Answer:
A). Paying money to attend a conference about climate change in order to do research for an article.
C). Ending an investigation because it may lead to violence and disunity in a local community.
D). Interviewing the CEOs of two insurance companies that are competing against each other.
Explanation:
Ethically acceptable scenarios would be associated with the scenarios that are morally accurate and corresponds to impartiality, responsibility, credibility, truth, and ethics.
As per the question, options A, C, and D would be considered as ethically acceptable scenarios as they correspond to unbiased, authentic, and credible information to be presented to the viewers. <em>'paying money to attend a research' would assist in offering a wider dimension and credible information while 'ending an investigation as it may violence and disunity' exemplify 'responsibility' which is the key code of ethics and 'interviewing two CEO's' would help present an unbiased representation.</em> Thus, <u>options A, C, and D</u> are correct.
Here's the link that would help you.
http://publicdomainreview.org/2011/08/29/geronimo-the-warrior/
Answer:
the second option, "this statement cannot be argued."
Answer:
Third person point of view.
Explanation:
A narrator who knows and focuses attention equally on the thoughts, actions and feelings of all the characters present is known as the omniscient narrator and this type of narrator uses the third person point of view to tell the story.
The third person point of view offers a panaromic view of the work and reveals everything about all the characters, from their thoughts, as well as their actions.
The answer to that question would c because a is a past tense word and d is not the correct grammar at all
