Google has responded to a barrage of criticism that it must do more to tackle online hate by launching a series of workshops for teenagers on how to tackle hate speech and fake news. 

The workshops, called Internet Citizens, will be launched by YouTube, the Google-owned video streaming service, for people aged 13 to 18 in cities across the UK as part of its Creators for Change program. (11) . 

The government pulled advertising from Google and YouTube last month after adverts funded by the taxpayer were placed alongside extremist content on the video site. An influential group of MPs from the home affairs select committee wrote to the company, accusing it of “profiting from hatred” just days after accusing Google, Twitter and Facebook of “commercial prostitution” because of a failure to tackle hate speech on their platforms. The Labor MP Yvette Cooper, chair of the committee, said: “ (12) , media reports had revealed that was not the case.” 

YouTube said the Internet Citizens program would be used to teach skills on how to participate safely and responsibly online, and would include input from the youth mentor Efe Ezekiel. The site’s head of public policy, Naomi Gummer, said: “ (13) . For young people in particular, this sense of vulnerability can be heightened if it’s difficult to judge whether a piece of content is real, especially when something is shared on social media by a trusted friend. That’s why we’re launching Internet Citizens.” 

The curriculum for the program has been designed by experts from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, the charity UK Youth and the youth marketing firm Livity, and is part of wider plans to tackle abuse online.

 “This is just one part of our commitment to a better web,” Gummer said. “Alongside this, we are exploring more innovative ways to use technology; to partner with experts to help us tackle hate speech online. (14) . We’ll share more updates on these areas in the coming weeks.”

 UK Youth’s chief executive, Anna Smee, said: “Young people in the UK spend more time online than ever before. (15) . However, we must also support them to manage the negative effects. Through Internet Citizens, UK Youth is empowering young people to express themselves, have a voice, listen to others and ultimately gain a sense of belonging by discovering the skills needed to act safely and responsibly online, and make the internet a positive place.” 

(A) Despite reassurances during a committee hearing that the companies did not allow hate speech or terrorist content to be monetized 

(B) Also, we are taking a hard look at our policies around offensive content 

(C) They are intended to raise awareness around issues such as tolerance, empathy and abuse online

 
(D) In this complex world, there is an urgent need to help young people embrace the positive aspects of connectivity 

(E) Nearly all of us would have come across comments or content online that shocked or even offended us, sometimes leaving us feeling isolated or powerless to change the conversation 〈Source: www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/21/google-workshops-help-uk-teenagers-tackle-hate-speech-online〉

(A) ethical
(B) counterproductive
(C) negatively
(D) culinary
(E) equivalently (AB) undermine (AC) straightforward (AD) tactics (AE) coalitions (BC) intrigue (BD) avenues (BE) line the pockets (CD) makes sense (CE) as a result (DE) nonetheless

 Well-connected lobbyists work in Washington for years, know the issues, are highly skilled advocates, and have cultivated close connections with members of Congress, regulators, specialists, and others. They understand strategy and have excellent communication skills; many are well suited to be able to choose which clients they would like to represent. Lobbyists patiently cultivate networks of powerful people, over many years, trying to build trust and maintain confidence and friendships. When a client hires them to push a specific issue or agenda, they usually form 26 to exert political pressure. Lobbying, 27 , depends on trying to be flexible to new opportunities, but at the same time, to act as an agent for a client. Access is important and often means a one-on-one meeting with a legislator. Getting access can sometimes be difficult, but to 28 , there are various ways to turn to: email, personal letters, phone calls, face-to-face meetings, meals, get-togethers, and even chasing after congresspersons in the Capitol building. Lobbyists, according to several sources, strive for communications which are clear, 29 , and direct. In a one-on-one meeting with a lobbyist, it helps to understand precisely what goal is wanted. A lobbyist wants action on a bill; a legislator wants to be re-elected. The idea is to persuade a legislator that what the lobbyist wants is good public policy. Lobbyists often urge lawmakers to try to persuade other lawmakers to approve a bill. Since it often takes a long time to build the network of relationships within the lobbying industry, 30 interpersonal dealings are important. A maxim in the industry is for lobbyists to be truthful with people they are trying to persuade. An untruth, a lie is too risky to the successful development of a long-term relationship and the potential gain is not worth the risk. One report suggested that below-the-belt 31 generally do not work. One account suggested that groping for "personal dirt" on opponents was 32 since it would 33 respect for the lobbyist and their clients. And, by reverse logic, if an untruth is told by an opponent or opposing lobby, then it 34 to publicize it. But the general code among lobbyists is that unsubstantiated claims are bad business. Even worse is planting an informant in an opponent's camp, since if this subterfuge is ever discovered, it will boomerang 35 in a hundred ways, and credibility will drop to zero. 

