Question
In 1988, a hunter discovered three gray whales hopelessly trapped in a hole in pack ice in Alaska's remote Beaufort Sea. The whales were unable to escape beneath the ice to reach open water because they needed to surface regularly to breathe. The media latched onto the story like leeches and soon both the United States and the Soviet Union had joined together to save the whales. Many passionate volunteers and organizations contributed to the effort, and an icebreaking ship finally cleaved a path through which the giant animals could swim. The fate of the whales is ultimately unknown, but it's assumed they swam free thanks to the massive, heroic, and expensive effort.
What makes the analogy used in the passage unsound?
Latching onto something like leeches has a negative tone, but what the media did had a positive impact.
Leeches are not known to share the same habitat as the whales that were saved, so it makes little sense.
Comparing the media to leeches unfairly characterizes all media similarly, regardless of national origin.
What makes the analogy used in the passage unsound?
Latching onto something like leeches has a negative tone, but what the media did had a positive impact.
Leeches are not known to share the same habitat as the whales that were saved, so it makes little sense.
Comparing the media to leeches unfairly characterizes all media similarly, regardless of national origin.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The most appropriate critique of the analogy used in the passage is:
**Latching onto something like leeches has a negative tone, but what the media did had a positive impact.**
The analogy suggests that the media's involvement was parasitic or exploitative, which contrasts with the positive outcome of their coverage in raising awareness and rallying support for the whales' rescue. Hence, this critique highlights the inconsistency between the negative connotation of the comparison and the beneficial role the media played.
**Latching onto something like leeches has a negative tone, but what the media did had a positive impact.**
The analogy suggests that the media's involvement was parasitic or exploitative, which contrasts with the positive outcome of their coverage in raising awareness and rallying support for the whales' rescue. Hence, this critique highlights the inconsistency between the negative connotation of the comparison and the beneficial role the media played.