Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: E-books vs traditional books

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 02:00, 29 July 2010 (edit)
FilmBuff84 (Talk | contribs)
(Con)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 02:03, 29 July 2010 (edit)
FilmBuff84 (Talk | contribs)
(The Independent)
Next diff →
Line 112: Line 112:
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"|
-===External links and resources:===+===http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/the-big-question-do-electronic-books-threaten-the-future-of-traditional-publishing-875724.html===
|} |}

Revision as of 02:03, 29 July 2010

E-books are superior to traditional books.

Contents

Background and Context of Debate:

Write Subquestion here...

Pro

E-book readers can quickly update content for accuracy and relevance.





Con

Traditional, paper books are immune to viruses, dead batteries, and other technical malfunctions.





Write Subquestion here...

Pro

Because they are paperless, e-books have less impact on the environment.





Con

A hardcover book has greater monetary value than an easily copied e-book.





Write Subquestion here...

Pro

E-books are more convenient as an entire library can be stored in a single reader.





Con

E-books threaten the publishing industry.





References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/the-big-question-do-electronic-books-threaten-the-future-of-traditional-publishing-875724.html

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.