Use the passage to answer the question.
Many fire-prone California towns don’t plan for evacuations
Counterintuitive as it may sound, Paradise has some of the strongest evacuation planning in California. In fact, a USA TODAY Network-California survey of communities at high risk from wildfires found only 22% (including Paradise) have a robust, publicly available evacuation plan.
The scale of disaster in the Camp Fire was unprecedented, but the scene of people fleeing wildfires was familiar, repeated numerous times over the past three years up and down California from Redding and Paradise to Santa Rosa, Ventura, and Malibu.
In many of those communities, motorists became stuck in traffic as officials tried to evacuate thousands onto a few roads leading away from the flames.
NO REQUIREMENT TO PLAN
The 85 deaths and nearly 19,000 buildings destroyed in Paradise’s Camp Fire made it the deadliest and most destructive blaze in California history. Eight of those who perished were found in their vehicles, with two others found outside their vehicles.
In some spots, burned-out and abandoned vehicles lined roads leading out of town.
Should cities be required to have detailed evacuation plans? In 3–5 sentences, answer the question and provide specific textual evidence to support your analysis.
Yes, cities should be required to have detailed evacuation plans. The passage states that only 22% of high-risk communities in California have robust, publicly available evacuation plans. This lack of planning was evident in the Camp Fire, where motorists became stuck in traffic as officials tried to evacuate thousands of people. The 85 deaths and nearly 19,000 buildings destroyed in Paradise's Camp Fire highlight the danger and devastation that can occur when there is inadequate evacuation planning. Requiring cities to have detailed evacuation plans can help ensure that residents are able to safely and efficiently evacuate during emergencies.
Use the passage to complete the activity.
Why Is the News Sometimes Controversial?
Reporters gather facts and write about them—so why do some people say the news is unreliable? They are worried that news stories might be biased.
Bias is an unfair representation of something or someone. It can happen when only one side of a story is presented, when only certain facts are shared, or when news organizations choose which stories they want to publish. Readers sometimes worry that news organizations, intentionally or accidentally, publish biased stories.
News organizations try to avoid bias as much as they can. They hire trained reporters who know how to ask good questions about all sides of a story. They also employ many different editors to double-check all of the facts cited in the articles.
Readers of the news can take their own steps to avoid possible bias in the news they read. They can read news from multiple sources, or they can look up facts on their own to make sure the news matches other websites and records. It is impossible to avoid bias completely, but news writers and news readers can still do a lot to make sure the information they share and read is accurate.
In 3–5 sentences, identify and explain an inference you made about news media based on the passage. Support your answer with text evidence from the passage.
Based on the passage, an inference that can be made about news media is that bias in news stories can undermine the reliability of the news. The passage states that bias can occur when only one side of a story is presented, when only certain facts are shared, or when news organizations choose which stories they want to publish. This implies that biased reporting can lead to an unfair representation of the facts and potentially misinform readers. The passage also suggests that news organizations try to avoid bias by hiring trained reporters and employing different editors to fact-check the articles. However, the inference is made that bias is still present to some extent, as it is stated that readers can take their own steps to avoid possible bias in the news they read.
Use the paragraph to answer the question.
Iodine is an important micronutrient, a vitamin or mineral that is necessary for good health. It helps the body to produce hormones, helps babies develop in the womb, and is important to many other body processes. In 1924, iodine was added to salt to make up for a lack of public access to dairy foods and ocean fish, which are natural sources of iodine. The modern American diet, however, includes many processed foods that contain iodine. As a result, many salt manufacturers have stopped adding iodine to their product, a change that did not get much attention in the media. Some nutrition experts are concerned that people who still rely on table salt as a source of iodine will have an increase in disease caused by a diet lacking in the micronutrient. Only time will tell, as America moves into a new era where table salt is no longer a guaranteed source of iodine.
In 1–2 sentences, identify and explain the evidence that the author uses to support the idea that taking iodine out of table salt might cause harm.
(2 points)