Based on the schenck v. united states case, when might it be acceptable for the government to restrict information
released by the press?
a. the government can never restrict information released by the press.
b. the government can only restrict information when it could be harmful to an individual's reputation.
c. the government can only restrict information released when practicing prior restraint.
d. the government can only restrict information that could present an immediate threat to security or the public.

Based on the Schenck v. United States case, it might be acceptable for the government to restrict information released by the press if the government can only restrict information that could present an immediate threat to security or the public.

given the fact that the question is about the detail that best support the idea that oppressive leaders use   propaganda to achieve thir goals,   the first option does not refer to any kind of propaganda, since it only tells about that the milk and the windfall apple should be reserved for the pigs. in the second option, that is, "snowball and napoleon sent out flights of pigeons whose instructions were to mingle with the animals on the neighbouring farms, tell them the story of the rebellion, and teach them the tune of "beasts of england". it can be identified that the oppressors make use of the propaganda, which is represented by the pigeons, and the information they have to tell other animals about what was happening in the farm in order to get their objectives. for that reason, the right answer is the second option, taking into account that the third option do not refer to propaganda since it only talks about that they did not want jones back. and, finally, the last option refers to the result of the given news, but it does not mean about the propaganda they used to achieve their goals.

it was a big part of the story, making a lot of plot points happen?