Read the following context and answer the question. Context: I've learnt a great amount throughout this studio, first and foremost I was taught: how the art world functions, how specific galleries such as Gertrude St Contemporary run and how artists earn a living. The studio also provided me with basic filmmaking skills such as how to: create a shooting schedule, write a shooting script, set up three-point lighting, conduct an interview, utilise visual storytelling and edit a short film. Throughout the shooting process with my artist I also developed my abilities regarding how to use a: Sony Zoom H2N (and other such handy recorders), a lapel mic, my own Canon EOS 60D and Adobe Premiere Pro editing software. Overall I think the studio functioned quite successfully, it was great to be in a studio with nineteen people who all were interested in the same topics as you. I felt that overall, the studios had a very happy and supportive environment, and you walked away knowing a great deal about the art world and how to make short documentaries. The project itself taught me a great deal about how to work with talent, as well as my group members. Having to work independently forced me to be completely all over every aspect of the shoot, whether that be choosing which questions to ask, deciding what to focus on, where I wanted the shoot to happen, deciding what gear to use, getting to the shoot, carrying all the gear, what I wanted to shoot, managing the audio, managing the lighting, managing the camera set-ups, managing the talent, editing the film, and finding a great soundtrack for it. I'm a pretty self-conscious person and I often doubt the decisions I make or ask someone else for their opinion (should I shoot this angle, or what do you think of this question etc.). Working independently pushed me to go with my gut instincts, to make decisions and to not seek others approval. It forced me to develop my aesthetic as a filmmaker and to own the work that I ended up producing, so ultimately I was really glad with how everything panned out. Question: Who is a pretty self-conscience person? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- The filmmaker
- The narrator
- not enough information
- The artist

Answer: The narrator

Question: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: My love affair with technology began at an early age. On my seventh birthday, my parents bought me a second-hand ZX Spectrum and, in a foretaste of my life to come, I immediately set about learning how to use it to get attention. It's a sign of how rapidly technology develops that my crappy Spectrum, with its 48k of memory, already had 12k more storage power than the computer that had guided the Apollo 11 moon landing eighteen years earlier* With power like that, there seemed to be no limit to what I could do. While my other computer-owning peers would sit for hours while their tape drives squawked away loading 'Manic Miner' or 'Bubble Buster' I was more fascinated by learning to write my own programs. The first of these consisted of just two lines of code* that made the word 'shit' appear again and again on my screen, to the huge amusement of my friends and the irritation of my parents, who obviously had more educational motives for bringing a computer into the house. From that day on, the possibilities offered by technology to both subvert the norm and get attention had me hooked. Years later, at secondary school, I convinced my English teacher, Mr Coen, to teach me desktop publishing, ostensibly to work on the official school magazine, but in reality to produce an alternative underground version - complete with less than flattering articles about teachers and fellow pupils and distributed via the publicly accessible shared hard drive that was supposed to be used for collaborative coursework. That particular stunt got me banned from the school computer room for half a term. And then, in 1997, I discovered the Internet. Throughout history, every fame-hungry media dickhead has found his preferred medium for pursuing fame and wealth (in that order). For Tony Parsons - and Hitler, for that matter - it was books. William Randolph Hearst chose newspapers. Don Imus and Howard Stern preferred radio. For Nick Griffin it's inflammatory leaflets. For Tracy Emin it's art. Or at least an approximation of it. With the... Question: It is peobably true about the narrator: Answer:
OPTIONS:
- He continues enjoying the Internet
- He becomes Englsh teacher
- The recent past.
- not enough information
Answer: He continues enjoying the Internet

Question: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: President Donald Trump often likes to point out how different he is from his White House predecessors in terms of style and substance. But it is unlikely any past president would envy the legal challenges facing Trump, from the Russia investigation to Stormy Daniels to the scrutiny law enforcement is giving his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. On Tuesday it was a night of pomp and glamor at the White House as President Donald Trump and Mrs. Trump welcomed French President Macron and his wife for a state dinner. The two presidents got along famously during their White House meetings. The only damper on the day came when both men were in the Oval Office and a reporter asked Trump about the legal difficulties facing his longtime personal attorney, Michael Cohen. "Mr. President, what about Michael Cohen? Are you considering a pardon for Michael Cohen?" asked ABC correspondent Jonathan Karl. After a pause, the president responded. "Stupid question," he said dismissively. Cohen is under scrutiny for a payment to an adult film star. Stormy Daniels says it was hush money to keep her quiet about a brief affair she had with Trump in 2006, a claim the president has denied. Trump has frequently complained about the recent FBI raids on Cohen's home and office and the ongoing Russia probe led by special counsel Robert Mueller. Earlier this month Trump spoke up during a meeting with military officials at the White House. "Here we are talking about Syria, we are talking about a lot of serious things with the greatest fighting force ever, and I have this witch hunt constantly going on for over 12 months now." Several legal analysts have said the increased scrutiny of Trump's long relationship with Cohen could become a serious problem for the president. "There has been no suggestions that Cohen has nothing that he could say, which suggests that they know that Cohen actually does possess information that could be damaging to Trump or the Trump organization more generally as a legal matter," said George Washington University Law... Question: Why was Michael Cohen under scrutiny, according to the text? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- due to the ongoing Russia probe
- for paying an adult film star to keep quiet about an affair she had with the president
- due to his close relationship with the president
- not enough information
Answer:
for paying an adult film star to keep quiet about an affair she had with the president