ducated workforce in order to be strong. When looking at popular press sources rather than academic, many use the authors’ opinion or an overview of the issue rather than actual full research. Personally, I do not think that means they should not be use, but for formal argument sake sometimes they do not offer solid evidence. The topic in a piece published by Dissent Magazine is “free public higher education is long overdue” (Cottom). The author used some factual information like pulling statistics from over the years and using information from past Democratic platforms and the Obama administration. But for the most part, her backings were just her blunt opinion, which makes the article bias. The author states the cost of tuition is the main reason why only half of Americans go to college but there are other factors like cultural and social barriers imposing on people’s education too. The claim is that free college is only going to benefit a small group of people– “students with the ability and/or some cultural capital but without wealth” (Cottom). Nonetheless, the author still wants the audience to know she does not care if free college will not solve inequality. She inflicts the idea of quality because she believes free high education is extremely valuable and shows public good. She then ends her argument with President Obama’s justification for free college, “Every American… should be able to earn the skill and education necessary to compete and win in the twenty-first century economy.” While the author’s delivery was not “scholarly” she was short with it and got to the point. All while pushing her side of the argument and offering the not-so-great aspects of it too.>