Please follow the professor’s instructions and explore the topic of anti-vaccines. I have attached the debate script so you know the exact arguments used. Also, I have attached a previous work so you can use it as an example for the way of writing. Professors instructions: Take one topic of the debate and explore it using your own words and thoughts, utilizing research sources as necessary to support them. Now there are some ground rules here: 1) The topic of your final paper needs to be grounded in the debates. As I hope and think you'll agree, the seven debates provided us with a rich array of potential topics. You might choose to broadly look at how the media has tackled the question of what rich countries owe poor countries in climate reparations, or you could grapple with a far more narrow topic touched on during the debates, such as whether or not the media has accurately reported the effect of Voter ID laws on minority voter turnout. I am requiring you to directly reference a statement or idea raised during one of the debates, and your paper should generally look at how media coverage has influenced views on your subject. 2) Next, the topic should reflect a change in your thinking. How did you think about the topic coming into the debates, and how do you now think about the subject now that they've been completed. It's natural that you might choose a topic related to the one you researched in your group, but it's not a requirement. 3) Employ research, but don't foreground it. Getting our facts straight is important. Central to any consideration of Voter ID laws is what the best available research says about their efficacy in preventing fraud and the extent to which they do or do not discourage people from voting. But more than in the Midterm, which was a true research paper, I'm curious to hear what you, as an individual, think about these ideas. Citations to external sources should support your writing, but your actual thinking should take center stage.