input: OPTIONS:
- Elmo and Carsie
- Elmo and Macy
- Ernie and Carsie
- not enough information Now, answer this question: Macy Golong peeked into Mallie Mae's room and was not surprised to see her sleeping. Elmo's mother rarely stayed up past 10:00 PM, and it was nearly 11:00. She closed the door and started to go back to her room across the hall. She was halfway through a romance novel. But Hadley's delicious oatmeal raisin cookies were calling to her. She walked down the stairs to the kitchen and put a few cookies on a plate. Then she poured a glass of milk. She wondered what Elmo was doing. Was he in the Media Room with Carsie? Their Media Room? Before Elmo and Carsie got together, Elmo and Macy used to spend hours almost every night in that room. Some nights he had almost kissed her. She left her milk and cookies on the kitchen counter and went down another flight of stairs, which came out in the Recreation Room. Macy could hear the sound of the TV coming from Media Room. She tiptoed to the open doorway and peeked in. There she was--that conniving slut--sitting where Macy should have been. How could Elmo have replaced her like that? She thought he had been falling in love with her. How could she have been so wrong? But it could still happen--if that woman would just go away. Elmo said, "Yeah. So, beginning Monday there will be two doctors in the office. That should take a little pressure off. If I need to be out for a day or two, Dr. Edwards can fill in for me." "Yeah, or if you need to take off a week for a trip to Hawaii with your beautiful new wife." Carsie gave him a sexy smile. "That's right. Dr. Ernie will take care of everything while I'm gone." "Dr. Ernie?" "Yeah. I asked if he would mind being called 'Dr. Ernie'. His name is Ernest, but I thought 'Dr. Ernie' would fit in well with the Sesame Street theme of my office." "So the two of you are Drs. Elmo and Ernie?" "Yep." Question: Who is thinking of getting married? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: Elmo and Carsie

David Gauntlett makes a good point in his newest book (Making Media Studies: The Creativity Turn in Media and Communications Studies) and that is that traditional forms of media studies are no longer applicable. Gone are the days of massive institutions and production companies, gone are the traditional audiences and simplistic texts. In, is the new age media companies, the everyday media makers, the consistent consumers and the fantastical mess of The WWW. While universities are pumping out the same content areas since the 1980's (e.g. institutions, production, audiences and texts) that are only relevant to a handful of media forms (cinema, television, online broadcasting and publications), the rest of the world is moving on. David Gauntlett so rightly says that creativity in media, should also refer to thinking creatively about the subject. What are the new ways of running media and communication studies? How has the subject itself changed? What approaches and methods can help media and communications studies to become innovative and useful in spheres beyond itself? David Gauntlett encourages a kind of call to arms, an acquiescence of the incapacities of the old system and a redirected gaze to the future needs of media students and media studies programs. Inspired by Tim Ingold's book Making, David believes media studies should have making at it's front and centre. He also believes the ability to do things with media should be embraced over and above the ability to talk about what others do with media, or what media does to us. The notion is that media studies should be hands on, that it should be all about ideas and critical engagement and this should be expressed through actual making. To borrow three key distinctions from the anthropologist Tim Ingold: 1. It's about learning WITH media rather than ABOUT media. 2. There is an intent to move FORWARD rather than looking BACKWARDS at how things are. 3. It's aims are TRANSFORMATIONAL rather than DOCUMENTARY. Question: David believes that === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- Tim Ingold is a smart man
- Tim Ingold is not savvy
- not enough information
- Tim Ingold is stupid

Answer: Tim Ingold is a smart man

My partner's parents decided to help with all the planning and set up for his sister's wedding. I am sure part of the reason was because they had offered to foot part of the expenses. There came a point in the planning, when his mom seemed to sort of run-amok with her ideas. His sister ended up accepting some plans for her wedding that I don't think she was really that fond of, but she went along with them anyways. One of the things that stands out the most to me, was this idea that they would make a large wooden box with a hole in it, and people would smash their dinner plates into the box. Then the fragments of the broken plates would be put into metal keepsake tins for the guests to take home. (The tins were cute, the trash inside seemed very weird to me.) So imagine it's the evening of your wedding reception, and people are in a corner of the room smashing their plates into a box. And then part of your wedding party is supposed to go in the back and fix up the tins of broken ceramic ware. It was like an exercise in how to needlessly generate extra stress hormones in a large room full of people. My partner's sister looked like she cringed every time someone threw a plate in the box. It is weird (and wasteful) to propose to break brand new plates for a tradition that isn't even part of your ancestry. It's weird to railroad the people getting married into accepting to do things they don't really want. Soon after that, my partner's mother offered that she would be happy to help us plan and throw our wedding too, just like they did for his sister. I think the experience made us both content to elope. Question: What did people break at the wedding? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- silverware
- not enough information
- Plates
- glasses

Answer:
Plates