Text 1 is more believable than Text 2 because it provides specific details about the pothole situation, including how deep it was, the amount of time it went unaddressed, and the city's eventual decision to hire a local business to fix it. These factual elements lend credibility and a sense of accountability to the situation. In contrast, Text 2 employs a more abstract and philosophical approach, focusing on the choices and feelings of the residents rather than concrete actions taken regarding the pothole. This lack of detailed information and reliance on subjective experience makes Text 2 less credible.
Use the two texts to answer the question.
Which statement best explains why one text is more believable than the other?
Text 1:
The famous pothole on Main Street was several inches deep before the city managed to address the situation. The hole was first reported three years ago. Over time, it grew deeper and cost local residents more tires with each passing month. After much debate, the city finally hired a local private business to fill the hole and patch the pavement. Given the city’s lack of working street equipment, this was clearly the right call.
Text 2:
Everyone was aware of the pothole on Main Street, but it remained a steadfast resident of our town for three years, nonetheless. Its presence gave us so many choices. Should we drivers take a different route or run over the hole and hope for the best? Was it wiser to trust the city to handle it, or should some brave citizens have jumped in to save us all? Should that brave citizen have used gravel, cement, or something
1 answer
1 answer