After-action Assessment:

There are a couple of pieces of advice that I want to offer -- in addition to the comments I made in your turnitin "Grademark" report.

First, you are clearly on one side of this argument when you say that it's clear some kind of sensible gun control is essential. It's a hot debate at the moment -- but the line seems to be drawn between "we can talk about control at some point (if ever)" and "we need control now (if not earlier)." So if you're going to be on one side of the argument -- that's fine. Just do your best to avoid painting yourself as unbiased/undecided when in fact you have quite a clear point of view.

I also think that if you had simply leaned into the angle of advertising from the start -- rather than the entire gun debate -- you may have been on stronger footing. There are other things to compare this kind of advertising to and how it was wrangled in over the years -- such as cigarettes and alcohol -- which were forced to steer away from targeting underage customers and now have to be openly clear about the risks and add the tag line "drink responsibly" as well as connections to helplines, etc.

You need more direct quotes from your experts to make your points. Everyone was guilty of this and it's going to be in my announcement to the entire class once I'm through grading. Use the expert language to show that people who've done research and work in the field already agree with you.

When you're talking about something that comes in "phases," it's important that you're making a clear delineation between those phases. So, when you talk about the NRA's current narrative, a key quote from LaPierre or one of the key pieces of advertising would have helped solidify your argument.

Your strongest asset here was creativity and a distinct point of view. Lean into that as a strength going forward