According to your textbook, the fallacy of appeal to novelty assumes that unfamiliar evidence will be most persuasive to listeners. that something new is automatically better than something old. that unique examples are superior to familiar ones. All of these answers are correct. Both that unfamiliar evidence will be most persuasive to listeners and that something new is automatically better than something old.

B). that something new is automatically better than something old.

Explanation:

'Appeal to novelty' is characterized as the flaw in reasoning where anything modern or new is prematurely considered superior or appropriate without any significant proof or evidence. Such fallacy automatically assumes that something old to be inferior and invalid over the new. Thus, it works upon the supposition that 'new is better' which causes an inherent flaw in the reasoning of the argument and affects its validity and credibility. Thus, option B is the correct answer.

dude you should crop your image so only the question shows. but   can you explain it better