In a robust democracy, reality, howsoever inconvenient it may be, finds its expression both in the speech of political leaders and the other social forms of assertion. The existence of the real has to be transparent, both through its circulation in and by the media as well as its argumentative articulation in deliberative democracy. A normatively responsible media through its communication effect has the responsibility to circulate the content of reality without distortion.

Explanation:

To answer this question, let’s analyze the key points of the passage:

1. In a robust democracy, reality should be expressed in political speech and other social forms.
2. The existence of reality should be transparent through media circulation and deliberative democracy.
3. A responsible media has the duty to communicate reality without distortion.

Now, let’s evaluate each option:

a) Responsible media should not distort the real in an ideal democracy.
This option closely aligns with the main idea of the passage, especially the last sentence which emphasizes the media’s responsibility to circulate reality without distortion.

b) Fake news seems inherent in the life of an ideal democracy.
This statement contradicts the passage, which emphasizes the importance of transparent and undistorted reality in a democracy.

c) There should not be any kind of restrictions on the freedom of expression in an ideal democracy.
While the passage discusses free expression of reality, it doesn’t argue against all restrictions on freedom of expression. This option is too broad.

d) Irresponsible media and political leaders cannot be effectively controlled in an ideal democracy.
The passage doesn’t discuss controlling media or political leaders, but rather emphasizes their responsibility in conveying reality.