Answer:
A contradiction between a reader's expectations and the actual outcome
Explanation:
Answer:
D) They are about to watch someone die, so they are showing respect.
Explanation:
Midway up the slope between the bridge and fort were the spectators -- a single company of infantry in line, at "parade rest."
I think it would be all of the above to all of them because they'd all work.
Let's write complete sentences using the given words:
1. Van Gogh's paintings are almost as expensive as the work of Picasso.
2. We did not know the Recycled Orchestra until we watched the video online yesterday.
For the first sentence, we can see that the purpose is to compare the work of two painters, Van Gogh and Picasso. That is why we use the structure "as ... as". We must place the adjective "expensive" in the middle: "almost as expensive as".
For the second sentence, we do not need to add anything. However, because of the word "yesterday", we know the sentence refers to something that happened in the past. Thus, we use the Simple Past tense for the verbs: not know - did not know; watch - watched.
In conclusion, all we need to do is read the words to grasp what the purpose of each sentence is and then add or change whatever is necessary to form a complete sentence.
Learn more about the Simple Past tense here:
brainly.com/question/14025107?referrer=searchResults
Answer: The statement implies that <u>there is no such thing as being impartial </u>in journalism. By looking for specific experts that reassure your point of view, a reporter can direct the news reporting the way he/she wants. Showing in the excerpt that they try to contact the ones that are up to this and even record the expert on camera, they manipulate the audiece with proof as they wish to.
