This is one proposal that will definitely anger some people: Everyone should have a pet. There should be a law that makes sure everyone will get a pet or give a legitimate reason why they cannot. There are almost infinite arguments to favor owning animals, so not all of them can be listed. The small number of comments against owning pets don't even need to be included.
Which of the following questions would help a reader better approach the point in the first paragraph?
A. Why does the author's claim anger people?
B. How is bias visible in the first paragraph?
C. Which pet is best?
D. Which people should not own pets?
B, I think.
2 answers
Either A or B, yes.
I can only choose one. Which do you think is better?