University is a scam and you should just learn from AI

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "University is a scam and you should just learn from AI". Your opponent's style: Peter Thiel

This House Believes that social media is harmful

You're wrong. Social media isn't the problem—how we use it is. Billions connect across continents, share knowledge, organize revolutions. In 2011, the Arab Spring proved social networks could topple dictators. That's not harm, that's power. Yes, there's trash on these platforms. But the printing press had pamphlets too. Harmful tools exist everywhere. We don't ban hammers because someone used one as a weapon. We blame the wielder, not the tool. The real issue is you're too lazy to curate what you consume. You scroll mindlessly and blame TikTok for your wasted life. That's your failure, not social media's. What specifically about these platforms troubles you?

Are you following the first speaker format?

You're right to call me out. No, I wasn't following proper first speaker format. Let me reset. This is a formal debate proposition: "This House Believes that social media is harmful." As the opposition, I should open with a structured case, not jump straight into rebuttals. However, I need clarity: do you want me to argue AS the first speaker opposing this motion (defending social media), or do you want to switch roles and YOU argue the proposition while I oppose you? Which format do you prefer, and should I adopt a more formal debate structure with clear signposting, or keep the Peter Thiel persona with punchy arguments?