1. WAR COSTS THREATEN TRUMP’S ECONOMIC MESSAGE

President Trump entered 2026 promising strong growth, easing prices, and better financial conditions for American families. But the war with Iran has put that message under pressure by driving up oil and gas prices, shaking financial markets, and raising new fears about inflation and even recession. Economists quoted in the article say the higher cost of energy could hurt consumers, weaken hiring, and reduce overall economic growth, especially if prices stay high for months. At the same time, the administration argues that the economic pain is a temporary cost tied to a larger national security goal. Write a two-paragraph analysis in which you examine the tension between political messaging and economic reality in this article. In the first paragraph, explain how Trump and his aides described the economy and how recent data challenged that narrative. In the second paragraph, analyze whether the administration’s argument that economic pain is a necessary short-term sacrifice is likely to persuade voters, using at least two specific details from the story.

2. OIL FIRES IN IRAN CREATE A PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS

After strikes hit Iranian fuel depots, thick black smoke spread over Tehran and nearby areas, bringing reports of black rain, oily residue, coughing, dizziness, burning eyes, and headaches. Health experts said the pollution included PM2.5 particles, black carbon, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, heavy metals, and other toxic chemicals linked to serious short-term and long-term health risks. They warned that exposure could damage the lungs, heart, brain, and even pregnancies, and that the danger may extend beyond Iran as pollutants move across borders. These health threats are made worse by war itself, since people may not be able to leave, seal their homes, or get proper medical care. Write a public health advisory in which you explain why the burning fuel depots are dangerous even for people who are not standing near the fires. Your response should identify the main pollutants described in the article, explain both short-term and long-term health risks, and discuss why conflict conditions make these dangers harder to manage. End by evaluating which groups are most vulnerable and why.

3. JEFF BEZOS AND THE WASHINGTON POST

Jeff Bezos has pushed The Washington Post into a major restructuring after years of financial losses, demanding that the paper become more efficient, more data-driven, and eventually self-sustaining. His strategy has included large layoffs, leadership changes, a reduced newsroom budget, and a new focus on productivity metrics and audience data. At the same time, critics inside and outside the paper worry that these changes could weaken journalism, damage morale, shrink important coverage areas, and narrow the range of views in the opinion section. The article portrays Bezos as both an owner trying to rescue a struggling institution and a powerful figure whose business-style approach has deeply unsettled one of the country’s most important news organizations. It raises larger questions about whether a newspaper can become financially stronger without losing the values that made it significant in the first place. Write a short media-analysis essay evaluating whether Bezos’s approach sounds more like responsible reform or harmful corporate overreach. Use at least three details from the article, such as the layoffs, the emphasis on data and productivity, the changes to the opinion section, or the reaction from staff and subscribers. Your response should consider both business realities and the democratic role of a major newspaper.

4. INDONESIA MOVES TO BAN SOCIAL MEDIA FOR CHILDREN UNDER 16

Indonesia has announced that children under 16 will be barred from social media on a list of what the government calls high-risk platforms, including YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, X, Roblox, and others. Officials say the goal is to protect children from pornography, cyberbullying, scams, addiction, and other online dangers, and they argue that parents should not have to fight powerful algorithms on their own. But the rollout raises major questions because the government has offered few details about how the ban will actually be enforced, and some companies argue that bans could push children toward less safe, less regulated online spaces. Indonesia joins a growing number of countries trying to restrict young people’s access to social media, showing how global concern about digital harm is shaping new policy. This change highlights the conflict between child safety, parental choice, platform responsibility, and the practical limits of government control online. Imagine you are testifying before a youth and technology committee that is considering a similar law. Write a balanced statement in which you explain the strongest argument for Indonesia’s policy and the strongest argument against it. Then take a clear position on whether age-based social media bans are a smart solution or an overly blunt one, and support your judgment with evidence from the article.

5. JUDGE ORDERS DOGE DEPOSITION VIDEOS REMOVED

A federal judge ordered the removal of video depositions from two former employees of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency after clips from the testimony spread online and led to ridicule, harassment, and reported death threats. The depositions had been posted by scholarly groups suing over DOGE-backed grant cuts at the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the videos drew intense attention because the former employees admitted using ChatGPT to help identify grants tied to banned D.E.I. programs despite having no expertise in the humanities. The government argued that public circulation of the videos endangered witnesses and had no legitimate legal purpose, while the plaintiffs argued that the videos were important evidence about government decision-making and should remain public under the First Amendment. The dispute therefore became about more than internet mockery: it turned into a clash between transparency, public accountability, witness safety, and free speech. Write a constitutional argument in which you analyze the conflict between transparency and protection in this case. Explain the government’s reasoning for demanding the videos be taken down, the plaintiffs’ First Amendment argument for keeping them public, and your own view of which concern should carry more weight here.