PrepTest 120, Section 3, Question 26
Students in a college ethics class were asked(82 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(21 more words not shown)
- AIt is wrong(13 more words not shown)
- BAnyone regularly transmitting(15 more words not shown)
- CIf two similar(16 more words not shown)
- DFailure to uphold(21 more words not shown)
- EA magazine should(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Same advertisement, different commitments. Is that enough to judge the magazines differently?
The first magazine undertook to screen ads and reject those it found offensive. The second publishes whatever ads its subscribers submit. I can see why a student would distinguish them: the first has accepted a responsibility to filter the content, while the second hasn't made that particular commitment.
That doesn't automatically settle every moral question about publishing the ad. Perhaps publishers have responsibilities even without announcing them. But our task is to justify the students' particular judgment: the first magazine was morally delinquent, while the second wasn't. We need a principle that makes the difference in commitments matter.
What we’re looking for
My initial thought is that taking responsibility for judging content creates a basis for holding the first magazine accountable. A rule applying the same publication standard to both magazines won't explain the different judgments. Let's look for the rule that best connects the stated difference with that result.
Working the answers
- A
Even if the offensive ad could cause harm, this rule would apply to both magazines that published it. It doesn't distinguish a magazine that promised to screen content from one that didn't. Also, the passage describes the ad as offensive without separately establishing the direct or indirect harm A specifies.
- B
This gives every regular publisher a duty to monitor content. That includes the second magazine, despite its policy of accepting subscribers' ads. The students need a reason to hold the magazines differently accountable; B imposes the same responsibility on both.
- C
This points toward the same standard of accountability for similar agents performing similar actions. The students reach different judgments, and their stated information concerns the magazines' different policies. C doesn't explain why that difference should justify treating the publication differently.
- DCorrect
The principle makes a specific commitment to a moral standard matter. The first magazine undertook to screen for offensive ads, so failing to uphold that standard supplies a basis for calling it morally delinquent. The second magazine did not make that commitment, so a failure to meet that particular standard need not itself establish a moral failing.
Notice the qualification: “not necessarily” isn't a blanket declaration that everything the second magazine publishes is morally acceptable. D provides the strongest support for the different judgments on the limited facts given. It identifies the relevant difference instead of treating both publishers identically.
- E
We don't know whether any subscribers would find the ad offensive. Its being demeaning to some people doesn't settle the reactions of either magazine's subscribers. Even if the condition were met for a magazine, the answer gives us no facts establishing a difference between the two readerships. It therefore doesn't justify the contrast based on their screening commitments.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.