LR Drill Set 10, Question 11
Journalists are criticized for so often emphasizing the(42 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(12 more words not shown)
- AOne should not(13 more words not shown)
- BA journalist's highest(18 more words not shown)
- CJournalists should learn(24 more words not shown)
- DIf a journalist(27 more words not shown)
- EA journalist should(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Is reaching more readers enough to justify emphasizing the sensational parts of a story?
The author says the attention-grabbing material serves a useful purpose. It draws people in, and the journalist can then communicate the important parts to more of them. I understand that defense. A serious story nobody reads may communicate very little.
But what matters most? The critics might care about the balance of the coverage, not just the size of the audience. They might fully understand the audience benefit and still think the emphasis is wrong. Showing a benefit doesn't automatically make the criticism misguided.
We need a principle that helps justify the author's response. My prediction is a rule that gives this benefit priority: if the journalist's central job is to communicate the important information to as many people as possible, the audience gained through sensational presentation becomes a strong defense of the method.
What we’re looking for
We don't need to claim that sensationalism is always harmless. We need a standard that explains why this stated benefit answers this criticism.
Working the answers
- A
Attracting a large audience doesn't establish that most people want journalists to emphasize sensational details. People might click on something while wishing coverage were different. The passage gives us readership, not a majority preference about what journalists should do. So this principle's condition hasn't been established.
- BCorrect
This makes communicating the important parts to the largest possible audience the journalist's highest priority. The passage says emphasizing sensational aspects helps accomplish precisely that goal.
Now the response has a standard behind it: the criticized method advances the purpose that should take priority in covering the story. B does not literally repeat the word 'misguided,' but it supplies a reason to judge the criticism that way. The connection matters more than matching that word.
- C
This asks journalists to achieve broad communication without overemphasizing sensational aspects. That gives support to the concern the author is trying to dismiss. It doesn't establish that the current emphasis is justified; it points toward finding a different way to reach readers.
- D
If sensationalism were necessary, this rule would tell the journalist not to cover the story. That's not a defense of using sensationalism. And the passage doesn't establish that no other approach could work, so we can't simply assume the rule applies. Either way, it doesn't justify the author's conclusion.
- E
Before applying this rule, we'd need to know that the criticism is misguided. But that's the very point the author is trying to establish. A rule about ignoring criticism once it has been judged misguided doesn't tell us why this particular criticism deserves that judgment.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.