Read the argument excerpt related to team use of smart phones and answer the question that follows:

"People on either side of smartphones-for-teens debate can't agree on the evidence. Sure, there's proof of cyber bullying. There's also proof of educational benefits. Yet
nothing is conclusive, so no value judgments can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens. Anyone supporting such a restriction is naïve and uniformed. He or she is reacting from emotion instead of his or her brain to study all the evidence and make a decision specific to his or her own teen. The bottom line is it's up to parents to be parents. Why spend billions of dollars on trying to stop cyber bully or explore educational apps? It's probably just another human assumption that we can control the technology we've created. Trying is a waste of time and money.
Which of the following is true about this are you an expert?


1. It is respectful in tune to the audience and supports it's credible with specific, credible evidence.

2. It contains specific, credible evidence but uses a derespectful tone that should be edited.

3. It feels to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses of the respectful tone.

4. It uses a respectful tone but you specific, credible evidence to support the claim.