This question is incomplete, here´s the complete question.
Preface:
This distinction prevailed until August 2006, when the International Astronomical Union (IAU), prompted by pressure from the professional community of planetary scientists as well as from the general public, brought Pluto's planethood to a vote at a triennial general assembly in Prague, Czech Republic. The result? Pluto was formally downgraded from "planet" to "dwarf planet," thereby helping to diffuse the negative attention that we had been receiving for six years running.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, The Pluto Files Interview:
Over the years, people started realizing that maybe that kind of makes sense, and six years later, the International Astronomical Union, they took a vote, and basically they said Pluto should be reclassified. So we were, in the end, kind of vindicated.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, interview by Melissa Block, "Astrophysicist Chronicles Battle over Pluto"
How are the excerpts from the preface of The Pluto Files and the interview, "Astrophysicist Chronicles Battle over Pluto," different?
A. The preface shows the author's emotion while the interview displays the author's attitude in a less emotional way.
B. The preface is not clearly structured while the interview is well-organized and easy for the audience to follow.
C. The preface expresses a complete idea while the interview just gives an overall impression of the topic.
D. The preface contains run-on sentences and "filler" words while the interview uses more complex sentences.
Answer: C. The preface expresses a complete idea while the interview just gives an overall impression of the topic.
Step-by-step explanation:
While the preface provides a solid explanation about the process that took the scientific community to finally categorize Pluto as a dwarf planet, the interview goes over the same subject without providing factual data to present the argument, almost as if it the main point was about Neil deGrasse Tyson´s vindication instead of Pluto´s history.