题目：The graphs below show the size of the ozone hole over Antarctica and the production of three ozone-damaging gases from 1980 to 2000.
题目 Some people believe that people who read books can develop more imagination and language skills than those who prefer to watch TV.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement.
Some people spend more time reading books, while others prefer to watch TV. The former groups are more likely to develop creative imaginations and have a much better grasp of language skills. Do you agree or disagree?
Fundamentally, I agree that reading can bring more advantages in improving the imagination of people. However, when it comes to the contribution to the learning language, I have to concede that watching TV always plays a leading role. My reasons will be explored as below.
In terms of imagination training for children, I strongly believe reading books is far superior over watching TV. During reading, children are the dominators and creators of the whole world of a story, they are encouraged to freely dream, construct and visualize all details like characters, items, colors and patterns of the background in mind. That is to say, their thinking and creativity can be outside of the box. In comparison, TV programs are always pre-designed and fixed, leaving no space for the imagination of viewers. Moreover, watching TV would manipulate minds of the audience and place them in a daze, in which all they can do is no more than passively staring at pictures on screen and mechanically pressing buttons of remote control, instead of thinking something new or different actively. As a result, the ability of free thinking among couch potatoes is averagely limited and lower than book readers.
In terms of language learning, however, I think watching TV has definite superiority over reading books, because a language is far more than literal contents. TV, a multimedia that can present pictures, sounds and videos, builds up a vivid language environment, in which a young viewer can learn the pronunciations of new words, sharpen the reaction about language listening, master the skills of language speaking, as well as understand the extent, suitability, and taboos of a certain word in different occasions. On the contrary, the language on books is always silent, which means such single-dimensional information is less accurate, incomplete and unpractical in teaching children a real and overall language.
In conclusion, I partially approve of this assertion. Although reading should be given the priority in helping people build up their creative thinking, the values of watching TV for improving the proficiency in language skills can never be underestimated.