Your task is to extract the thesis of an opinionated news article by selecting some of its text segments. The thesis is a summarization of what the author wants to persuade the reader of. Your answer should consist of segments of the given text. Note that you are not allowed to combine different sentences.
One example is below.
Q: Our 'impartial' broadcasters have become mouthpieces of the elite. When people say they have no politics, it means that their politics aligns with the status quo . None of us are unbiased , none removed from the question of power . We are social creatures who absorb the outlook and opinions of those with whom we associate, and unconciously echo them . Objectivity is impossible . The illusion of neutrality is one of the reasons for the rotten state of journalism, as those who might have been expected to hold power to account drift thoughtlessly into its arms . But until I came across the scandal currently erupting in Canada, I hadn't understood just how quickly standards are falling . In 2013 reporters at CBC, Canada's equivalent of the BBC, broke a major story . They discovered that RBC - Royal Bank of Canada - had done something cruel and unusual even by banking standards . It was obliging junior staff to train a group of temporary foreign workers , who would then be given the staff's jobs . Just after the first report was aired, according to the website Canadaland, something odd happened : journalists preparing to expand on the investigation were summoned to a conference call with Amanda Lang, CBC's senior business correspondent and a star presenter . The reporters she spoke to say she repeatedly attempted to scuttle the story, dismissing it as trivial and dull . They were astonished . But not half as astonished as when they discovered the following, unpublished facts . First ,  that Lang had spoken at a series of events run or sponsored by RBC  - for which she appears, on one occasion, to have been paid around 15,000 Canadian dollars . Second , that she was booked to speak at an event sponsored by the outsourcing company the bank had hired to implement the cruel practice exposed by her colleagues . Third , that her partner is a board member at RBC . Lang then interviewed the bank's chief executive on her own show . When he dismissed the story as unfair and misleading , she did not challenge him . That evening she uncritically repeated his talking points on CBC's main current affairs programme . Her interests, again, were not revealed . Then she wrote a comment article for the Globe and Mail newspaper suggesting that her colleagues' story arose from an outdated suspicion of business, was dangerous to Canada's interests, and was nothing but "a sideshow" . Here's what she said about the bank's employment practices:"It's called capitalism, and it isn't a dirty word." Canadaland, which exposed Lang's conflicts last week, found that other journalists at the broadcaster were furious, but too frightened to speak on the record . But after CBC tried to dismiss the scandal as "half-truths based on anonymous sources" , Kathy Tomlinson, the reporter who had broken the story about the bank, bravely spoke publicly to the website . The following morning, staff in her office arrived to find this message spelt out in magnets on their fridge:"Jesse Brown snitches get stitches" . Jesse Brown is Canadaland's founder . CBC refused to answer my questions , and I have not had a response from Lang . It amazes me that she remains employed by CBC , which has so far done nothing but bluster and berate its critics . This is grotesque . But it's symptomatic of a much wider problem in journalism : those who are supposed to scrutinise the financial and political elite are embedded within it . Many belong to a service-sector aristocracy, wedded metaphorically (sometimes literally) to finance . Often unwittingly, they amplify the voices of the elite, while muffling those raised against it . A study by academics at the Cardiff School of Journalism examined the BBC Today programme's reporting of the bank bailouts in 2008 . It discovered that the contributors it chose were "almost completely dominated by stockbrokers, investment bankers, hedge fund managers and other City voices . Civil society voices or commentators who questioned the benefits of having such a large finance sector were almost completely absent from coverage." The financiers who had caused the crisis were asked to interpret it . The same goes for discussions about the deficit and the perceived need for austerity . The debate has been dominated by political and economic elites , while alternative voices - arguing that the crisis has been exaggerated, or that instead of cuts, the government should respond with Keynesian spending programmes or taxes on financial transactions, wealth or land- have scarcely been heard . Those priorities have changed your life : the BBC helped to shape the political consensus under which so many are now suffering . The BBC's business reporting breaks its editorial guidelines every day by failing to provide alternative viewpoints . Every weekday morning, the Today programme grovels to business leaders for 10 minutes . It might occasionally challenge them on the value or viability of their companies, but hardly ever on their ethics . Corporate critics are shut out of its business coverage - and almost all the rest . On BBC News at Six, the Cardiff researchers found, business representatives outnumbered trade union representatives by 19 to one . "The BBC tends to reproduce a Conservative, Eurosceptic, pro-business version of the world," the study said . This, remember, is where people turn when they don't trust the corporate press . While the way in which the media handle the stories that are covered is bad enough , the absence of coverage is even worse . If an issue does not divide the main political parties , it vanishes from view , though the parties now disagree on hardly anything . Another study reveals a near total collapse of environmental coverage on ITV and BBC news: it declined from 2.5% (ITV) and 1.6% (BBC) of total airtime in 2007 to, respectively, 0.2% and 0.3% in 2014 . There were as many news stories on these outlets about Madeleine McCann in 2014 - seven years after her disappearance - as there were about all environmental issues put together . Those entrusted to challenge power are the loyalists of power . They rage against social media and people such as Russell Brand, without seeing that the popularity of alternatives is a response to their own failures: their failure to expose the claims of the haut monde, their failure to enlist a diversity of opinion, their failure to permit the audience to see that another world is possible . If even the public sector broadcasters parrot the talking points of the elite , what hope is there for informed democratic choice? o Twitter: @georgemonbiot . A fully referenced version of this article can be found at Monbiot.com .
