Intrusive Marketing -Strengthen Question(Expert Help Needed)

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1132
Joined: 20 Jul 2009
Location: India
Thanked: 64 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:760
Passage:-

Every day the mailboxes of America are filled with solicitations provided by the direct marketing industry. America's response to this deluge has been strangely mixed. On the negative side, poorly executed direct marketing produces unwanted, annoying and wasteful solicitations, also known as "junk mail." Also, aggressive direct marketing techniques, aided by new tools in technology, represent a serious threat to informational privacy. Sophisticated computer matching programs can produce intrusive personal profiles from information which, standing alone, does not threaten individual privacy.
The 1991 Harris-Equifax Consumer Privacy Survey addressed popular attitudes towards direct mailing practices and their impact on informational privacy. When asked how they viewed direct mail offers in general, 46 percent of the respondents said they were a
"nuisance," 9 percent considered them to be "invasions of privacy," and only 6 percent said they were "useful." But if Americans have such a negative opinion of the direct marketing industry, they have a strange way of showing it. Direct mail advertising expenditures rose from $7.6 billion in 1980 to $23.4 billion in 1990. The laws of the market dictate that companies would not have made these efforts without prospects of success. Moreover, almost half of the citizens surveyed who considered direct mail offers to be "invasions of privacy" had themselves bought something in response to a direct mail ad in the past year.
Analysis of this seeming contradiction reveals the central problem of regulation in this industry: everyone hates receiving "junk mail," and everyone ought to be concerned about informational privacy. Still, direct marketing offers real advantages over other means of shopping. Even those who believe that the direct mailing industry has a generally negative societal impact probably would prefer to remain on some mailing lists. We like shopping by mail, and we don't want to throw out the good with the bad.



Q)Which one of the following, if true, would best strengthen the author's explanation of the "seeming contradiction" expressed in line 35?
(A) Awareness of commercial infringements on the rights of citizens has never been higher.
(B) The number of people on more than one mailing list has increased in direct proportion to the increase in direct marketing expenditures.
(C) Consumers do not perceive a connection between their individual purchasing behavior and infringements on their personal rights.
(D) Some people believe that the benefits associated with the recent success of the direct marketing industry will filter down to consumers over time.
(E) Some opinion polls on other topics indicate a similar discrepancy between what people say about an issue and how they act in relation to that issue.


Source:-Kaplan 800

I am confused between C and E. IMO answer should be E. But the OA is C.
It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button :)



Just because something is hard doesn't mean you shouldn't try,it means you should just try harder.

"Keep Walking" - Johnny Walker :P

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 124
Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:14 members
GMAT Score:750

by CappyAA » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:12 am
The seeming contradiction is this - everyone hates receiving "junk mail," and everyone ought to be concerned about informational privacy, however people still buy things through these direct mailings.

To strengthen this contradiction, we need to find an answer that gives a reason for why people could be concerned about their informational privacy but still buy via direct mail.

C tells us that consumers don't see the connection between what they buy and their personal rights. If consumers can't see this connection, they won't be able to connect the dots. Therefore, they can still be very concerned about informational privacy but buy via direct mailings.

E is out of scope. It is about other topics. Don't confuse correlation with causation. In this case, the similar discrepancies indicate a correlation, but this could be entirely by chance. It does not strengthen the author's explanation.
Taking the GMAT Again...PhD this time!

October 2008 Score: GMAT - 750 (50 Q, 41 V) :D

Manhattan GMAT 1 - 11/20/11 - 750 (50 Q, 42 V)
Manhattan GMAT 2 - 12/3/11 - 780 (51 Q, 45 V)

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 509
Joined: 21 Apr 2010
Location: Irvine, CA
Thanked: 199 times
Followed by:85 members
GMAT Score:750

by tpr-becky » Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:10 pm
Moreover, almost half of the citizens surveyed who considered direct mail offers to be "invasions of privacy" had themselves bought something in response to a direct mail ad in the past year.


To strengthen the concept that this is a "seeming" contradiction - Which means that you have to strengthen the fact that this is not really a contradiction - you must stay on topic for the two facts within the contradiction. C is the only answer which does that. If people don't see the connection then it is only a "seeming" contradiciton.

E goes outside - Some is too small (can mean at least one) and opinion polls don't really help to strengthen.
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA