. Anyway, listening to Music makers already use computers, which help to
has been used by lots of musicians. Recently, Paul music that was made by a computer isn’t the same perfect sound and mix different layers of a song. AI is
McCartney from the famous 1960s band The Beatles, experience as listening to human-made music. When just another new technology, a tool that musicians can
used it. Taking an old song created by Beatles musicians create songs they put genuine emotions use to spark ideas. It won’t replace musicians but they
member John Lennon, who died in 1980, McCartney and real experiences into their work, creating songs can work with it. Building on music created by AI could
created a “final Beatles record” with the help of AI. that connect with people at a deep level. Songs save them time. It could allow lots more music to be
Some people think that using AI to create music isn’t produced by AI aren’t original because the computer produced and it could lead to new and unique styles
original or creative because it just makes songs out of just samples bits of music from already-existing music. of music emerging. AI could create exciting tunes that
old music. What do you think? Is AI bad for creativity? AI music isn’t genuinely creative. humans could never have dreamed of.

Three reasons why AI is bad Three reasons why AI is not

Scan the QR Yes for new music No bad for new music
code to vote in
Junior the debate
1 Musicians might be put out of work if
companies find it cheaper to use AI to
create music. That means they’ll have
1 If a song is catchy and you’re enjoying
listening to it, does it matter whether it
was made by a human or a machine?
LAST WEEK’S POLL less support to create new music.
Last week we asked if
baths are better than
2 Listening to music made by humans is
a unique experience, because genuine
2 AI is the latest technology and
musicians can use it as a tool. They can
get inspiration from it and use it to
showers. Most of you
feelings have gone into the piece. experiment and save time.
preferred the quick 36% 64% AI can’t recreate that.
3
refreshment of a YES NO Using AI to produce music could
shower, which uses
less water and is better
for the environment.
3 Using AI to make music isn’t very
creative because it uses pre-existing
music. This isn’t very original.
encourage an increase in musical
creativity. It could lead to new styles
of music emerging in future.
 The big debate
Is exploring space worth the money?
Space exploration is exciting, but some say
the money should be spent closer to home.
DID YOU?
What you need to know KNO, 1W
969, NA
SA
20 g
On July t Neil Armstronto
O NASA, the US space agency, had a u
astrona the first person .
budget of $29.2 billion in 2022. became ot on the Moon
set fo
O It costs NASA about $3.1 billion a
year to operate the International
Space Station.
O NASA is expected to spend about
$93 billion on its Artemis mission.
O Space exploration has led to advances
in many types of technology, including
heart monitors, water purification
systems, solar panels, GPS, weather
forecasting, camera phones, wireless
headphones, and ear thermometers.
 Yes—the benefits outweigh the costs No—it wastes much-needed resources
W hen the first images from the James Webb
Space Telescope were released in July
2022, people around the world saw awe-
Exploring our universe costs a lot of money, but it
still comes to less than 1% of US government
The cost of space exploration can only be described
as astronomical. NASA’s budget has decreased
inspiring views of the universe. However, those spending. That seems like a bargain when you since we first landed on the Moon, but it’s still tens
views came with a hefty price tag: It cost about think about all the benefits. Space programs boost of billions of dollars every year. Right now, inflation
$10 billion to get Webb up and running nearly a the economy by creating jobs and driving the (the cost of goods and services) is high in the US
million miles from Earth. Space exploration gives invention of new technology that changes our and people are struggling. That money could go to
scientists a deeper understanding of our universe lives. Discoveries made through space exploration programs to help them. It could also be used to
and shows us what great things humans can help us with problems on our planet. For example, help protect Earth and slow climate change. And
accomplish. Many people, however, say the learning how to grow food on Mars could help us private companies like SpaceX are going to space,
money would be better spent addressing issues grow food in our changing climate. Understanding so exploration will continue whether or not the
right here on Earth, such as climate change, social how space flight affects astronauts could provide government pays for it. Besides, with more than
injustice, and the rising cost of goods. So what do lifesaving knowledge about the human body. We 80% of the world’s oceans yet to be explored,
you think—is exploring space worth the money? need to keep looking beyond our horizons. there’s plenty to discover closer to home.

YES Three reasons space exploration is

worth the money NO Three reasons space exploration is
not worth the money LAST ISSUE’S POLL
In our last issue, we asked if
1 Space exploration accounts for a small
fraction of government spending. 1 The billions of dollars spent on space could
go to programs that help people struggling
to buy groceries or fight climate change.
fake Christmas trees are better
than real ones. Most of you
2 Space programs create jobs and lead to
new technology, which boosts the
economy down the line. 2 Several private companies are exploring
space, so we should let them do it at their
prefer the real
deal: 54% of 54%
own expense, not the government’s. NO
you said no,
3 What we learn in space could help us
feed people as the climate changes and
save lives with medical breakthroughs. 3 There’s so much left to discover on Earth,
including about 80% of the planet’s oceans.
while 46% 46%
YES
said yes.
 The big debate
Should kids get to stay up late for special events?
Getting enough rest is essential. Is there
ever an occasion to go to bed very late?

What you need to know

O According to the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC),
children ages 6 to 12 need between
9 and 12 hours of sleep per night.
Teenagers need 8 to 10 hours.
O Lack of sleep can affect kids’ health,
happiness, and ability to learn.
O In a study by the National Sleep HITTINZGE
Foundation, 60% of kids said they SNOOhows that
hs s
feel tired during the day. Researc middle schooler
10 lers
O Studies show that going to bed and 6 out of n 10 high schooep.
and 7 i et enough sle
waking up at the same time every don’t g
day is better for people’s health.
 Yes—if you snooze you lose No—bedtime is a priority
A t 10:56 pm Eastern time on July 20, 1969,
about 600 million people around the world
watched on live TV as astronaut Neil Armstrong
Sometimes there are good reasons to break a rule.
A once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to experience a
It’s 2023. Most events can be viewed online after
they end, and big moments are replayed over and
became the first human to set foot on the Moon. big event as it is happening should be one of them. over as videos or memes. Because there are so
Today, many people who watched as children still The event will be a lifelong happy memory, many time zones in the world, you won’t be the
remember the thrill—and that they stayed up especially when the experience is shared with only person sleeping through the event, and
past their bedtimes to watch. Kids are often family members, friends, or, in some cases, people conversations about it are likely to continue for a
allowed to stay up late for historic moments or around the world. Sleep is important for health, but while. Besides, keeping routines is good for you.
exciting events, such as a big sports game, a so is social bonding. And it’s OK to miss a few Scientists say that a regular sleep schedule is
family wedding, or a holiday celebration. They’ll hours of shut-eye every now and then. Research crucial for kids, and every hour lost builds up a
probably be tired the next day, but many say it’s shows that healthy sleep can happen in more than “sleep debt” that harms your body’s daily functions
worth it. Others say it’s best for kids to stick to their one segment, so a nap during the day could help and can’t really be erased by naps. You won’t miss
bedtime and get their rest. What do you think? you recover those lost hours. Once an event is over, much by going to bed, and you’ll feel your best
Should kids get to stay up late for special events? you can’t go back in time to participate. after you wake up refreshed from a full night’s rest.

YES Three reasons why kids should get

to stay up late for special events NO Three reasons why kids should not
get to stay up late for special events LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 Nothing compares to seeing it live—
that’s a once-in-a-lifetime experience
you’ll always remember.
1 You can see almost anything online after
it happens, and technology allows big
events to be replayed over and over.
exploring space is worth the
money. Most of you think
it’s a good
2 Watching your favorite team win a big
game or witnessing a historic event is a
special, shared moment with other people.
2 You’ll still get to experience it after the
fact and talk about it with other people. investment: 24%
NO
76% said

3 It’s not a big deal to miss sleep once in a

while—you can make it up the next day.
3 Studies show that you can’t “make up”
sleep, and sleeping irregular hours can
mess with school and health.
yes, while 76%
YES
24% said no.
 The big debate
Should we stop eating Maine lobster?
People say lobster fishing harms whales,
but is boycotting them the answer?
DID YOU?
What you need to know KNOW ed to be
a
s us
O The Maine lobster industry is one of Lobster od and didn’t
the oldest continuous businesses in cheap foe known as a
becom cy until the
the US, dating back to the 1600s. delica 50s.
19
O More than 100 million pounds of
lobster are harvested in Maine each
year, making up 80% of the lobster
eaten in the US.
O Some people say critically endangered
North Atlantic right whales are
caught in Maine lobster traps, nets,
and ropes and struck by fishing boats.
O Fewer than 350 of the whales are
believed to exist in the wild.
 Yes—protecting whales comes first No—that’s not the right answer
I n September 2022, Seafood Watch, a program
at the Monterey Bay Aquarium in California,
advised US consumers to stop eating lobster
Is a good meal worth an animal going extinct?
Research shows that more than 85% of right
The Maine lobster industry works hard to protect
North Atlantic right whales, and very few are
caught in Maine. The program rates seafood by whales have been caught in fishing gear, which is harmed in Maine’s waters. Fishers are using fewer
how much its producers protect or harm the their leading cause of injury or death. They also get ropes, as well as equipment that has no ropes or
ocean. The aquarium said equipment used in the hit by lobster boats and other fishing vessels. There that’s easier for whales to escape from, and they’ll
Maine lobster industry is injuring and killing are 900,000 fishing lines in the water in Maine, keep trying new things. The industry brings in
North Atlantic right whales, which are at risk of making it a very dangerous place for the whales, $1 billion a year, and thousands of people rely on
dying out. As a result, big grocery chains and but it isn’t the only place to catch lobster. The it for their livelihoods. Boycotting Maine lobster
restaurants stopped selling Maine lobster and industry should shift to catching them in the waters would put their jobs and families at risk. And
people began boycotting it. But the Maine of the Caribbean, Florida, and the West Coast of lobster has been part of Maine’s cultural identity
lobster industry said it has made gear safer and the US. Lobster may be big business in Maine, but for generations. The state has a famous lobster roll
its fishing practices don’t harm whales. What do many other industries, including technology, sandwich, lobster festivals, and even lobster license
you think? Should we stop eating Maine lobster? lumber, and tourism, bring in as much or more. plates. It wouldn’t be right to take that away.

