Tips: Separate the views of critics, supporters and the third group from what the speaker personally decides.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Reporters should wait until those responses are proven.: Untested projects are the critics' worry. The speaker wants responses examined, not ignored until they are proven.
• Reporters should let affected people decide what success means.: Supporters want affected people included, so organisers do not define success alone. That does not hand the decision to residents.
• Reporters on a special team should cover those responses.: A special category is discussed by the third viewpoint. The speaker does not ask for a special team.

Correct Answer: Reporters cannot check every possible response before a deadline.

Why this is correct: Critics note that a reporter cannot examine every possible response before a deadline. So the work may not be done carefully enough.

Tips: Keep each reason linked to the person or group that gives it.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Organisations often describe their own projects with little evidence.: Organisations with impressive language and little evidence are the speaker's own example. The speaker adds this after the critics speak.
• Readers pay more attention to dramatic headlines than careful work.: Headlines and clicks come from the speaker's own advice about measuring the trial. The critics do not say this.
• Editors would judge the stories mainly by how long they took.: Completion time is one of several things editors could compare. Nobody says it would be the main test.

Correct Answer: Eight constructive pieces out of thirty-two stories in total.

Why this is correct: Eight constructive pieces plus twenty-four other stories makes thirty-two stories. That matches four stories a week for eight weeks.

Tips: Listen to every figure about the trial and work out how they fit together.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Eight constructive pieces out of twenty-four stories in total.: Twenty-four is the number of other stories, not the total. You need to add the eight constructive pieces.
• Four constructive pieces out of thirty-two stories in total.: Four is the number of stories each week. Over eight weeks, one a week gives eight constructive pieces.
• Twenty-four constructive pieces out of thirty-two stories in total.: This swaps the two groups. Only one story a week is constructive, so most stories follow the usual mix.

Correct Answer: Open to it, but strict about sources and honesty about doubt.

Why this is correct: The speaker supports a limited trial. But it continues only with rigorous sourcing, clear uncertainty and no slower correction of errors.

Tips: Check each option against the standards the speaker sets for continuing the trial.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Open to it, but worried it will make bad news sound cheerful.: The speaker says making news cheerful is not the proposal. So this is not the speaker's worry.
• Open to it, but only if every story ends with a credible answer.: The speaker says editors should not require a hopeful answer when no credible response exists.
• Doubtful about it, and expecting it to be stopped early.: The speaker still supports a limited trial. The speaker sets clear conditions but does not expect it to fail.

Correct Answer: To show when the critics' concerns matter most.

Why this is correct: Right after the critics' points, the speaker calls them serious concerns. They matter most when an organisation uses impressive language but gives little evidence.

Tips: When a speaker gives an example, ask which claim it is there to support.

Why the other options are wrong:

• To show why affected people should be included.: Including affected people is the supporters' idea. It comes later and is not linked to this example.
• To show what questions a constructive story asks.: The supporters list the questions a constructive story asks. The organisation example is not given for that.
• To show why stories need not end with hope.: Hopeful endings come near the speaker's own conclusion, as a separate point.

Correct Answer: It could imply other stories need not be constructive.

Why this is correct: The third viewpoint says a category might help staff practise. But it could also suggest that ordinary reporting need not be constructive.

Tips: Listen for who holds each view. Then check which worry belongs to this group.

Why the other options are wrong:

• It could make troubling news sound more cheerful than it is.: Making news cheerful is a wrong idea about the proposal, from the start of the talk. The third viewpoint does not raise it.
• It could give untested projects free publicity.: Free publicity for untested projects is the critics' worry.
• It could slow down how quickly errors get corrected.: Slower correction of errors is one of the speaker's own tests for the trial.