At a community meeting, a representative for a gas-drilling company was accused of poisoning the local water supply.
He insisted that the company was not harming the
environment in any way. A local resident offered him a
glass of the local tap water to drink. "Oh no," the
representative said. "I only drink bottled water."
Based on this work of satire, what is most likely the author's opinion?
A. That companies often lie about the damage they cause
B. That companies usually have people's best interests in mind
C. That companies do less harm to the environment than citizens do
D. That companies pay their employees to drink bottled water
7

A

Explanation:

That companies lie about the damage they cause

hope this helps <3

Explanation:

Let's analyze the information and answer choices provided.

We see the the company representative denies the accusations of harm to the environment or water supply. Yet, when he is offered the water, he says he will only drink bottled water.

This can lead us to believe the company is lying. Why would the representative state the water is fine, then refuse to drink it?

If the water really was clean and not poisoned, then he should have been willing to drink it, especially in front of the community members.

So, the company doesn't have the people's best interests in mind (choice B), the citizens aren't the ones causing damage, it's actually the company (choice C), and there is no evidence that employees are paid to drink bottled water (choice D). Therefore, choice A must be correct.

the answer is both an appeal to ethos and logos (if that's what your question options were)

c. to depict the cunningness of the federal soldiers