YES Three reasons why we should stop

eating Maine lobster NO Three reasons why we should not
stop eating Maine lobster LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if kids should
1 Equipment used in the lobster industry is
harming North Atlantic right whales,
which are critically endangered.
1 Few whales are harmed in Maine’s waters
because the lobster industry takes steps
to protect them.
get to stay up late for special
events. Most of you would rather
miss sleep than
2 Lobster can be caught in other places,
like the Caribbean, where North Atlantic
right whales won’t be at risk.
2 The Maine lobster industry employs
thousands of workers whose livelihoods
would be at risk.
a big moment:
94% said yes, 94%
6%
NO

while only YES

3 Lobster is big business in Maine, but the

state has many other industries too. 3 Maine is famous for lobsters and
wouldn’t be the same without them. 6% said no.
 The big debate
Should screen time be restricted?
Do people need help putting their devices
down, or can they decide on their own?

What you need to know DID YOU?

KNOW f 12-year-olds
l In 2019, American kids ages 8 to 12 20 21 , 71% o d a phone,
In U S owne crease
spent an average of 4 hours and 44 th e
in
h ic h w as an in 015.
minutes on screens every day. w % in 2
from 41
l By 2021, that average had increased
to 5 hours and 33 minutes per day,
likely due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
l Studies show that too much screen
time can have a negative effect on
physical and mental health.
l A “digital detox” is when a person
stops using electronic devices, such as
computers, gaming consoles, phones,
tablets, and TVs, for a set time.
 Yes—people need help unplugging No—people can manage it on their own
A siren sounds at 7 pm every night in
Mohityache Vadgaon village, in India,
informing its 3,000 residents that it’s time to turn
Smartphones, computers, tablets, and gaming
consoles are great, but they’re also designed by
It’s not about how long people spend on
screens, it’s what they use the time for. Digital
off their digital devices. At 8:30 pm, a second tech companies to be super appealing. People devices are a portal to a world of knowledge.
siren lets them know screen-free time is over. have a hard time putting them down, so limiting People can find answers to just about any
Village leaders put this digital detox system in access can help them become more disciplined. question or access great works of art, literature,
place so young people could focus on their Even though people often use their devices to and music. Why restrict that? Many people also
homework and not be distracted by funny videos communicate with friends and family or play use smartphones and computers to connect
or text messages, and families and friends could online games with others, it’s not the same as with friends and family across the street or
spend time talking face-to-face. However, some interacting with people in the real world. Screen around the world. That helps prevent loneliness
say that people shouldn’t have to be told when time is also bad for our health. When we’re on and isolation. Besides, most people naturally
to put down their devices—they should be able screens, we’re not getting outdoors into nature take screen breaks, such as when they eat or
to decide for themselves. What do you think? or being physically active. And the light from exercise. They’re capable of judging for
Should screen time be restricted? electronic devices can lead to sleep problems. themselves how much screen time is too much.

YES Three reasons why screen time

should be restricted NO Three reasons why screen time
should not be restricted LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if we
1 Screens are hard to put down, and some
people need help learning self-discipline. 1 Screens give people access to knowledge
and art from around the world. That
should not be limited by others.
should stop eating Maine
lobsters. Your answers
2 Even if people are chatting or playing
games with others online, it’s not the
same as interacting in person. 2 People use devices to connect with others,
which helps them avoid loneliness.
were nearly a
tie: 53% of 47%
NO
you said yes,
3 When people are on screens, they’re not
getting outside or being physically
active and their sleep can be disrupted.
3 Most people know when to take breaks
and can decide for themselves how much
time to spend on screens.
and 47% of 53%NO
XX%
YES
you said no.
 The big debate
Should stores be allowed to refuse cash?
Some businesses have decided not to
accept paper money or coins.

What you need to know

DID YOU?
O US law states that cash is “legal
tender,” meaning it’s a valid payment
KNO8W% of US
About 5 they try to
y
method for any debt owed. However, adults saarry cash, just
there is no federal rule saying that always c they need it.
businesses must accept cash. in case
O As more businesses are becoming
cashless, some states and cities
have passed laws giving people
the right to pay with cash.
O In 2022, 41% of Americans said they
usually do not use cash for purchases,
44% use it sometimes, and 14% use
it for all or nearly all purchases.
 Yes—the time for cash has passed No—it’s not right to refuse it
D uring the Covid-19 pandemic, signs
appeared at many shops declaring that
they had gone “cashless”—refusing coins and
Store owners should be able to choose how to run
their businesses. Most people use debit or credit
An estimated 5.9 million Americans do not have
bank accounts. Many are low-income families,
bills and only accepting contactless payments cards anyway, because they’re more convenient. people with disabilities, elderly people, and
from a debit or credit card or a payment app on Counting out the correct amount of bills and coins children. These consumers have no way to pay at
phones. Some stores had already begun is a hassle. That’s why cash transactions take up to cashless stores, so they’re unfairly excluded.
moving away from cash years earlier, and many three times longer than the average contactless Meanwhile, because credit card companies and
still continue to do business this way. In fact, in payment. Without cash, lines get shorter and banks charge fees for every transaction, shop owners
a 2021 survey, 22% of small-business owners shops make more sales. It’s also safer. Cash can be lose money or have to raise prices, which can affect
said they think US society will be fully cashless lost or stolen, and employees can be at risk when customers. Going cashless relies on technology. If a
within 10 years. But some people have argued they have to guard the money. And remember card reader stops working or a connection goes
that it is unfair to turn away customers who why so many places went cashless during the down, nobody can buy anything. It’s important to
want to pay with cash. What do you think? pandemic: Cash spreads germs as it passes from have options, and cash is the legal tender of our
Should stores be allowed to refuse cash? hand to hand. Refusing cash protects us all. country. No one should be able to refuse it.

YES Three reasons why stores should be

allowed to refuse cash NO Three reasons why stores should not
be allowed to refuse cash LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if screen
1 Businesses have the right to choose to go
cashless, and most people use cards or
payment apps anyway.
1 Refusing cash discriminates against
people who don’t have a bank account
and who may already be struggling.
time should be restricted. In
a close vote, 53% of
you said no
2 Cashless payments speed up purchase
transactions, which is good for people
and businesses.
2 Merchants end up paying more fees to
credit card companies and banks, which
can cause prices to go up.
to limits, 53%
NO
while 47%
said yes to a 47%
3 Cash can be lost or stolen, and it’s dirty
and spreads germs. 3 It’s risky to rely on technology for every
payment. If there’s a glitch, no one can pay. digital detox.
YES
 The big debate
Is it OK to sell fossils for big bucks?
Many fossils are sold to private collectors.
The T. rex fossil
Some people say they belong to the public. named Stan

What you need to know

O About 11,000 dinosaur fossils have
been found since the early 1800s.
O In many countries, all fossils are
considered part of a shared history
and belong to the public.
O In the US, dinosaur fossils found on
government-owned land belong to
the public. Those found on private
WOoW ! sils
land belong to the landowner. ldest fos
he ae
One of t d is ancient alg
n e
O The most expensive fossil ever sold ever foudates back mor .
was a Tyrannosaurus rex named that billion years
than 3
Stan, for about $31.8 million in 2020.
It will be displayed at a museum.
 Yes—more money means more fossils No—they belong to the public
F ossils are like missing pieces of a jigsaw puzzle
that help scientists understand how life
evolved on Earth. But not all fossils are available
Dinosaur fossils found on private land simply don’t
belong to the public, and the person who owns
Important fossils, regardless of where they’re
found or who found them, should be given to
for experts to study. When a fossil is found on them has the right to sell them for any amount scientists to study because this knowledge
public land, the government makes it accessible they want. Some of the world’s most important benefits all humanity. Less important fossils could
to scientists. Fossils found on private land, fossils, like Stan the T. rex, were found by amateur be sold to private collectors to help fund the work.
however, can be sold to the highest bidder— fossil hunters on private land. Without them, Stan Some scientists say it’s risky to encourage people
often wealthy collectors who pay millions of might never have been found in the first place. to dig up fossils for cash. Untrained people can
dollars for them. Institutions like museums and Why shouldn’t they be rewarded for that? Digging damage the delicate remains or the dig sites and
universities often can’t pay those high prices, so for fossils is hard, expensive, and time-consuming, ruin them for further study. And scientists need to
the fossils end up in people’s private collections. and museums and universities don’t always have be able to compare one fossil with another and
Sometimes they’re made available to scientists the resources. Giving people a financial incentive share their knowledge to get a clearer picture of
or the public, and sometimes they’re not. What to do the work helps everyone—nobody benefits the past. This isn’t possible when some specimens
do you think? Is it OK to sell fossils for big bucks? from fossils that are never found. are locked away in private collections.

