send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Not every voice on the internet commands the same kind of audience. When anonymous private entities with high capital can pay for more space for their opinions, they are effectively buying a louder voice. If political discourse in the digital sphere is a matter of outshining one's opponent till the election is won, then the quality of politics suffers. The focus of social media is restricted to the promotion of content that gcncrates more user engagement, regardless of how inflammatory the content may be.
1 only
2 only
Both 1 and 2
Neither 1 nor 2
Based on the passage, here’s an analysis of the assumptions:
- 1. Internet is not inclusive enough:
- The passage highlights that entities with high capital can "buy a louder voice." This implies that not everyone gets equal representation, suggesting a lack of inclusivity.
- 2. Internet can adversely affect the quality of politics in a country:
- It mentions that politics can suffer if discourse is dominated by those who can afford more influence. Content that generates engagement, possibly controversial, can detract from healthy political discourse.
- Option 1 (1 only): This would be valid if the passage exclusively focused on inclusivity.
- Option 2 (2 only):
- ? This option correctly aligns with the idea that politics can suffer due to the imbalance of voices and focus on engagement.
- Option 3 (Both 1 and 2): The passage supports both the lack of inclusivity and adverse political effects, making it valid.
- Option 4 (Neither 1 nor 2): Incorrect, as both assumptions are supported by the passage.
Report error
Access to prime resources