A columnist writes that the acquisition of a new team mascot for the local baseball team is bad luck. He believes this because ever since the mascot arrived the team has lost every game. What is wrong with this statement?

Columnists are not supposed to cover stories about sports-related news in their work.

A credible columnist is not allowed to express his or her opinion openly in the news.

This is an example of plagiarism. The columnist has made use of someone else's ideas.

It suggests that one thing caused another to happen when there is no evidence for this.

Question

A columnist writes that the acquisition of a new team mascot for the local baseball team is bad luck. He believes this because ever since the mascot arrived the team has lost every game. What is wrong with this statement?

Columnists are not supposed to cover stories about sports-related news in their work.

A credible columnist is not allowed to express his or her opinion openly in the news.

This is an example of plagiarism. The columnist has made use of someone else's ideas.

It suggests that one thing caused another to happen when there is no evidence for this.

anonymous · Answer

@Spectrum

anonymous · Answer

if a new mascot joined the team, considering mascots don't play ....is it really true for him to say thats the reason they lost every game?

anonymous · Answer

no?

anonymous · Answer

A credible columnist is not allowed to express his or her opinion openly in the news. ?

anonymous · Answer

no ... a columnist gives their opinion.....but since a new mascot has nothing to do with them winning or losing...what do you think?

anonymous · Answer

the last one ?

anonymous · Answer

yes ..there is no evidence to support their opinion