Critical Reasoning

The recent proliferation of newspaper articles in major publications that have been exposed as fabrications serves to bolster the contention that publishers are more interested in selling copy than in printing the truth. Even minor publications have staffs to check such obvious fraud.

The above argument assumes that

(A) newspaper stories of dubious authenticity are a new phenomenon
(B) minor publications do a better job of fact-checking than do major publications
(C) everything a newspaper prins must be factually verifiable
(D) only recently have newspapers admitted to publishing erroneous stories
(E) publishers are ultimately responsible for what is printed in their newspapers
-----------------------
The author conclues that publishers are more interested in selling copy than in printing the truth. The evidence is that many newspaper articles have recently been exposed as frauds.

I don't understand why (E) should be assumed. Please somebody explain this. Thank you in advance!

IMO E

P1: Recent proliferation of newspaper articles in major publications that have been exposed as fabrications.
P2: Even minor publications have staffs to check such obvious fraud
C: publishers are more interested in selling copy than in printing the truth

A: Irrelevant. We are not concerned about the recency of stories
B: The premise states that even minor publications have staff to check this. It means that apart from minor, major publications also have the staff for this
C: The stimulus doesn't assume that everything has to be verifiable
D: This doesn't have any effect on conclusion

The option E is necessay for the conclusion. If fabricated articles are published in newspaper even though most of the publications have staff to check such obvious frauds, it means that the publishers are allowing the articles to be published. So they are ultimately responsible for what is printed.

Hope this helps

Premise: recent articles in major publications are fabrication but major publications keep printing those articles
Conclusion: they are interested in selling copy than in printing the truth

Negating option D: Major publications are not responsible for what is printed, so they don't decide whether to print those articles. Thus, conclusion that they are more interested in selling copy is weak.
D is the assumption. Glad to share your other ideas.

The answer is E simply because the argument talks about the contention that publishers are more interested in selling copy than in printing the truth. If publishers were not responsible for what is printed then the argument falls apart. Hence this is the obvious asumption

I will Go with option E in this case.