In a word, the social comparison theory states that we evaluate ourselves in relation to others in order to broaden and/or improve our frame of reference.
When objective measurements are absent or not thought to be important, it ostensibly serves as a reality check. On the plus side, the comparison might provide a framework for "information collecting." Without the example of other individuals, we might not even realize what is even possible. Our perception of what we can conceive for ourselves can be expanded by looking at other people's examples. It motivates us to achieve excellence. We have the chance to get closer to perfection by seeing others practice it. We learn about what's effective when we observe someone or an organization accomplishing its objectives. By extending our casing of reference and applying what we gain from this perception, we gain ground toward our own proficient objectives.
Contrasting our existence with the existence of another person can be a strong chance for appreciation. One of the aces of correlation is the capacity to take advantage of inspiration we probably won't have all alone when we bridle the force of local area to push toward our favored future.
To learn more about comparison, refer:-
brainly.com/question/24306502
#SPJ4
Answer:
In some of the most influential democracies in the world, large segments of the population are no longer receiving unbiased news and information. This is not because journalists are being thrown in jail, as might occur in authoritarian settings. Instead, the media have fallen prey to more nuanced efforts to throttle their independence. Common methods include government-backed ownership changes, regulatory and financial pressure, and public denunciations of honest journalists. Governments have also offered proactive support to friendly outlets through measures such as lucrative state contracts, favorable regulatory decisions, and preferential access to state information. The goal is to make the press serve those in power rather than the public.
The problem has arisen in tandem with right-wing populism, which has undermined basic freedoms in many democratic countries. Populist leaders present themselves as the defenders of an aggrieved majority against liberal elites and ethnic minorities whose loyalties they question, and argue that the interests of the nation—as they define it—should override democratic principles like press freedom, transparency, and open debate.
Among Free countries in Freedom House’s Freedom in the World report, 19 percent (16 countries) have endured a reduction in their press freedom scores over the past five years. This is consistent with a key finding of Freedom in the World—that democracies in general are undergoing a decline in political rights and civil liberties. It has become painfully apparent that a free press can never be taken for granted, even when democratic rule has been in place for decades.
Explanation:
hope it helps!
Napoleon is always right :D
rneiuberiubute fgnuosr tguetbh guowehst uohtufdghorehf aoivhuhboudfhuebhouhouh eouthbvthourth uorthuob htrouhrothb uhfbeuthgubtuivtbitebeufhbhrbtiuuorhfuehbuhtrvutoghvuoerheiboi hroitb oithio hoithohbiohtro