YES Three reasons why it’s OK to sell

fossils for big bucks NO Three reasons why it’s not OK to sell
fossils for big bucks LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week we asked if stores
1 Fossils found on private land aren’t public.
Owners have every right to sell them. 1 Fossils are part of our collective history
and should be accessible to everyone. should be allowed to refuse
cash. Your answers made
2 Amateur fossil hunters have discovered
important fossils on private property.
They should be paid for their efforts.
2 Untrained fossil hunters can damage a dig
site and ruin it, which means scientists
can’t gain more knowledge from it.
your position
clear: 75% of 75%
NO
you said no,
3 Paying people to find fossils will result in
more discoveries. After all, fossils that are
never found don’t help anyone.
3 Scientists need access to many fossils to
piece together prehistory, but they can’t do
that when some are in private collections.
while 25% 25%
YES
of you said yes.
 The big debate
Are e-books better than real books?
Some say the convenience of a digital book
beats the benefits of reading a hard copy.
THAT’S
What you need to know WILldDThings Are
he re the Wi wed book in
O An electronic book—known as an W st borro Library’s
e m o
is th oklyn Public
e-book—is the text and art of a the Bro 5-year history.
book published in digital form. 12

O In 2022, sales of e-books in the

US totaled about $1 billion, while
hardcover and paperback book
sales hit $9.1 billion.
O In a survey, 30% of Americans who
read books chose e-books, while
most still prefer print books.
O Research shows that comprehension
increases when people read books
in print, rather than in digital form.
 Yes—they can easily go anywhere No—print is part of the experience
D r. Seuss once wrote, “You can find magic
wherever you look. Sit back and relax, all
you need is a book!” Back then, of course, he
If you like to take a book along when you go out,
you can’t beat the convenience of an e-book. You
There’s nothing better than the feel of a real book,
from the weight of it in your hand to the
meant a book printed on paper, but today that’s can download hundreds—even thousands—of satisfaction of turning each page. It’s part of the
not the only way to read one. People can e-books onto one lightweight, portable device experience of reading—just like going to a library
choose to read a traditional hardcover or that’s easy to carry, whether you’re going to school or bookstore, browsing bookshelves, and flipping
paperback, or they can read a digital version on or on vacation. Print books are heavy, and it’s through a book. Scrolling through a device isn’t the
a tablet, e-reader device, or computer. No inconvenient to carry more than one at a time. And same. And not every kind of book translates well to
matter what format people prefer, they still with e-books, there’s barely anything to store, so digital. Graphic novels, for example, are harder to
need to pay to buy books or sign up to “borrow” you don’t have to worry about shelf space in your read in e-book form. Plus, e-books can require
them from the library. Many people say e-books home. E-books are also better for the environment. expensive devices that need to be charged, as well
are convenient and easy to carry, but others like They reduce paper use and printing costs, and the as internet access to download books. That’s not
the feel of a physical book. What do you think? books don’t have to be shipped to bookstores on always possible or convenient. A printed book
Are e-books better than real books? trucks that contribute to air pollution. doesn’t have to be connected to be enjoyed.

YES Three reasons why e-books are

better than real books NO Three reasons why e-books are not
better than real books LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if it’s OK
1 One light and portable device can hold
hundreds or thousands of e-books,
letting people read anywhere.
1 Nothing can replace the experience of
holding a physical book or wandering the
aisles of a library or bookstore.
to sell fossils for big bucks. A
majority of you think they
shouldn’t be
2 An e-book collection doesn’t require any
shelf space to be stored at home. 2 Some books, like graphic novels, can lose
their visual impact in e-book form. sold: 59% of
you said no,
41%
3 3 E-books can require things not everyone
E-books reduce paper use, printing YES
and 41%
59%
costs, and transportation, which has a has: devices that need to be charged and NO
major environmental impact. internet access to download books. said yes.
 The big debate
Should we be rewilding more land?
Land that is given back to nature can thrive,
but some say the process has risks.

What you need to know

ORewilding is the process of letting
developed land return to its natural
state, often by putting animals or
plants back into a habitat.
O Scientists say rewilding can help
slow climate change and save plant
and animal species from dying out.
DID YOU?
KNOorW
OOne plan calls for people to rewild
,300
about 865 million acres of land
eme than 1 red
around the world by the year 2030. There ar ed or endangeies
threatennd animal spec
OIn the US, experts hope to rewild land Bison are being plant a in the US.
owned by the government and reintroduced in
reintroduce gray wolves and beavers. the western US.
 Yes—it helps slow climate change No—there are too many risks
E very day in the US, 6,000 acres of open land
are cleared for farming, housing, roads, and
other purposes. Many scientists say the more
Climate change is an urgent problem. Rewilding
helps by restoring forests that absorb harmful
If rewilding takes back land that’s being used to
grow or produce food, that could hurt farmers and
open land we lose, the more we’re harming gases like carbon dioxide. Rewilding can also cause food prices to rise. The cost of food is
the planet. Untouched forests, grasslands, and prevent species from dying out and reset a natural already hitting record highs right now. And there’s
waterways provide wildlife habitats, clean water, ecosystem (living things in an area that affect no guarantee that putting wildlife back into its
reduced air pollution, and other benefits. In order one another). For example, gray wolves were natural environment when it hasn’t been there for
to create more wilderness, efforts are underway reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park in 1995, a long time will be a good thing. The rewilded
around the world to return animals and plants after being hunted to extinction there. The wolves animals might not survive. They could also
to certain areas, from bison and wildflowers in reduced the booming population of elks, which threaten other animal and plant species, including
the US to cheetahs in India. But some people say gave the plants the elks ate a chance to thrive— nearby farm animals like sheep and cows. That
rewilding is an expensive, risky process that might and serve as habitat for animals like beavers and would be a big problem for farmers and people
not work and could cause harm. What do you birds. Rewilding also provides jobs for workers and who live nearby. Rewilding requires careful
think? Should we be rewilding more land? scientists and attracts visitors to an area. monitoring, which is a lot of work and costly.

YES Three reasons why we should be

rewilding more land NO Three reasons why we should not be
rewilding more land LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week we asked whether
1 Rewilding is a great way to put plants and
trees back into nature. Trees absorb carbon
dioxide, a gas that causes climate change.
1 Rewilding can affect crops and food
production, which would be a problem at
a time of rising food prices.
e-books are better than real
books. You prefer to read on
paper: 78%
2 Entire ecosystems can be repaired, which
can stop many species from dying out. 2 There’s no guarantee rewilding will work
the way we want it to, and the rewilded
plants and animals might not survive.
of you said
78% YES
22%
no, while
3 Rewilding creates jobs in areas such as
science, conservation, caring for the
landscape, education, and tourism. 3 Reintroducing predators puts other species 22% of you
NO

at risk, including farm animals and people. said yes.

 The big debate
Is writing by hand better than typing?
Some people think typing is more efficient,
but others say that’s not all that matters.
WOmW !
an set a
What you need to know A Texas orld Record
sW
Guinnesst typing, at 360
O The earliest form of writing, called for faste s per minute.
word
Sumerian, can be traced back to
about 5,500 years ago.
O In the past, handwriting was a
required subject in school and
students were graded on the
quality of their penmanship.
O Today, most US schools teach
keyboard skills but do not have
to teach handwriting.
O About 66% of students do homework
on a computer or other device and
turn in assignments online.
 Yes—writing by hand has big payoffs No—typing is faster and easier
I n 1787, a professional “penman” named
Jacob Shallus was hired to handwrite the
US Constitution using a quill on a piece of
Sure, writing by hand may take longer than
typing, but it has scientific benefits. Research
Handwriting may be pretty, but people can get
their ideas and thoughts down more quickly
parchment paper. Shallus spent about 40 shows that when we use a pen or pencil to write when they type. Typing also makes it easy to
hours working on the document that laid the down ideas, we activate parts of the brain that revise and edit because you can make changes
foundation for our country, and the handwritten help us learn, remember, and think. Writing by with the click of a few keys. Once something is
result is on display in Washington, DC. If Shallus hand lets people show their creativity, whether written by hand, there’s no delete button. If you
were doing that job today, however, he would they’re printing, using cursive, or going all out want to make a change, you have to write it all
most likely type it on a computer and finish with calligraphy as Shallus did. No two people over again. In addition, many people have
much faster. Many people think that’s a good have the same handwriting, which makes it a very motor control issues that make it difficult for
thing because typing is quick, efficient, and personal expression of themselves. Writing by them to write by hand. And some people’s
easy to read. But others say writing with a pen hand can also help people focus. It’s easy to get handwriting is hard to read. Typing makes
and paper is more valuable. What do you think? distracted when using a computer, which offers everything clear, and no one will have to worry
Is writing by hand better than typing? easy access to the internet, games, and apps. about their words being legible.

