Advertisements in newspapers

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:10 am
Followed by:1 members

Advertisements in newspapers

by psm12se » Thu Feb 27, 2014 6:29 am
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people"Ÿs tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on GMAT and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?
-- The advertisers switched their advertisements to other family newspapers.
-- Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.
-- The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
-- People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on GMAT and violence.
-- It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:31 am
psm12se wrote:Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people"Ÿs tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on GMAT and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?
A) The advertisers switched their advertisements to other family newspapers.
B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.
C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on GMAT and violence.
E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.

Premise: Some advertisers are motivated by moral AND financial considerations
Premise : The publication its content from family to adult
Premise: Some advertisers withdrew
Conclusion : Those advertisers withdrew on moral grounds

So, if there are TWO reasons (financial reasons and moral reasons) why an advertiser might withdraw, how do we know that the reason wasn't financial?

One way to strengthen this argument, is to find a new premise that RULES OUT the possibility that the withdrawal was motivated by financial reasons.

Answer choice C does just that. It says that the advertisers expected their product sales to increase. So, withdrawal could not have been for financial reasons. Now that we've ruled out the financial motivation, we are left with moral motivation. Perfect!

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image