Read the following piece of news and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the option that best fits each of the numbered blanks from 1 to 6.

Vietnam Jewelry Queen 2026 pageant

The Vietnam Jewelry Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ________ is organized by the Vietnam Gemstone Jewelry Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of professionals, artisans and media representatives.

The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ________ and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ________ every two years since 2003 has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while contributing to the promotion of the country's goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.

The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners. The contest officially (4) ________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October 13th to 18th. (5) ________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living, studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ________ of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.

(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 7 to 14.

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024, according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.

Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries, often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.

In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.
The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network. When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow geography" of disposal.

These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.

(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue, unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting, significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users' access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ________, and to find inspiration from accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ________, these connections are a fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ________. Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34) ________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ________, and to find inspiration from accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ________, these connections are a fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ________. Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34) ________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ________, and to find inspiration from accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ________, these connections are a fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ________. Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34) ________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ________, and to find inspiration from accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ________, these connections are a fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ________. Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34) ________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ________, and to find inspiration from accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ________, these connections are a fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ________. Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34) ________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.

FUTURE-PROOF YOUR CAREER PATH IN THE AI ERA
When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern. However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity. To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ________ these fields are the least likely to be fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ________ through internships or exchange programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ________ ambitious peers to learn how to use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ________ its potential to assist your research and learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ________ throughout your professional life.