YES Three reasons why writing by hand

is better than typing NO Three reasons why writing by hand is
not better than typing LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if we
1 Writing by hand is a brain booster. Using
a pen and paper to write helps people
learn, remember, and think.
1 Writing by hand is much slower than
typing. People can get their ideas down
faster and more efficiently with typing.
should be rewilding more land.
You were nearly unanimous in
your support for
2 Handwriting lets people be creative and
show their artistic side. 2 Typing lets you edit and revise easily
rather than rewriting something. nature: 90% 10%
NO
of you said
3 Writing by hand helps people avoid the
distraction of a computer, where the
internet is just a click away.
3 People who have messy handwriting
or trouble with their motor skills can
communicate clearly when they type.
yes, while
90%
YES
10% said no.
 The big debate
Should museum admission be free?
Some people think museums belong to the
people, but others say the money matters.

What you need to know

O Most art museums get less than
10% of their annual budget from
admission fees. Others rely on
admission fees to make up more
than one third of their budget.
O Admission prices can range from
about $5 to $30, often with reduced
rates for students and others. Some
offer occasional free admission days. DID YOU?
O In 2012, 37% of US museums were KNOWool groups
th e U S , sch million
free to enter or asked for a In out 55 ums
ak e a b
suggested donation rather than m
isit s to muse
v ar.
charging an admission fee. each ye
 Yes—art belongs to all of us No—museums need the funds
In recent years, a string of major museums
have “gone free,” allowing people to view their
exhibits without paying an admission charge.
Museums are like libraries of art, culture, and
history. They belong to the public, and everyone
Museums are caretakers of cultural history and
priceless artifacts, and an admission fee reminds
Reactions to the change have been mixed. should be able to visit. When admission fees are the public that these institutions are doing an
Some people are celebrating the increased charged, museums become a luxury only for those important job. Museums need the resources to
access, while others are concerned about how a who can afford it. And visits become crowded and build and care for their collections. Otherwise,
loss of admission fees could affect museums. stressful: Many museums are packed with too they may not be around for future generations.
After the Hammer Museum in California much art to see in one visit, so people try to do it all Museums that stop charging for admission may
dropped its ticket fee, attendance rose by about in one day to avoid paying another fee to come have to cut staff and programs, and they could
15%, and the number of repeat visitors also back. If museums were free, visitors could wander become crowded with visitors, which wouldn’t
increased. However, the Hammer and other in a relaxed way. Besides, museums receive be good for guests or the artwork. Many
museums have had to raise money from private millions of dollars from federal, state, and local museums already have free online galleries that
donors to make up for lost income. What do you governments, so taxpayers are already supporting everyone can visit. They shouldn’t have to give
think? Should museum admission be free? them. It’s not fair to ask the public to pay more. up an important source of income.

YES Three reasons why museum

admission should be free NO Three reasons why museum
admission should not be free LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if writing
1 Museums are a public good that should
be accessible to all, not just to people
who can pay for admission.
1 Admission fees help museums continue
doing the important work of preserving
our cultural history.
by hand is better than typing.
You were almost evenly split
on the outcome:
2 Making museums free would allow
people to take their time and appreciate
the exhibits over multiple visits.
2 If fees weren’t charged, museums would
be crowded and less pleasant to visit. 49% of you
49%
YES
said yes,

3 Museums already get enough money 3 Many museums make exhibits and
galleries available for free online, which
is a wonderful opportunity to “visit.”
while 51% 51%
NO
from other sources. of you said no.
 MOR

HU
The big debate

UE
ISS

Is comedy better than drama?

Some people go for the laughter, while
others like to be swept away by feelings.

What you need to know

O Dramatic books, plays, movies, or TV
shows have a serious tone or subject.
They portray life in a way that
involves emotions and conflicts.
O Comedy is light and humorous, with a
happy or cheerful ending. Comedies

A LITTLTEH
usually show funny situations and
make the audience laugh.
O Popular comedy movies in the US
OF BoOw, or movie
sh
A story, bines elements
s
include Minions, Shrek, and Home that comdy and drama i
Alone. Dramas include The Lion King, of comeas a “dramedy.”
Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio, and known
Avengers: Endgame.
 Yes—laughter is the best medicine No—people need to get real
W ith so many options to choose from,
picking a book, show, or film to enjoy can
be a difficult decision. When it’s time to select
Everyone loves to laugh. And studies show that
laughter can reduce stress, relieve pain, and
Drama explores real issues in a serious way. It can
educate viewers about how to face problems in
something to watch or read, some people improve the immune system. Funny stories make their lives and have better relationships with one
decide on a fun comedy, while others go for a the world seem a little brighter and can even cheer another. They can see how characters deal with a
captivating drama. Those who like comedies up people who are sad. That’s because when situation and apply these lessons to their own
usually enjoy them because they offer goofy someone sits down to watch or read a comedy, lives. Meanwhile, the experience of watching or
gags, funny jokes, and amusing situations. They they can stop thinking about their worries for a reading a dramatic story may help people cope
provide relief from the more serious aspects of little while and enjoy the lighter side of life. But with difficult feelings. It allows people to
life—something everyone needs from time to creating good comedy is a serious matter. It experience some big emotions—maybe even
time. Dramas have a lot going for them, too, requires many of the same elements as drama— cry—which often makes them feel better
including interesting stories, compelling including a strong plot and relatable characters— afterward. And for those who just want an escape
characters, and emotional themes. What do but also needs hilarious jokes and great timing. from reality, drama keeps them on the edge of
you think? Is comedy better than drama? Comedy is an art form worth appreciating. their seats, excited to see what happens next.

YES Three reasons why comedy is better

than drama NO Three reasons why comedy is not
better than drama LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if museum
1 Studies have shown that laughter is
good for your health. 1 Drama takes a serious look at real issues
and teaches important lessons. admission should be free. Most
of you said access to art should
2 Comedy has the power to cheer people
up, make them happier, and help them
forget about their problems.
2 Watching or reading drama helps people
understand their own experiences and
deal with their feelings.
not cost
anything: 34%
66% of you NO

3 Creating good comedy takes at least as

much skill as creating a drama does—
maybe more. It’s an art form unto itself.
3 Drama is gripping. It holds the viewer’s
attention, gets your heart pumping, and
provides a thrilling escape.
said yes, and 66%
34% said no.
YES
 The big debate
Is it important to have good manners?
Some people stick by them, but others say
they’re old-fashioned and unnecessary.
DID YOU?
What you need to know KNOs, yW
awning
was
00 re
O Manners are rules for how people In the 16that people we d
should behave around one another. a sign o they covere
bored, s r mouths to
One expert called them “traffic thei e it.
lights for life” that prevent us from hid
crashing into one another.
O Some manners are about people’s
feelings. Others are rules about
things like holding a knife and fork
the right way—also called etiquette.
O Good manners in one place can be bad
manners in another. For example, in
parts of Asia, slurping and burping at
the table are compliments to the chef.
 Yes—manners are a form of kindness No—people should be themselves
F or hundreds of years, people have been taught
to mind their manners, whether that means
taking their elbows off the table or not talking
Good manners cost nothing but really pay off.
Being polite shows you care about other people’s
Manners put pressure on people to behave in a
way that might not reflect how they really feel. If
with a mouthful of food. But manners are always feelings and want to put them at ease. Studies someone says “thank you” or “sorry” when they
changing. About 100 years ago, children weren’t show that when someone is kind to us, it releases don’t mean it, they’re not being polite—they’re
supposed to speak unless an adult spoke to them a feel-good chemical in our brains called oxytocin, just pretending to be nice. It’s better to be honest.
first. Now young people can make their voices which causes us to be kind back. In other words, Plus, “good manners” don’t always make sense in
heard in school, at home, and in public at events well-mannered people make the world a happier modern times. For example, keeping your elbows
like climate protests. Manners also vary. In the US, place—and benefit everyone. Manners also help off the table started in the Middle Ages, when
making eye contact is polite, but in parts of Africa keep us healthy, which is why people should people crowded around tables that flipped over
and South America, it can be rude. Some people cover their mouths when they cough and keep easily. That’s not a big concern anymore. Manners
say manners show respect for others, but others dirty feet off seats. Although manners evolve, once showed how sophisticated and rich people
think they’re just random rules. What do you they all share a common goal, which is to make were, but it doesn’t matter what fork you use as
think—is it important to have good manners? people feel comfortable and respected. long as you’re kind and considerate to others.

