Answer:
Article III, Section II, US Constitution:
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Explanation:
Answer:
high distinctiveness, low consensus, and high consistency
Explanation:
Hello. You have not submitted the text to which this question refers. This makes it impossible for your question to be answered. However, I will try to help you in the best possible way.
It is only possible to answer this question by reading the two texts. Also, this is a personal question so first of all, you should reflect on what you think about the dangers that social media can offer to users. Do you think social media can influence you incorrectly? do you think social media can impose negative standards on society? Do you think that social media can promote exaggerated exposure? These are some concepts that you can reflect on to create your opinion about the dangers that social media can cause.
Then, you should read both texts and pay attention to how the authors approach these dangers and which author managed to present an argument that most closely resembles the opinion you have on this subject.
Therefore, you must answer this question by showing how you and this author present similar arguments and opinions.
<span>There's not really any pros for propaganda because essentially what you are doing is lying to get someone to believe something. I guess you could say a pro is that gullible people will believe you, but that's an unethical pro. The cons are that it usually causes much controversy in a society where there's not supposed to be a bias in the government. Propaganda in its true form is never a good thing. It is unethical in the sense that it takes advantage of people who are too lazy to do research and quick to believe what someone tells them. One example I like to use is many of these independent "news" websites. On both ends of the political spectrum, left and right, you find websites that have articles so heavily weighed down with that wings propaganda that true news becomes less and less visible. Occupy Democrats is one textbook example of that. Their articles are so left leaning that you read an article and are immediately left with a left leaning impression. Same goes for a lot of right wing websites. I'm not going to say "always" but propaganda 99.9 percent of the time is not good. Instead of people doing their own research to decide their view on something, propaganda </span>tells<span> people what they should think versus the </span><span>asking </span><span>people what they think</span>
When Ashley Johnson’s male co-workers make unwelcome comments to her about her body and frequently tell sexual jokes when she is around even though she has been vocal to them that it’s comfortable for her, then it appears that Ms. Johnson is experiencing hostile environment sexual harassment.
This example is still surprisingly present in the real world.
