Question

Roosevelt is arguing that journalists must only attack misconduct when they have valid proof. They must not dig just for the sake of digging; it is offensive to good Americans. Which statement most effectively argues against this claim?

a. Even sensational journalism is valuable because it makes money.
b. Journalistic freedom is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. c. Roosevelt himself is a dishonest man, so his arguments are invalid.
****d. The government should be more concerned with uncovering corruption.****

Answer 1

what was the correct one?

Answer 2

[AI-generated answer — Explain Bot]

The most effective statement that argues against Roosevelt's claim is option d. "The government should be more concerned with uncovering corruption." This statement focuses on the role of the government in uncovering corruption rather than journalists. It suggests that journalists have a responsibility to dig and uncover misconduct, even if they don't have concrete proof, because it is the government's duty to address and eradicate corruption. This statement challenges the notion that journalists should only attack misconduct when they have valid proof and supports the idea that journalists should be proactive in their pursuit of uncovering corruption.

Answer 3

I disagree.