Mainstream news sources should be evaluated 1 as closely as independent news sources. 2 less thoroughly than independent news sources. 4 more carefully than independent news sources. 5 none of the above.

In essence, mainstream news sources should be evaluated just as much as independent news sources because they are just as liable to mislead and misinform as independent news sources, but they are always take at face value since people see them as more serious and as believable sources of information.

Explanation:

Mainstream news sources, such as the New York Times, or The Wall Street Journal, have built a reputation as sources of believable and reliable information through the establishment of processes of quality control. On the other hand, we have what is known as alternative media, or independent media, which is usually a small group of people, who can, or may  not always be, journalists, who deliver information with a certain purpose, and are not always reliable or objective, and their quality processes are not the best. A lot of misinformation can come from alternative sources. However, what has recently been seen is that this is not always the case, that there have been instances in which mainstream news feeds have misinformed the public, while alternative sources have become more reliable and objective, but people never question mainstream sources because it has never been seen as a need. This is why it is necessary to perform more evaluations on mainstream media, just as it is done on alternative media.

im pretty sure a would be the answer

the correct answer is:   [d]:   " diagram "   .

hope this !

    best wishes to you!