YES Three reasons why it is important to

have good manners NO Three reasons why it is not important
to have good manners LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if
1 Good manners show others we care and
motivate them to be polite, which
makes the world a kinder place.
1 Manners force people to hide how they
really feel. It’s better to be honest. comedy was better than
drama. It’s no joke that you

2 Some manners prevent the spread of

germs, which helps keep everyone safe.
2 Lots of rules, like not putting your elbows
on the table, are way out of date. Let’s
leave them in the past where they belong.
love a good
laugh: 72% 28%
of you said 72% NO

3 Even though they change over time,

manners are meant to make people feel
happy and respected. That’s a good thing.
3 As long as people are kind to one
another, they shouldn’t have to follow
random rules. Let them be themselves.
yes, and
28% said no.
YES
 The big debate
Should fans keep home run balls?
When a player hits a homer into the stands, !
Y BAL L
fans can catch, keep, and even sell the ball. PLA ge Major
An averaball game uses
What you need to know Base hat’s
League to 120 balls. T alls
0
about 8 300,000 baseb
O When a baseball player hits a home about er season.
p
run out of the park, a new ball is
substituted and the game continues.
O Fans are known to jump, dive, and
scramble to catch home run balls.
Some even buy certain seats where
the ball is likely to land and bring
baseball gloves to catch one.
O Home run balls can be worth a lot
of money. The priciest baseball, hit
by Mark McGwire for his 70th home
run in 1998, sold at auction for
more than $3 million.
 Yes—it’s a forever memory for a fan No—the players should take priority
L ast October, Aaron Judge of the New York
Yankees hit his 62nd home run of the season,
setting a new record for Major League Baseball’s
Catching a home run ball is one of the most
amazing experiences a baseball fan can have.
A home run ball belongs to the player who hit it
out of the park. There’s no reason for a fan to
American League. A fan caught the ball that Once that ball has left the field, it’s not the profit from someone else’s accomplishment.
day—and later sold it for $1.5 million. The same player’s property anymore. It belongs to the Hitting a home run is a key moment in a
week, Cal Raleigh of the Seattle Mariners hit a person who caught it, and they have the right to player’s career, especially if it breaks a record or
home run to send his team to the playoffs, and do whatever they want with it. That includes wins the game. No one deserves the chance to
the ball was caught by a teenager attending his selling it and making money, if that’s what they hold on to that memory more than the player
first pro baseball game. “Nothing, nothing will choose. Players hit so many balls in their careers does. And if it is a historic moment, such as a
ever compare to that moment,” the teen said. But that they won’t miss one. But for a fan, the ball record-setting home run or a World Series–
he didn’t keep the ball. Knowing its importance to gives them a priceless connection to the game. If winning hit, the ball should be preserved by the
the team, he gave it back, and Raleigh gave him an adult catches a home run ball, they often give player, team, or league. Fans and collectors
signed memorabilia in return. What do you think? it to a nearby child, who will have a lifelong might not take care of it properly, and a piece of
Should fans keep home run balls? memory—and maybe become a lifelong fan. history could be lost forever.

YES Three reasons why fans should keep

home run balls NO Three reasons why fans should not
keep home run balls LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if it’s
1 Once a ball leaves the field, it no longer
belongs to the player. 1 A home run ball belongs to the player
who has trained for years to hit it, and no
one else should profit from their effort.
important to have good
manners. Most of you prefer
2 Whoever catches the ball has the right to
do whatever they want with it, including
selling it if they choose to. 2 Players deserve to be able to hold on
to the keepsakes from important
to be polite:
84% of you 16%
achievements in their lives. said yes, NO

3 Players won’t miss one ball, but for a

fan, it could become a lifelong memory
and connection to the game. 3 Historic home run balls should be
preserved for the team and league.
while 16% 84%
said no.
YES
 The big debate
Should chatbots be banned in school?
Some say the technology is helping kids
DID YOU?
learn, while others think it’s a problem.

What you need to know KNOt cW

hatbot,
The firs was created in
O A chatbot is a computer program am ed E liza, sachusetts
n
a t the Mas logy.
that you can “talk” to. It responds in 1966 te of Techno
a natural, casual way, like a person. Institu

O When asked a question, a chatbot

searches the internet, gathers
information, and provides an answer.
O Chatbots can talk about an endless
number of topics. They can draft an
essay about ancient Greece, write
lyrics in the style of rock stars, or
explain how to solve a math problem.
People can connect with chatbots
O In 2022, the global chatbot industry by typing or talking on devices like
was worth nearly $5 billion. phones and computers.
 Yes—chatbots are unreliable No—technology is the future
W hen ChatGPT, a chatbot, launched last
year, it had more than a million users
within a week—and was quickly banned in
Getting help with schoolwork is great, but chatbots
don’t always use the most reliable sources or check
Technology is changing education, and ignoring or
banning it won’t stop that. Why not teach kids to
school districts across the US. The powerful for accuracy. Students might hand in classwork use chatbots responsibly, like they use calculators
technology uses artificial intelligence (AI, when a with false or incomplete information. What’s or online dictionaries? Chatbots could serve as a
computer learns like a human) to help students worse, they wouldn’t really be learning the starting point for learning by guiding research,
research, write outlines, draft essays, and do material or using their own critical thinking skills teaching vocabulary, and helping students
homework. Parents, teachers, and administrators to do the work. And if students rely too heavily figure out the next step of a math problem. They
were concerned that students might turn in work on chatbots, it could be seen as cheating or could engage students in debates and let them
done by a chatbot rather than do it themselves. plagiarizing. Teachers are too busy to check every practice public speaking and critical-thinking skills.
But others think chatbots are a great learning assignment for signs that students used a chatbot. Chatbots can give teachers a hand by creating
tool and that students and teachers need to People say chatbots can help teachers by grading tests, homework assignments, and lesson plans or
figure out how to use them responsibly. What do papers and tests quickly, but who wants their even writing individual assignments for students
you think? Should chatbots be banned in school? work graded by a machine instead of a human? learning at a different pace. Everybody wins.

YES Three reasons why chatbots should

be banned in school NO Three reasons why chatbots should
not be banned in school LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 Chatbots don’t check their sources or
verify facts. Students could be getting
bad information and won’t be learning.
1 Chatbots are here to stay, so students
should learn to use them responsibly. baseball fans should keep
home run balls. Most said

2 Students who use chatbots could cheat or

plagiarize, and teachers can’t keep up.
2 Chatbots can help students acquire and
build many skills without replacing
learning or doing the work for them.
yes, but some feel
the player
11%
who hit the NO

3 Chatbots might be able to grade work

faster, but they could make mistakes. It’s
better if a human reviews schoolwork.
3 Overworked teachers can use chatbots
to write assignments and lesson plans
tailored to each student.
homer should 89%
get to keep it.
YES
 The big debate
Should plant-based drinks be called milk?
DID YOU?
Some people say it’s all the same, whether
it came from a cow or a cashew.
KNOW merican
s
,A
What you need to know In 2022 half as much
ed
consums milk as they
O In 2022, Americans spent more than cow’ n 1970.
did i
$15.7 billion on cow’s milk and more
than $2.4 billion on plant-based milk.
OPlant-based drinks are made from
sources such as nuts, grains, soy,
oats, coconuts, and sunflower seeds.
O In February, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA, the US agency
that oversees food safety) said
plant-based drinks can be called milk.
The agency also recommended that
plant-based milks have nutrition
labels comparing them to cow’s milk.
 Yes—people are smart consumers No—why complicate things?
T hese days, you can make a smoothie with
soy milk, dunk a cookie in almond milk, or
pour oat milk over your cereal. Plant-based
Plant-based drinks are nothing new, and they’ve
been called “milk” for a long time. There’s been soy
Calling plant-based beverages “milk” is misleading
because they don’t taste like cow’s milk and don’t
drinks, also known as non-dairy drinks, have milk in China and coconut milk in Southeast Asia always contain the same levels of calcium or
gone mainstream. But the US dairy industry, and Africa for centuries. The dairy industry wants vitamins. Consumers might think they’re getting
which produces cow’s milk, argues that these consumers to think plant-based drinks aren’t as the same nutrition as they do with cow’s milk. And
drinks shouldn’t be called “milk” because they healthy as cow’s milk. They might be different, but it would create confusion if manufacturers had to
don’t have the same taste or nutritional value they can be equally or even more nutritious. In fact, change their packaging to include a nutrition
as cow’s milk. Plant-based drink makers say many people buy plant-based milk because of comparison to cow’s milk. Why add extra
people use their products just like they use health issues like food allergies or high cholesterol. information when it’s easier to call it by another
cow’s milk, so they’re essentially the same. They’re informed shoppers who know what they’re name—the same way “margarine” is different
And, they say, the two types of drinks can have consuming and won’t be confused by the word from “butter”? There are new plant-based products
similar health benefits. What do you think? “milk” on the label. People know “peanut butter” coming out all the time. It’s time to start setting
Should plant-based beverages be called milk? doesn’t contain actual butter, right? some clear rules about what’s what.

