Answer:
The author means that now the tools are more important that the message itself.
Explanation:
The excerpt belongs to Small Change: Why the Revolution Won't Be Tweeted, an article written by Malcolm Gladwell, a Canadian journalist and writer. There, he discusses the impact of social media and other new tools in different movements across the world.
In this sentence, Gladwell means that the vehicle the message uses to travel is more important than the message itself. He uses as an example the case of Iran, where people got enough courage to uprise because of social media like Twitter. Even though it is an interesting idea, I don't totally agree with this. I think how the message travels is important, otherwise it could be really important but sterile. There's where the tools take more relevance; sometimes, due to different factors, the tools are faster and more efficient to use communication, but if the message is not relevant, then there are no good reasons to use the tools.
The tropics, underwater volcanic regions, the equator.
Answer:
It could ruin the whole essence of a camping trip, the experience of camping outside among nature.
Explanation:
The primary purpose of any camping trip might well be to experience nature and be among the woods, enjoying the surroundings and being one with nature. The outside camping, the bonfire, the tents, all are part of the experience. But if it rains, then everything gets ruined. The camping won't be a success, bonfires are impossible, out of the question, and the proposed experience of being one with nature might as well be eliminated. Not only will it ruin the plans, it will also make it impossible to even camp properly, let alone do anything. Staying dry will be the only objective. It could ruin the whole essence of a camping trip, the experience of camping outside among nature.
The answer seems to be man vs nature
Answer:
C
Explanation:
Can't seem to find an answer button, but the answer I would assume is C. There wasn't a place in the text directly referring to the answer, however, judging from how many times the fact the walzer was written as disgraceful and awful, peasants would most likely be the ones to dance the walzer because they wouldn't care about customs like that.
I will tell you that it is definitely not B, and A would most likely be wrong as well because the fact that peasants did not associate with members of the upper class has little to do with why only peasant danced the walzer.
