Jackson made a good point when he states, "sure all these factory's and car company's might be trying to lessen the amount of emissions that are produced but its not going to halt the process of global warming." Many people may completely disagree with this statement because of the facts that they know about global warming, but someone like myself who only knows the main points about global warming, could possibly be persuaded with. The issue with the statements he makes such as this one is that there are no supporting facts or statistics.
Jackson has these extremely strong opinions about the global warming issue and the way "propaganda" is being used to express the consequences our actions are having on the world surrounding us. When he states, "The thing is that these advertisements are really exaggerated, its kind of like propaganda people are just filming polar bears adapting naturally in certain parts that looks horrible to us." I don't see anywhere in his editorial that says he did research to find out if the advertisements really are exaggerated or if that is really the situation throughout all of the land where the polar bears are found.
I am fully supportive of everyone having their opinions on issues, but I really think those who have such strong opinions on an something should have done some research or studied some aspects of the issue they feel so strongly about. I understand what Jackson is trying to convey, but there needs to be some more substance if he really wants to get his point across to the reader and especially if he wants to persuade or inform with his editorial.