Blog Extract: Plastic-Bag Ban and Weak Evidence
Read this extract from a local English-language blog: 'Last month, the town council voted to ban single-use plastic bags in all shops. Supporters point to a survey of 400 residents: 78% said they would support a ban. But the survey was conducted outside an organic supermarket, and the question asked was “Would you like to see less plastic waste?” The council’s own waste report shows bags make up 0.7% of household waste by weight. The ban may feel good, but it will not solve the problem. Shoppers will simply buy reusable bags, which require far more energy to produce. The real issue is packaging. A local shopkeeper, Mrs. Kruse, says sales of reusable bags have tripled, but she also reports that many customers forget them and buy another.' The blog post is shared in your English class.
1. Identify one fact and one opinion in the extract. Explain the difference using the wording of the text, not just labels.
Read the worked answer
A fact is checkable against a source: 'bags make up 0.7% of household waste by weight' comes from the council’s waste report. An opinion is an evaluative claim: 'The ban may feel good, but it will not solve the problem' predicts an outcome and judges the ban. The difference is not whether a sentence contains numbers; the fact is attributed and measurable, while the opinion is the author’s interpretation. 'Sales of reusable bags have tripled' is reported as fact from Mrs. Kruse, but it is a single shopkeeper’s report, so it is weaker evidence than the council report.
2. How does the author use the 78% figure? Is it used fairly? Give two reasons.
Read the worked answer
The author does not deny the 78%; they undermine its meaning. Reason one: the sample is biased because it was taken outside an organic supermarket, whose customers may already favour less plastic. Reason two: the survey question asked about 'less plastic waste', not specifically about a bag ban, so support for the ban is not the same as support for less waste. The figure is therefore used fairly as a target for critique, but unfairly if a reader treats it as direct evidence of majority support for the ban. The author’s rhetorical move is to show that a precise number can still be weak evidence.
3. What is the author’s main claim, and what evidence would most strengthen it? What evidence would weaken it?
Read the worked answer
Main claim: a bag ban is symbolically attractive but ineffective because bags are a tiny share of waste and reusable alternatives have costs; the real target should be packaging. To strengthen it, the author would need data on packaging’s share of household waste and on the energy costs of reusable bags compared with single-use bags. To weaken it, evidence that bag bans reduce plastic leakage into rivers or change shopping habits without increasing total energy use would help. A critical reader separates the claim about effectiveness from the claim about symbolism; the 0.7% figure supports the first but not automatically the second.