PrepTest 156, Section 4, Question 9
Journalists often claim that their investigation of the(56 more words not shown)
The claim that journalistic investigation(23 more words not shown)
- AIt is a(7 more words not shown)
- BIt mentions a(15 more words not shown)
- CIt is cited(13 more words not shown)
- DIt describes a(16 more words not shown)
- EIt gives an(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Trying to help and actually helping are different things.
The journalists say they investigate political leaders to improve society by holding powerful people to the same standards as everyone else. I might wonder whether the scrutiny itself is equal—ordinary people generally don't face that kind of investigation. But the author takes a different route: the practice has bad consequences, making leaders focus on appearances and making the public cynical.
That doesn't establish that the journalists lied about their purpose. They could sincerely want improvement and still cause the damage the author describes. A leader might become so worried about looking bad that appearances take priority over everything else; the journalists could have wanted the opposite result.
What we’re looking for
For the role question, work back from the conclusion that the practice harms society. The opening claim tells us the justification journalists give for that practice. The author then argues that its actual consequences are undesirable. Keep the reason for doing something separate from what happens as a result.
Working the answers
- A
The argument doesn't establish that the investigations aren't an effort to improve society. An effort can fail or backfire. Refuting the claim about that purpose would require questioning whether improvement is really what the journalists are trying to achieve. The argument instead criticizes the effects of the practice.
- BCorrect
The opening gives a justification offered for investigating political leaders: improving society by demanding consistent standards of conduct. The argument then concludes that the practice produces undesirable consequences. This captures both parts without confusing the journalists' stated aim with the outcome.
- C
The opening isn't evidence offered for a separate assertion that the argument then proves false. It reports the journalists' stated reason for their practice. The later claims about appearances and cynicism are the evidence used to support the author's conclusion that the practice is harmful.
- D
This reverses the direction of the author's criticism. The author says the practice is detrimental despite the journalists' stated aim of improvement. The argument doesn't say the practice is less damaging than the journalists assume, and the opening doesn't tell us that journalists assume it is damaging at all.
- E
We haven't been told what everyone assumes the effects will be. We have been told what journalists often say they are trying to accomplish. E turns a particular group's stated intention into a universal belief about effects. The opening establishes neither what everyone believes nor what effects they expect.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.