Question 17: a. That is why many people argue for strict fines, rapid takedowns, and meaningful legal punishment for acts such as doxxing, h...

Question 17:

a. That is why many people argue for strict fines, rapid takedowns, and meaningful legal punishment for acts such as doxxing, hate speech, targeted harassment, and direct online threats.

b. At the same time, if the rules are written too vaguely or enforced too broadly, even sharp criticism may be treated as “hate,” and the law itself can become a weapon used to silence weaker or unpopular voices.

c. With clear standards like these in place, victims can receive real protection, public debate can remain possible, and the internet may begin to feel less like a shouting room and more like a shared civic space.

d. When a single cruel post can follow a person into school, work, friendships, and family life, the advice to “just ignore it” no longer sounds practical or fair.

e. A safer approach is to define harmful acts precisely, require evidence before action is taken, allow appeals for disputed cases, and force platforms to explain their decisions in language ordinary users can understand.

A. d – b – a – c – e        B. d – a – b – c – e        C. d – a – c – b – e        D. d – a – b – e – c