<p>These were two short passages with four questions</p>
<p>the last question was about a line and the answer was highlighting an irony</p>
<p>Another was how the passages are related
I put the first passage talks about a movement (reforming of journalism) which the second passage refutes</p>
<p>Another was how would the author of passage 2 view the people who wanted to reform journalism</p>
<p>i cant remember, but was it this passage that had the question about “what did one use and the other didn’t” and it was like, direct quotes from critics or something?</p>
<p>yeah that was the other question… I think I put direct quotes from critics becuz the quote in the first passage was some from some organization to reform journalism not a critic</p>
<p>i think it was the economic choice because passage one stated how the media can affect the economy or something, while the second one didn’t; and i know for a fact both used quotes</p>
<p>Idk I just think that the first line was saying that the media is lucrative business that cood be economic, but I still think it was use of quotes from crtics because the first paragraph used a quote from an advocate of reforming journalism</p>
<p>It was like In line (something - something)… they were the last lines of the 2nd passage it said something like in trying to reform the journalism they are doing what they intend to stop, “not telling the truth”</p>
<p>Therefore it is highlighting irony</p>
<p>Godot what do u think the difference between the two passages was
Use of quotes from critics
Or use of economic impact of journalism</p>
<p>Ahhh. Great, I had that answer. The difference was definitely “economic impact” on journalism. Passage 2 mentioned in the first or second sentence that the journalism industry was profitable, while Passage 1 did not mention economics at all. Both passages used quotes from critics (it doesn’t matter that the <em>authors</em> had opposing views; they are STILL quoting from critics of the current way of doing journalism in both instances).</p>