Question

maddie is writing a rebuttal to the counterclaim that protecting people by refusing certain groups membership on social media sites violates americans first amendment right to free speech. read her rebuttal.(1) social media is widely used by people of all ages, including children and adolescents. (2) children and adolescents are still shaping their understanding of the world, making them vulnerable. (3) social media provides a platform on which extremist groups can exploit that vulnerability. (4) it is unconscionable to expose young people to potential harm for purely philosophical reasons.which sentence should maddie revise to strengthen her rebuttal?sentence 1 because it is not supported by evidencesentence 2 because it is unfairsentence 3 because it does not relate to the topicsentence 4 because it is not objective

Explanation:

To strengthen the rebuttal against the free speech counterclaim, we analyze each sentence:

1. Sentence 1 states social media's broad usage, which sets context but doesn't directly address the free speech vs. protection argument; it doesn't need evidence for this contextual setup.
2. Sentence 2 focuses on youth vulnerability, which is relevant to the protection argument and is a factual, fair claim.
3. Sentence 3 connects extremist groups to exploiting youth vulnerability, which directly supports the need to restrict certain groups to protect vulnerable people, so it is on-topic.
4. Sentence 4 uses subjective language ("unconscionable") instead of objective reasoning or evidence to address the free speech counterclaim. A more objective framing would better strengthen the rebuttal by focusing on balancing rights and safety with logical, evidence-based points.

Answer:

sentence 4 because it is not objective