Introduction / Context:
The question addresses press freedom versus government control in a democratic setup. A strong argument must align with democratic principles and practical outcomes for information integrity and public trust.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I claims diversity confuses citizens.
- II argues that government-controlled news loses credibility among the public.
- Democracies value pluralism and independent verification as checks on power.
Concept / Approach:
- Credibility in news depends on independence, transparency, and accountability. Monopolized, state-controlled narratives are prone to bias and erosion of trust.
- Citizens can process varied information; institutions (public broadcasters, press councils) and media literacy help reduce confusion without censorship.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Argument I: Asserting that variety “confuses” people is paternalistic and ignores the role of plural media in democracy. Weak.Argument II: Controlled news tends to be distrusted and is vulnerable to propaganda, undermining democratic accountability. Strong.
Verification / Alternative check:
Historical experience shows that press control typically reduces investigative scrutiny and public confidence, validating II.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I / Both / Either / Neither: These fail to recognize that I is weak while II is cogent and relevant.
Common Pitfalls:
Equating information management with truth; credibility stems from independence, not monopoly.
Final Answer:
Only argument II is strong
Discussion & Comments