Question

Which sentence from this newspaper editorial illustrates the author’s bias? Coal companies should follow regulations when they work mining excavations like mountaintop removal or pit mining. These rules exist to protect the environment, the natural beauty, and the wildlife of an area. They also protect the health and homes of the people who live near a mine. Coal companies prefer excavation mining because it lets the companies employ fewer workers while maximizing output. The miners claim that a company can mine the entire coal lode more effectively, whereas shaft mining is less efficient and requires more workers. Coal companies claim the large scale of these projects is necessary to meet the growing demands of the United States and the rest of the world. The mining sites are repaired by coal companies when they finish a project. They call this process "reclamation." The companies fill in the large holes and replace the topsoil. They plant trees and grasses. Many times, coal companies later sell this land to developers who build towns and urban centers. Regulations include fees and fines for companies who do not follow environmental guidelines. The process of following regulations may cost the company money in terms of productivity, but the cost is always worth it. Companies can easily absorb these added costs because excavation mining creates huge profits.

Answer 1

The biased sentence is "The process of following regulations may cost the company money in terms of productivity, but the cost is always worth it," as it expresses a judgement that seems to inherently value regulations without considering opposing perspectives.

Step-by-step explanation:

The sentence that illustrates the author's bias in the newspaper editorial is "The process of following regulations may cost the company money in terms of productivity, but the cost is always worth it." This statement shows bias because it asserts the value of following regulations without considering the coal companies' perspective or the actual cost-benefit analysis. It implies a judgement that the author believes the environmental protections and safety measures are intrinsically worthy, regardless of the economic impact on the companies.

The rest of the editorial appears to provide more neutral information about the coal companies' and miners' viewpoints and the environmental and health impacts of mining practices.