When the interests of politicians or big business moguls coincide with those of the masses which of the following is the consequence?
Answer
coverage of events will be slanted
coverage of events will be automatic
coverage of events will be cancelled
coverage of events will be leaked
i don't know this one ?? but i doubt its gonna be cancelled. that's all i have.
It's probably the first one. No matter which organization is covering these stories, they will probably be slanted one way or another.
When the interests of politicians or big business moguls coincide with those of the masses, the consequence is likely to be that the coverage of events will be slanted. Slanted coverage refers to a biased or one-sided presentation of information that is designed to support a particular point of view or agenda.
To arrive at this answer, we can eliminate some options:
1. Coverage of events will be automatic: This option does not seem to be a likely consequence in this scenario. Automatic coverage implies that events will be covered without any bias or manipulation, which may not be the case when the interests of politicians or big business moguls are involved.
2. Coverage of events will be cancelled: This option is less likely because when the interests of politicians or big business moguls coincide with those of the masses, it is more probable that they would want the events to be covered, albeit in a way that serves their interests.
3. Coverage of events will be leaked: While the interests of politicians or big business moguls can lead to leaks of confidential information or documents, this option does not specifically address the coverage of events.
Considering the remaining option, "coverage of events will be slanted," it aligns with the common understanding that powerful interests often seek to shape the narrative to suit their agenda. Slanted coverage can involve selective presentation of facts, strategic emphasis, or biased analysis that aligns with the interests of politicians or big business moguls.