YES Three reasons why plant-based

drinks should be called milk NO Three reasons why plant-based
drinks should not be called milk LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if chatbots
1 Plant-based drinks have been around
and called “milk” for centuries. 1 Plant-based milks are different from cow’s
milk, but people might not realize that. should be banned in schools.
More than half of you said yes,
2 Plant-based beverages are not
necessarily unhealthy. They can be
just as nutritious as cow’s milk.
2 Why go to the trouble of adding more
nutrition information to labels? Just call
plant-based drinks by another name.
but many think
the talkative
42%
tech has a
3 Consumers are smart and know the
difference between dairy and non-dairy
milks. The word “milk” won’t confuse them.
3 So many plant-based foods exist now.
There should be clear rules about what
they can—and can’t—be called.
place in
58% NO
YES
the classroom.
 The big debate
Should publishers revise old books?
Some people are upset about updates to
books that were written decades ago.

What you need to know

O When old books are reprinted for
modern readers, publishers often
make small edits to the original work.
O New versions of some books by
British author Roald Dahl were
recently edited to remove language

WORD
that people might find offensive.
O Roald Dahl, who died in 1990, wrote WHRIZoald Dahl
such books as Matilda, The Twits, The rk,
In his womore than 250 ,
g
Witches, James and the Giant Peach, invented e whizzpoppin .
ik
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, words, l erry, and zoonk
and The BFG. They were published snozzb
from the 1960s to the 1980s.
 Yes—times and language change No—books should be left as they are
In February, the publishing company Puffin
released new versions of some books by Roald
Dahl that had been edited to remove or replace
Society’s values are always changing. What would
have been acceptable to say or do 50 years ago
Censorship is dangerous because it limits what a
person can say or how they express themselves.
offensive language. Dahl’s original work included might not be OK anymore. People are right to If we allow people to censor one author’s work,
terms that were once considered acceptable but point out when somebody says something hurtful, what’s to stop them from doing the same to every
that many people today find upsetting, such as so the same should apply to books with offensive author’s work in the future? If somebody disagrees
describing characters as “fat” and “ugly.” Puffin language. A careful editor is able to successfully with an opinion or is offended by an idea, it doesn’t
said it changed those words and others so the remove words or terms that upset people without mean no one else should hear it. A healthy society
books “can continue to be enjoyed by all.” Many changing the characters, plot, and tone originally embraces many different beliefs and points of
people criticized the move, however, saying it created by the author. The most important thing is view. If some people find certain words or
amounted to censorship (bans on people’s ideas that children (and adults) read books—and lots of descriptions upsetting, the best approach isn’t to
or language). Others say it’s good to remove them. Any minor changes to the text that make ban or change them but to discuss, debate, and
outdated and hurtful language. What do you Dahl’s—or another writer’s—stories more make people aware of why the material is hurtful.
think? Should publishers revise old books? accessible and inclusive are a good thing. It can help people learn and understand.

YES Three reasons why publishers

should revise old books NO Three reasons why publishers should
not revise old books LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if plant-
1 Attitudes change over time and what
was once acceptable might be genuinely
hurtful or harmful now.
1 Censorship is dangerous and can lead to
voices and opinions being silenced. Once
it starts, it’s very hard to stop.
based drinks should be called
milk. Most of you said no, but a
third of you said
2 It’s possible to remove offensive language
without changing the overall book. 2 If one person doesn’t like something, it
doesn’t mean other people will agree. yes, they’re
33%
milk and it’s
3 Anything that makes books more
3 It’s better to leave books unchanged so YES
67%
accessible and inclusive is a good thing people can discuss them and learn why OK to call NO
because it encourages reading. others might find the material unkind. them that.
 The big debate
Should dogs be allowed at restaurants?
Dining with canines is fun for some, but
others say the pups should take a walk.

What you need to know

O The US government says dogs
cannot be inside restaurants unless
they are service animals that are
trained to help people.
O In the US, 23 states, including New
York, Maryland, Kentucky, and
California, have laws that allow
dogs to sit outdoors at restaurants.
DAPPEIERS
O Dogs are the most popular pet in the DOGrs,Graincoats,
US, with more than 80 million dogs Sweate d skirts are the e
an pl
living in 65.1 million households. T-shirts, ular clothes peo
p .
most poy for their dogs
O In 2022, Americans spent more bu
than $136 billion on their pets.
 Yes—everything’s better with dogs No—that’s just barking mad
M any dog owners treat their dogs like family,
from dressing them in adorable sweaters to
dropping them off at doggie daycare. Around the
It’s so fun to enjoy a nice meal next to your
favorite furry friend—or someone else’s sweet
Dogs may be their owner’s best friend, but that
doesn’t mean they belong everywhere. Not
world, people spend more than $5 billion on dog pup. Research shows that dogs make us happier, everyone likes dogs. Some people are afraid of or
clothes every year, and in one poll, 76% of US dog reduce stress, and are good for our health, so they even allergic to them. Should those people be
owners said they let their pups sleep in bed with can make meals more enjoyable too. Customers forced to avoid their favorite restaurants just
them. Many people even like to take their dogs dining with their dogs can relax and not rush because someone wanted to dine with their pet?
out to dinner rather than leave them home alone. home to walk their pups, so they’ll stay longer That isn’t fair. Not all dogs are well behaved, so
Thousands of restaurants in the US let dogs sit at and spend more money. That’s good for business. there’s a chance they could be disruptive or even
outdoor tables. Pups can be perfect dining During the pandemic, dogs spent a lot of time dangerous to other dogs, diners, and restaurant
companions, curling up at their owner’s feet with owners working from home. Now some pets staff. Servers are busy keeping the customers
during the meal. But some diners feel pets take get anxious when they’re left alone. If people can happy and carrying trays and plates. They
away from their dining experience. What do you take their pups to restaurants, it’s one less thing shouldn’t have to worry about tripping over a
think? Should dogs be allowed at restaurants? for humans and dogs to worry about. dog when they’re just trying to do their jobs.

YES Three reasons why dogs should be

allowed at restaurants NO Three reasons why dogs should not
be allowed at restaurants LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if
1 Dogs improve people’s well-being, so
having them there is a positive boost. 1 Some people are allergic to dogs or just
don’t like them. Their dining experience
shouldn’t be ruined by someone else’s dog.
publishers should revise old
books. Two thirds of you want
2 Customers with dogs at dinner don’t
have to rush home, so they stay longer
and spend more money. 2 Dogs can be dirty, dangerous, and
disruptive to other dogs and diners.
to leave the
words alone, 34%
while a third YES
3 Many dogs have separation anxiety, so
this gives owners a chance to get out
without leaving their pet home alone.
3 Waiters are busy serving tables full of
customers. It’s too much for them to also
worry about looking out for dogs.
said it’s OK to
update them.
66%
NO
 The big debate
Is it better to watch movies at home?
Some say seeing a film from the comfort
WOMWar!io Bros.
of your living room is the best option.
er
What you need to know The Sup, released on
Movie the highest-
s
O Before the pandemic, new feature- April 5, i film based on
earning eo game.
length films opened in movie a vid
theaters and didn’t become available
to watch at home for a year or more.
O During the pandemic, movie theaters
were closed and new films were
released on streaming services for
people to watch at home.
O Movies are being released in theaters
again, but business has suffered. At
the end of 2019, there were 5,700
movie theaters in the US. At the end
of 2022, there were 4,700.
 Yes—convenience and cost win out No—nothing compares to the real deal
T he first movie theater in the US opened in
1896, and for more than 100 years, people
who wanted to see a newly released film had to
By the time you pay for tickets and overpriced
snacks and drinks, it can cost $100 or more for a
You’re sitting in a big, comfortable seat with a
bucket of buttery popcorn on your lap. The lights
buy a ticket to watch it at a movie theater. Going family to go to the movies. Most streaming go down, the screen comes alive, the music
to the movies was a fun event. You got to sit in services cost a fraction of that per month. It also swells, and you’re transported into the world of a
the dark and enjoy a shared experience with takes time to get there and back. Films released movie. Watching a film at home can’t possibly
family, friends, and strangers—laughing, crying, in theaters are available to stream within a few compare to the experience of seeing it in a movie
or getting scared together. But since the weeks, so it’s not a long wait to see them at theater. Movies are made for the big screen, after
pandemic, more people are choosing to settle home. For example, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish all, and they don’t look or sound as good when
into their sofas and watch movies at home, came out in theaters on December 21, 2022, viewed on a TV or laptop. It’s also much easier to
saying it’s comfy, convenient, and less expensive. and began streaming on January 6, 2023. be distracted at home, like when a friend texts
Others say staying home makes the movie- Watching at home also gives you more control. you or someone pauses the film to get a drink.
watching experience less exciting. What do you You can pause whenever you like and rewind to Seeing a movie at the theater gets your full
think? Is it better to watch movies at home? watch your favorite scenes again. attention and makes it a special event.