A: The illusion of neutrality is one of the reasons for the rotten state of journalism, as those who might have been expected to hold power to account drift thoughtlessly into its arms We are social creatures who absorb the outlook and opinions of those with whom we associate, and unconciously echo them
Rationale: The text span selected for thesis is meaningful and correct. Pay attention that there can be more than one correct thesis for each article. Some meaningful subsets of this thesis also can be accepted as a thesis, like : "none of us are unbiased"
Q: Why CIA interrogations report matters: Torture doesn't work and Americans need to know. As a former professional interviewer with the FBI, I know what works and doesn't . Torture is not an effective way to get information , and the American people need to know that . That's why the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA interrogation and detention after 9/11 is important . The executive summary of the report, written after reviewing hundreds of thousands of the CIA's internal documents, shows that torture was more brutal and much less fruitful than the CIA claimed . In fact ,  the committee concluded that all the claims about the value of intelligence gained from "enhanced" interrogation--including the claim that it helped the U.S  find Usama bin Laden-- are overstated or just plain false . Proponents of torture are contesting these well-documented findings . So let's look at the facts . On 9/11, the CIA had few, if any, experienced counterterrorism interrogators . Their traditional purview had been intelligence collection during the Cold War . Inexperienced in this area and overwhelmed they resorted to techniques that merely sounded good but in fact worked against them . When concocting the legal opinions to authorize torture, the lawyers inside our government didn't consult trained interviewers or interrogation experts--the people who actually knew how to get information . They consulted psychologists who helped train U.S  military pilots to resist torture methods should they be captured (torture methods, it should be noted, designed to elicit false confessions) . If they had consulted trained interviewers , they would have found out what I and my colleagues had known for decades: Torture isn't just unnecessary; it's an unreliable way to get information . Instead , as the Senate report shows, the CIA brought in untrained interrogators and contractors and asked them to get answers out of Al Qaeda detainees using methods designed to inflict pain, both physical and mental, and even simulate death . The CIA also employed horrific methods, like forced rectal feedings, that were never approved . I recall when I learned that cruel techniques were being used . I spoke with several long-term CIA officers and CIA polygraph experts with whom I had worked over many years , and we were all appalled , not just by its immorality , but because we knew it would be counterproductive . Apologists say that these methods were used to put the detainees into a state of "learned helplessness," in which the detainee would depend totally on his captor and give up all information . Those of us who have actually conducted interviews know that this isn't the way things work . To get good, accurate information, you want the subject to be as cognizant as possible . You want him to be able to remember all the details and to be able to tell you them . A person will say anything to try to stop the pain , and torture impairs the suspect's ability to remember the details that may be essential to your investigation . Professionals don't need to use torture and never have . On top of that, torture is illegal, both here in the U.S  and internationally . The United States has even prosecuted people for the methods that the CIA used after 9/11 . We are a nation of laws , and the conduct detailed in the Senate report is against the law . For these reasons, in October, I joined 22 other security, interrogation and interviewing experts to issue a statement of principles in opposition to using torture . Not only is torture less reliable, illegal and immoral, we write , but it also makes our nation less safe . When we are not using effective and legal interviewing tactics, we miss information that may be vital to our nation's safety . In using torture, we also encourage other nations and actors (including terrorist groups) to emulate our illegal actions, effectively lowering the bar for the rest of the world, and allow them to use U.S  torture as a recruiting tool . President Obama, on his second day in office, signed an executive order banning the CIA torture methods the Senate report describes . But this executive order could be overturned by a future president . Now that the Senate report's executive summary has been released and the public knows the just how ineffective and brutal U.S  torture was, we need to make sure that this prohibition is permanent . Working with Congress to pass legislation that makes sure a ban on torture extends to the CIA is one way that President Obama can make sure that the United States never again embraces the misguided, ineffective, and dangerous tactics of torture .
A:
Torture is not an effective way to get information