1. For ‘Does celebrity fandom do more good than harm?’ how would each side define fandom? Notice your different inclinations, and consider how to persuade others.

2. ‘Political correctness’ has many meanings. What does it mean to you, and what else might internet users mean by it?

3. Can you give another example where definition is important?

Hello, I’m Pang Ying. Welcome to the Q&A for Episode 15 of Think Like a Debater.

A：Fandom is a very broad concept.

Whom do people follow—artists and scholars, or traffic celebrities with no substance beyond looks and commercial packaging?

How do they follow—rationally, or obsessively without restraint?

Age groups have long viewed fandom differently. It is more common among the young, while parents and elders respond in many ways.

The internet has changed business models and created traffic celebrities and organized fan circles, making fandom more complex.

The affirmative has two useful approaches to definition.

Notice that I summarize transferable approaches, not merely one answer.

Everything has two sides; the question is whether risks can be controlled in most cases.

A knife can save or kill, yet overall we think knives do more good than harm.

Likewise, with proper guidance and selective judgment, fandom does more good. Most of it is harmless while providing joy, beauty, and inspiring examples.

Preordering one copy of an idol’s new album is fandom. Raising money to buy batches and treating data and spending as the only proof of love is fan-circle ranking activity. Fandom does more good; organized fan-circle culture does more harm.

The opposition will reject a division that assigns every bad practice to fan circles and then declares fandom beneficial. It has two responses.