YES Three reasons why it’s better to

watch movies at home NO Three reasons why it’s not better to
watch movies at home LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 It’s time-consuming and too expensive
for the whole family to buy tickets,
snacks, and drinks.
1 At a movie theater, you can forget about
the world and lose yourself in the story,
sights, and sounds of the film.
dogs should be allowed at
restaurants. Most of you said
yes to dining
2 Rushing to the theater to see a film isn’t
necessary because it will start being
streamed soon enough.
2 Movies are made to look and sound
better on the big screen. with canines,
42%
while some

3 It’s more comfortable to watch a film at

home, and you can pause or rewind.
3 It’s so easy to get distracted at home.
When you’re at the theater, the screen
has your undivided attention.
said no tails
58% NO
YES
at the table.
 The big debate
Is taking selfies bad for nature?
Some people say the perfect photo isn’t
worth putting plants and animals at risk.
PLANERTE
What you need to know PICDTaUy in 2014, a d
h te
O It’s common for people to post photos For Eart elfie” was crea en
S k
of themselves with animals or in wild “Global 6,422 selfies ta.
from 3 nd the world
or protected natural areas. arou
O In 2019, hundreds of thousands of
people flocked to a large blossoming
of wildflowers called a superbloom in
California, causing major traffic jams
and trampling the flowers.
O Many visitors to US national parks try
to take pictures with bison or bears.
The National Park Service posts
reminders on social media for people
to avoid getting too close to wildlife.
 Yes—selfies are selfish and risky No—photo sharing is caring
A s a spectacular wildflower superbloom
began in Lake Elsinore, California, this
spring, the city’s mayor announced that
When people pose with wild animals or against
a gorgeous natural backdrop, they can be so
Most people want to be respectful of the
environment, and they can learn to be careful.
blooming areas would be off-limits to visitors. focused on taking photos that they forget Signs and barriers can be put up to prevent visitors
She said that during the last superbloom in where they are. They get so caught up in from stepping in the wrong places or acting in
2019, people with selfie sticks wandered off getting the perfect selfie that they’re not even harmful ways. Besides, selfies are an important
the trails to take photos and “trampled the fully enjoying the beauty around them. They way for people to share their passions with others.
very habitat that they…sought to enjoy.” step off marked trails, drop trash, stomp on A popular photo can inspire many more people to
People also seek out selfies with animals in plants, and scare or stress out the animals. In visit natural areas and contribute to conservation
the wild, which experts say puts the animals fact, people sometimes forget common sense efforts to safeguard the land or endangered
and humans at risk. But selfie-loving folks say altogether, get too close to the animals, and get animals. Showing our planet’s magnificence
there’s no problem as long as people are attacked. Because of this behavior, park officials through photos is a great way to encourage people
careful around plants and animals. What do have to spend their time protecting visitors to protect it. In the end, selfies could make up for
you think? Is taking selfies bad for nature? rather than taking care of the park. any harm they have caused by doing a lot of good.

YES Three reasons why taking selfies is

bad for nature NO Three reasons why taking selfies is
not bad for nature LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 People sometimes treat animals and
plants poorly—or even put them in
danger—while taking photos.
1 People can learn to be respectful and
take pictures responsibly. Parks can set
rules for visitors and enforce them.
it’s better to watch movies at
home. Most of you said you
would rather
2 When people are focused on getting the
perfect shot, they’re not enjoying nature. 2 Selfies allow people to share their
appreciation for Earth’s natural beauty. cozy up on
30%
NO
the couch
3 It’s harder for experts to take care of
natural areas when they’re busy
keeping selfie-lovers safe.
3 Posting photos encourages others to do
their part to protect the planet. Selfies
will ultimately do more good than harm.
than go out 70%NO
XX%
YES
to a theater.
 The big debate
Is shouting at youth sports acceptable?
Some adults get carried away on the
sidelines, while others keep calm.

What you need to know

OIn recent years, there have been more
incidents of adults at youth sports
events shouting, swearing, and even
getting into physical fights.
OMany schools and leagues have rules
telling parents how to behave at
sporting events. Others have banned
parents from games entirely.
DID YOU?
KNOstuWdy found
OA new rule in Deptford Township,
New Jersey, says that parents who
yell at Little League baseball A recentrly 61% of US
umpires must serve as an umpire that nea s 6 to 12 play
kids ageth sports.
for three games. you
 Yes—sports are noisy and exciting No—shouting makes things stressful
A cross the US, millions of children and teens
take part in school, club, and league
sporting events. In recent years, some adults
You can’t tell parents not to cheer when their
child is competing. They’re proud of their kids and
Youth sports are about sportsmanship and fun,
not just winning. Shouting puts too much pressure
have become more emotional and aggressive as want to encourage and support them. Besides, on young players, and aggressive adults can be
they support their kids from the sidelines. Some shouting encouragement motivates all the scary and create a bad atmosphere for everyone.
shout instructions to their kids or other players. players to try their best. Sports are, after all, about That behavior can make players embarrassed,
Shouting can lead to arguing, using rude competition and passion. Shouting for your team anxious, and afraid to lose. It can even cause them
language or gestures, and even threatening or an athlete is a part of the experience and helps to make errors. Players need to focus on the game
coaches, game officials, the opposing team, or create an exciting atmosphere. Most parents are and make quick decisions without being
other parents. Occasionally, the fights get sensible and respectful, even if they do shout, and distracted by yelling from the sidelines. Coaches,
physical. Adults who yell say they’re just won’t let it lead to more aggressive behavior. referees, and umpires are often other parents
supporting athletes. But other sports spectators Why should a few poorly behaved people ruin it volunteering for the job. They don’t deserve to get
think enough is enough. What do you think? Is for everyone else? It’s the out-of-control parents shouted at—or worse. Adults should set a good
shouting at youth sports acceptable? who should be banned, not shouting. example and control their emotions.

Three reasons why shouting at youth Three reasons why shouting at youth
YES sports is acceptable NO sports is not acceptable LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked if taking
1 Parents are just trying to encourage their
children to do their best. 1 Shouting takes the focus off the whole
point of youth sports, which should be
about fun and sportsmanship.
selfies is bad for nature. Three
quarters of you said selfies are
2 Shouting creates an exciting, competitive
atmosphere and motivates all players to
try to win, which is the whole point. 2 Shouting puts too much pressure on
young players.
OK if you’re
careful, while 75%
NO
one quarter
3 A handful of adults are a problem. Other
people shouldn’t be punished for the poor
behavior of a few aggressive people.
3 No one in youth sports deserves to be
yelled at, including coaches and game
officials who are volunteering their time.
of you said 25%
YES
it’s too risky.
 The big debate
Should yearbooks go fully digital?
Some people say hard copies enhance
school memories. Others say no to print.

What you need to know

O Yearbooks are often available in
elementary, middle, and high
school as well as college.
O The first officially published
yearbook dates back to 1806,
when a class at Yale University in
Connecticut bound a book with
names of students and faculty and
DID YOU?
printed images of students.
KNOesW
t known
O In most schools, students have to The old arbook is from
g ye ege
purchase a yearbook, which covers survivin sachusetts Coll .
the cost of printing. Prices can range the Mas armacy in 1823
of Ph
from $10 to $100 each.
 Yes—everything is online these days No—print yearbooks are a keepsake
N othing signals the end of the school year like
warmer weather, summer plans, and flipping
through your brand-new yearbook. Across the US,
The average size of a high school yearbook is
140 pages, which uses a lot of paper and is
Yearbooks document a special time in life, and
a hard copy symbolizes how important and
many students purchase a printed copy of their expensive to print. And the more it costs to print, meaningful it is. You can hold it in your hand, flip
school’s annual yearbook, which is filled with fun the more it costs students to buy. Digital through the pages at your own pace, and return
memories and photos of friends, teachers, and yearbooks don’t kill trees and are more affordable. to things you want to see again. Plus, you can
classmates. Students often sign one another’s Printed yearbooks are also big and heavy. Kids read all the signatures and personal messages
yearbooks, too, with messages they can read have enough to carry around, and they’re used to from your friends and teachers in their own
again and again for years to come. Yearbooks are doing their homework and keeping photos on handwriting. People tend to be more thoughtful
a special tradition, but many people say there’s their devices anyway. With digital yearbooks, the when they know something is going in print or
no point in printing them anymore. Instead, there editors also aren’t limited by space. They can they’re writing it out by hand. And just because a
are online versions that students can scroll include everyone, which means no one is left out. yearbook is digital doesn’t mean it’s forever—a
through and store on their devices. What do you If there’s a mistake, it can be fixed instantly. An computer problem could wipe it out entirely, and
think? Should yearbooks go fully digital? error in a printed yearbook lives forever. those memories would be gone.

YES Three reasons why yearbooks

should go fully digital NO Three reasons why yearbooks should
not go fully digital LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 Printed yearbooks waste paper and
money. Digital versions are more
accessible to all students.
1 A printed yearbook symbolizes how
important school memories are. shouting at youth sports is
acceptable. It was a close call:

2 Yearbooks are clunky and heavy. It’s

easy to store and look at a digital one.
2 It’s more meaningful to read handwritten
messages, and people are more thoughtful
when they know their note will be in print.
Just over half of
you said it’s 47%
NO
OK for adults
3 If a yearbook is digital, there is unlimited
space to include everyone and it’s much
easier to correct mistakes.
3 Digital yearbooks aren’t necessarily
forever. They could get lost or erased,
along with all those special memories.
to be loud on YES
53%
the sidelines.
 The big debate
Should conservation focus on smaller animals?
Some say it’s time to change the strategy
for helping endangered species.

