Harris presents "countering" as an aspect to writing, along with his many other ideas. The idea of countering can be summarized fairly easily. Countering does not necessarily mean to disagree with an author's work, but offers three key points that can be used to counter a piece that you may still agree with. The first point is arguing the other side to show possible flaws in what the author is arguing for. The second point is uncovering values by analyzing an idea that was left unexplained to help bring better meaning to the argument as a whole. The final point is dissenting, or noting limits on a shared idea. Once these points are understood it becomes clear that countering does not have to be a disagreement, but a way to bring new perspective to a text.
A blog I follow, The Ville Voice, does not often use countering to convey a point, as forwarding articles they agree completely with seems to be more their forte. I was, however, able to find an article where countering was used to show the blogger, Jake's, opinion. The blog post, Told Ya So: Berman Wasting Your Money, discusses the Jefferson County Public School Superintendent, Sheldon Berman, wasting Louisville's tax money for personal use, such as travel. The original article from WHAS only mentions that Berman seems to be traveling more often, and discuss possible reasons for this sudden travel increase. Jake puts a personal spin on this article and argues all of the negative aspects of Berman's travel. He points out all of the places he has been traveling to, and how the only explanation is for personal reasons. I believe countering is a useful tool. It does not cause an article to lose or gain anything. When used properly, countering should really only be seen as a way of putting a new perspective on a semi-controversial article or topic.
