Passage Summary: Sarah thinks that just by choosing what to talk about, reporters are interpreting the news. Ramon thinks reporters should stay objective and only provide facts without any personal spin.

Conclusion: Sarah believes reporters always interpret the news, while Ramon believes they should never do so.

Reasoning: Sarah argues that the act of selecting which stories to cover is itself an interpretation; Ramon argues that once a story is selected, the reporter's duty is to provide untainted facts.

Analysis: To find the point at issue, we apply the 'Agree/Disagree' test to identify the specific claim where one speaker says 'Yes' and the other says 'No.' Sarah explicitly states that the act of allotting time to specific events is an exercise in judgment that constitutes interpretation. Ramon, however, views the selection of a story and the reporting of that story as separate acts, insisting that the reporting itself should be untainted. Look for an answer choice that centers on whether the selection of news stories is, in itself, an act of interpretation.