 In October 1887, the steamer Vernon set sail from Michigan toward Chicago with about 50 people on board. Likely overloaded with cargo, she never made it.   24   In decades of Great Lakes shipping, more than 2,000 commercial vessels sank while traversing Lake Michigan’s waters.

Last summer, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) announced it had designated 962 square miles of the lake as a national marine sanctuary. The Wisconsin Shipwreck Coast National Marine Sanctuary contains the remains of 36 known shipwrecks, including the Vernon, and up to 59 potential shipwrecks that have yet to be discovered.   25   Researchers, shipwreck enthusiasts and coastal community leaders hope that the new sanctuary will spark renewed public interest not just in the wrecks themselves but in the waterways that made them. “For almost all of human history, the world has been connected by water, really, and separated by land,” said Russ Green, NOAA’s regional coordinator. “This is what makes the Great Lakes so special.” The Vernon sank in deep water, and it was not until the summer of 1960 that John Steele and Kent Bellrichard discovered the wreck. Steele and Bellrichard hunted shipwrecks, using surplus military sonar technology, said Brendon Baillod, a maritime historian. They found the Vernon under about 200 feet of water, well preserved by the lake’s cool, fresh water.   26   Ships on the Great Lakes sailed loaded with iron, grain, lumber and coal, often into the late fall and winter, without modern navigation technology or weather forecasting. Some, like the Vernon, carried passengers. “Sailing was even riskier,” said Baillod. He estimates around 50,000 sailors died in the Great Lakes between 1850 and 1900.   27   But sailors were admired for their bravado, and they got paid in cash.

       The Montparnasse Tower, a 59-story glass skyscraper in Paris, has faced widespread criticism since its construction in 1973. Many Parisians consider it an eyesore in the city's __(16)__ architecturally harmonious skyline. This negative sentiment is not surprising, as Parisians have historically resisted significant alterations to the city's appearance, a sentiment shared by the Eiffel Tower and the glass pyramids at the Louvre Museum, which were initially met with similar criticism but eventually accepted.

       Although approaching its 50th anniversary, the tower continues to be despised by a significant portion of the population. To understand this animosity, we must explore in depth the history of Paris's urban development. The city's layout and architectural style trace back to the mid-19th century __(17)__ Baron Haussmann was commissioned to transform the overcrowded and unsanitary city into a modern metropolis. Haussmann demolished old structures, introduced wide avenues, and implemented uniform Haussmannian apartment buildings, defining the aesthetic of Paris.

       Almost a century later, Paris faced another __(18)__ after World War II. The post-war era presented an opportunity for modernization, including the construction of highways and skyscrapers, similar to developments in the United States and the United Kingdom. Montparnasse, located in southern Paris, was selected for a large-scale urban renewal project. While some architects and developers were enthusiastic about the modernization plans, public opinion turned against the tower due to its height and the stark contrast it created with the surrounding low-rise buildings.

       Despite the backlash, the project proceeded, and the tower was inaugurated in 1973. Over the years, it has housed notable figures, including several French presidents. However, it has remained widely unpopular, __(19)__ constructing buildings taller than 37 meters in Paris in 1977. Skyscrapers were confined to the La Defense business district and suburban areas until height restrictions were relaxed in 2010. 

       The negative perception of the Montparnasse Tower has endured, with some even __(20)__ its demolition. The ongoing debate surrounding tall buildings in Paris prompted the city government to reintroduce height restrictions as part of its efforts to combat climate change. Nevertheless, plans for the Triangle Tower, a new skyscraper in Paris, raise questions about whether it will encounter similar opposition. In summary, the Montparnasse Tower's unpopularity in Paris stems from its departure from the city's architectural uniformity, historical resistance to major changes, and the jarring contrast it creates with the surrounding low-rise buildings. The tower remains a subject of contention, reflecting the ongoing debate about the role of tall buildings in shaping the city's identity.