What you need to know

O An estimated 42,108 species are at
risk of extinction (no longer existing),

DID YOU?
including 35% of amphibians, 22% of

KNOrldWWildlife
mammals, and 13% of bird species. Eastern small-
footed bat Black-footed ferret
O Many conservation groups focus on The Wo onservation
c
large, popular animals like pandas, Fund, a s had a panda
a
whales, tigers, and gorillas. These group, h go since 1961.
are known as “flagship species” or on its lo
“charismatic megafauna.”
O Studies have found that animals
with large bodies, forward-facing
eyes, and an impressive appearance
Galápagos pink
are the most appealing. Hellbender salamander land iguana
 Yes—protect the little guys No—big problems require big solutions
G iant pandas have adorable faces. Elephants
and lions are famously beautiful and majestic.
These animals are the focus of major conservation
There are many endangered animals people don’t
pay any attention to, which means they get less
There’s a reason conservation efforts often focus on
attractive or charming animals, and that’s because
efforts, but few people talk about the black-footed support, money, and scientific and community they get people’s attention and inspire them to
ferret, Eastern small-footed bat, Galápagos pink efforts to save their lives. Maybe they’re quirky or help. Sure, people are more likely to donate money
land iguana, or hellbender salamander (also scary-looking, but they still need our help. Many of to an adorable polar bear than a flopping salmon
known as a “snot otter”). They’re endangered these creatures provide important benefits to at first. But once they get involved and start to care
too, but many wildlife experts say these animals people, like killing harmful insects and rodents. about saving animals, they’re more likely to help
are being left out because they’re small and Protecting a species isn’t very effective if it doesn’t the fish and other small creatures. This is known as
considered less attractive. US lawmakers help the entire ecosystem (group of plants and the “umbrella effect.” Plus, many of the flagship
recently introduced the Recovering America’s animals in an area that affect one another). Each animals are “keystone species,” which are essential
Wildlife Act to focus efforts on less “charismatic” ecosystem relies on a careful balance of predators to an ecosystem. Saving them helps others in their
creatures like these. What do you think? Should and prey. If conservationists help one species habitat survive while giving the public a greater
conservation focus on smaller animals? without protecting the others, it can cause harm. appreciation for the value of nature.

YES Three reasons why conservation

should focus on smaller animals NO Three reasons why conservation
should not focus on smaller animals LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you if
1 Small animals need our attention and
support too, which means people need
to know about them.
1 Big, striking, and beautiful animals
motivate people to care about
conservation efforts in general.
yearbooks should go fully
digital. A large majority said
no, it’s better to
2 These species can protect humans from
pests and provide other benefits. 2 Once people are inspired to protect one
animal, they’re more likely to help other
animals as well.
have school
memories 11%
3 It’s important to maintain the balance
between small and large animals in
3 It’s vital to save larger keystone species. preserved 89% YES
NO

; ALAMY (2)
every habitat. That helps other creatures survive. in print.
 The big debate
Are exclamation points necessary?
The seemingly simple punctuation mark
can stir up a lot of strong feelings.

What you need to know

O Exclamation points are used with an
interjection or exclamation, like
“Watch out!” They’re also used at
the end of a sentence to express
significance or strong emotion.
O The exclamation point first appeared
in writing about 600 years ago and is
believed to come from the Latin
UN F AC T
word io, which means “joy.” F y town in the
The onl wo exclamation
O Exclamation points are sometimes or ld w ith t name is
w n its
called “bangs,” “shrieks,” “gaspers,” points i is-du-Ha! Ha!,
u
and “screamers” by journalists, Saint-Lo bec, Canada.
writers, and publishers. in Que
 Yes—they serve an important purpose! No—they’re the equivalent of shouting
If a character in a book says “Duck,” you might
think they’re pointing out a nearby bird. But if
they say “Duck!” it’s clear they’re warning
Exclamation points are a valid punctuation mark
that can be traced back to a 14th-century Italian
Famous author F. Scott Fitzgerald once said that
exclamation points are the same as “laughing
someone else to get down quickly, right? scholar. No one would say the question mark was at your own jokes.” They make the writer seem
Punctuation, such as exclamation points, has unnecessary—without it, how would we know a little desperate or like they’re shouting at the
been around for thousands of years and is an the writer is asking something? In a similar way, reader—and no one enjoys being shouted at.
important tool for conveying meaning. It can exclamation points signal to readers that the They can also make the reader feel like they’re
indicate the end of a sentence, a pause, a words contain strong feelings. But they don’t do being forced to have a specific feeling or
question, or—in the exclamation point’s case—a all the work—the reader still has to figure out reaction. Readers don’t want to be told how to
strong emotion or urgent instruction. But some what the emotions are. Exclamation points can read, and they should be free to react to the
writers think exclamation points are unacceptable also keep people safe. For example, on road signs, words on their own terms. And a good writer
and unnecessary. They say the writing should tell they warn drivers of a hazard ahead. Of course, doesn’t take shortcuts. They can create
the reader everything they need to know. What using exclamation points too often weakens their emotions with just words and sentences,
do you think? Are exclamation points necessary? effect, but that doesn’t mean they’re useless. whether that’s fear, wonder, or joy.

YES Three reasons exclamation points

are necessary NO Three reasons exclamation points
are not necessary LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week we asked you if
1 Exclamation points have been around for
hundreds of years and are just as necessary
as any other form of punctuation.
1 Exclamation points make the writer
seem desperate and even like they’re
shouting at the reader.
conservation should focus on
smaller animals. Most of you
said yes, experts
2 They signal that there are emotions in the
writing but still leave room for the reader
to figure out what those feelings are.
2 Readers don’t want to be told how to
feel, and they should be allowed to
interpret the writing on their own.
should be
paying more 39%
NO
attention to 61%
3 Exclamation points on road signs make
drivers aware of hidden dangers. 3 The skill of writing is in crafting words
and sentences that carry emotion. the little guys.
YES
 The big debate
Should there be live-action remakes?
Some people think animated films should
N FAC T
be left as they are, rather than remade. FU nimated
In the a ow to Train
of H
What you need to know version gon, Toothless
Your Dra d on one of the
e
O Live-action movies mix real-life was bas ators’ cats.
actors with the latest special anim
effects to make fantasy look real.
O Popular animated films that have
been remade into live-action ones
include The Lion King, Aladdin, and
Beauty and the Beast.
ODreamWorks Animation is now
making live-action versions of the
How to Train Your Dragon films.
O The original films were based on a The live-action
book series about a Viking named version of The
Hiccup and Toothless the dragon. Little Mermaid
 Yes—they give new life to old stories No—that’s not very creative
F rom Toy Story to Frozen, Moana, Minions, and
Encanto, animated films are huge. Timeless
movies like these build magical worlds where
The original animated film The Little Mermaid came
out in 1989. Many adults love it for sentimental
Animated films have beautiful styles of animation
that are created for a specific story and contribute
dolls talk, little yellow creatures cause trouble, reasons, but it can seem old-fashioned to young to the film’s magic. Some movies use classical
and families live in enchanted homes. Recently, audiences who have grown up with state-of-the- two-dimensional sketch-style animation, while
studios have been making live-action versions of art special effects. The live-action version that others have a more modern three-dimensional
big animated hits. How to Train Your Dragon, came out this year was a chance to update a classic style. Creating animation takes years of effort
which will hit theaters in 2025, is just the latest story for a younger generation. Years ago, from the people who work behind the scenes.
animated film to be getting a live-action remake. filmmakers didn’t have the technology to make Live-action remakes make it seem as if the hard
Some people who love the original movies are live-action fantasy worlds look as real as they do work of the original animators isn’t good enough
excited to see them brought to life again. Others today. Now they can make live-action movies that or is too old-fashioned. It’s not very creative to
think the animated films were so good that are as amazing as animated ones. It’s exciting for simply remake a film in a different style. Instead,
there’s no need to redo them. What do you think? kids to see what their favorite characters or film studios should come up with original ideas
Should there be live-action remakes? creatures look like in the “real” world. and stories to make into new films.

YES Three reasons there should be

live-action remakes NO Three reasons there should not be
live-action remakes LAST WEEK’S POLL
Last week, we asked you
1 Remaking films is a great way to update
animated classics and introduce them to
a new generation of kids.
1 Part of what makes animated movies so
special is the beautiful animation styles,
which are different in each film.
if exclamation points
are necessary. You voted
overwhelmingly
2 Amazing technology that enables
fantasy to look like reality has been
invented—we should use it.
2 Animators put years of hard work into
their films. Live-action remakes make it
seem like that’s not important.
in favor of
using the
7%
NO
93%
punctuation YES
3 It’s exciting to see fantasy worlds
brought to life in the film’s “real” world. 3 Remaking old films isn’t very creative.
It’s better to come up with new ideas. mark in writing!