대광고 고2 · 가치와 지문 결론 분리 5문항

A school committee released preliminary survey results before checking whether each class had been represented. Popular online comments quickly pushed the committee toward one policy. Some members said that following the most visible comments would be democratic. The final report disagreed with that reasoning. It did not claim that public participation was harmful or that every comment should be ignored. It argued that a fair decision required verified responses and a review process independent of early online pressure. After the data were checked, the committee reopened discussion and explained how quieter groups had been included. The important contrast was not between public opinion and expert rule. It was between unverified pressure that narrowed judgment and a review process that could consider participation without being controlled by the first loud reaction.

A school committee released preliminary survey results before checking whether each class had been represented. Popular online comments quickly pushed the committee toward one policy. Some members said that following the most visible comments would be democratic. The final report disagreed with that reasoning. It did not claim that public participation was harmful or that every comment should be ignored. It argued that a fair decision required verified responses and a review process independent of early online pressure. After the data were checked, the committee reopened discussion and explained how quieter groups had been included. The important contrast was not between public opinion and expert rule. It was between unverified pressure that narrowed judgment and a review process that could consider participation without being controlled by the first loud reaction.

A school committee released preliminary survey results before checking whether each class had been represented. Popular online comments quickly pushed the committee toward one policy. Some members said that following the most visible comments would be democratic. The final report disagreed with that reasoning. It did not claim that public participation was harmful or that every comment should be ignored. It argued that a fair decision required verified responses and a review process independent of early online pressure. After the data were checked, the committee reopened discussion and explained how quieter groups had been included. The important contrast was not between public opinion and expert rule. It was between unverified pressure that narrowed judgment and a review process that could consider participation without being controlled by the first loud reaction.

A school committee released preliminary survey results before checking whether each class had been represented. Popular online comments quickly pushed the committee toward one policy. Some members said that following the most visible comments would be democratic. The final report disagreed with that reasoning. It did not claim that public participation was harmful or that every comment should be ignored. It argued that a fair decision required verified responses and a review process independent of early online pressure. After the data were checked, the committee reopened discussion and explained how quieter groups had been included. The important contrast was not between public opinion and expert rule. It was between unverified pressure that narrowed judgment and a review process that could consider participation without being controlled by the first loud reaction.

A school committee released preliminary survey results before checking whether each class had been represented. Popular online comments quickly pushed the committee toward one policy. Some members said that following the most visible comments would be democratic. The final report disagreed with that reasoning. It did not claim that public participation was harmful or that every comment should be ignored. It argued that a fair decision required verified responses and a review process independent of early online pressure. After the data were checked, the committee reopened discussion and explained how quieter groups had been included. The important contrast was not between public opinion and expert rule. It was between unverified pressure that narrowed judgment and a review process that could consider participation without being controlled by the first loud reaction.