I believe television is more effective than radio because, television provide a visual image of certain things, and people find visuals more appealing and favorite more than listening to someone speaking. The images tend to capture the mind of the viewer causing them to be more attracted to a certain thing, causing it to have a greater influence on public opinion. For example, If Pepsi chose to create an advertisement in a radio by just simply stating that it's refreshing and saying that you should buy it. But Coca Cola chose to make an ad on TV by showing people enjoying the drink by the pool in a summer day, you are more likely to chose Coke because it appealed to you more than Pepsi. So I think that's why Television is more effective in influencing public opinion than a radio.
Hope this helps you
Marta is making an argument for a job candidate she likes. she tells the other members of the hiring committee that all utsa graduates are trained in a <u>syllogism</u>.
A syllogism is a form of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at an end primarily based on propositions that are asserted or assumed to be real.
In its earliest form, syllogism arises whilst two true premises (propositions or statements) validly imply a conclusion or the principle point that the argument objectives to get across.
For instance, knowing that everyone guys are mortal (primary premise) and that Socrates is a person (minor premise), we might also validly conclude that Socrates is mortal. Syllogistic arguments are commonly represented in a 3-line form.
Learn more about syllogism here: brainly.com/question/361872
#SPJ4
Answer:
"Original jurisdiction" cases are rare, with the Court hearing one or two cases each term. The most common way for a case to reach the Supreme Court is on appeal from a circuit court. A party seeking to appeal a decision of a circuit court can file a petition to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
Answer:
Explanation:fkdkekekeekrrkfkfkg
The answer is a sweeping generalization. It is applying a
general rule to a specific occasion without appropriate evidence. While the
opposite of the sweeping generalization is hasty generalization is applying a
specific rule to a general situation without proper evidence.
