Cause and Effect: I) The Prime Minister’s Ireland visit was the headline in the newspapers. II) The Prime Minister’s Ireland visit is historic.

Introduction / Context:We must judge which statement functions as cause and which as effect. Major news prominence (headlines) typically results from the intrinsic newsworthiness of an event (e.g., a visit being historic), not the other way around.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: Newspapers featured the visit prominently.
• II: The visit is characterized as historic.
• Headlines usually reflect significance.

Concept / Approach:Media coverage intensity is usually an effect of an event’s perceived importance. If the visit is historic (a significant milestone), that serves as the reason for front-page treatment.

Step-by-Step Solution:1) If II (historic) holds, it naturally causes I (headlines) due to higher news value.2) I → II makes little sense; being on the headline does not make an event historic, it only signals editorial judgment about importance.

Verification / Alternative check:Replace “historic” with any high-news-value attribute (pathbreaking treaty, first-ever engagement); such attributes cause headlines, not vice versa.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:They either invert the relationship or assume independence despite the intuitive cause–effect chain between significance and coverage.

Common Pitfalls:Confusing marker (headline) with essence (historic nature).

Final Answer:If statement II is the cause and statement I is its effect