The correct answers are A. A magazine article exaggerating the public’s extreme reaction to a celebrity, B. A funny political cartoon exposing the flaws in a new government policy, and D. An ironic short story that draws attention to how unmotivated people can be
Explanation:
The purpose of satire is to criticize negative aspects of individuals, society or government, for this, satire does not use literal language but relies on irony, humor or exaggeration that show indirectly the absurdity of some behaviors and actions. This also implies texts that use literal language and do not focus on criticizing society are not satirical.
According to this, from the options provided the texts that are example of satire are "A magazine article exaggerating the public’s extreme reaction to a celebrity" because this uses exaggeration to show a negative aspect of people and create a critique; "A funny political cartoon exposing the flaws in a new government policy" because this exposes the flaws of government through humor; and "An ironic short story that draws attention to how unmotivated people can be" because as other examples this focuses on showing flaws or vices by using humor.
<span>The main point of the story is that infatuation isn't true love. We can all sympathize with the girl in the story who is flattered by the young man's attention. She fell for the charming young man. He takes command of each situation, is closely attentive to her, and talks
Now don't get me wrong. I mean, I want you to understand from the beginning that i'm not really so dumb. I know what a girl should do and what she shouldn't. I get around. I read. I listen to the radio. And I have two older sisters. So you see I know what's what. Even if the my sisters were not there I would rely on the wisdom of other, more experienced girls, that are either my friends, or are in the family.</span>
Statement #1 should be the correct answer
Go to school because your learning there
Answer:
A. text 1 does not acknowledge both sides of it argument, but text 2 does.
Explanation:
"Big Money shouldn't buy our elections" didn't acknowledge both sides of it argument while "Corporation have campaign rights, too" did.
[CloudBreeze]