Critical Reasoning

this is an question from retired test and so is official one

16. Advertiser: The revenue that newspapers and magazines earn by publishing advertisements allows publishers to keep the prices per copy of their publications much lower than would otherwise be possible. Therefore, consumers benefit economically from advertising.
Consumer: But who pays for the advertising that pays for low-priced newspapers and magazines? We consumers do, because advertisers pass along advertising costs to us through the higher prices they charge for their products.
Which of the following best describes how the consumer counters the advertiser’s argument?
(A) By alleging something that, if true, would weaken the plausibility of the advertiser’s conclusion
(B) By questioning the truth of the purportedly factual statement on which the advertiser’s conclusion is based
(C) By offering an interpretation of the advertiser’s opening statement that, if accurate, shows that there is an implicit contradiction in it
(D) By pointing out that the advertiser’s point of view is biased
(E) By arguing that the advertiser too narrowly restricts the discussion to the effects of advertising that are economic

pls, explain the OA

IMO B. which one is the OA?

E is irrelevant
D tells only about the advertiser .The correct answer should actually tell how the consumer counters the advertiser’s argument.
C uses if accurate, which is not true.
A again uses if true.


B is correct because it tells how the consumer counteracts the advertiser’s argument - by questioning the truth of the factual statement on which the advertiser’s is biased.

OA is A.

Google says so.

IMO it should be B

Hi srn,
Could you please tell me why the answer choices with 'if true' statements are wrong.....I mean is there any rule that for such questions, the answers with 'if true' are not correct?

I choose C

The question asks about how the Consumer counters the Advertiser argument.
The Consumer's response is in the line : Given what you say is right, there is an alternate reason to it (note the mention of opening statement in choice C).
I think the word counter here refers to accepting the argument but offering an alternate explanation (which is not to economically benefit the Customer).
In this angle only C fits.

Hi ketkoag,

In the question, Advertiser's are asserting that 'consumers benefit economically from advertising' by giving supporting reason's.

The consumers are contradicting saying that, the advertisement cost and the high product cost are payed by the consumers itself.

Here, there is no conditional statement given that says that only if the advertisers statement is correct, the consumers contradiction is true or vice versa. Hence C and A are wrong
This is how I came to the conclusion.

But it is mentioned that the OA is A. So even I am a bit confused now.

Adv : Advertising reduces magazine rates. Hence consumers (you) benefit from advertising.

consumer : But what about the costs of advertising. You will recover the costs by charging higher rates for the products. So indirectly we pay for your higher cost product, you(advertiser) pay for the magazine and hence the rates of the magazine are less.

Consumer counters by.
Here the consumer does just making a statement.
According to A.
If whatever the consumer says is true, which is the advertisers really price the product higher, then the advertisements do not really benefit consumers,

Thus, the allegations of the consumer if true would weaken the advertisers conclusion.

B) By questioning the truth of the purportedly factual statement on which the advertiser’s conclusion is based
The statement on which the advertisers conclusion is based on the price of the magazines. Consumer is not questioning this statement. He has accepted that the price / magazine is less. no questions on that.

Hope it helps.

B is the most appropriate answer