In Los Angeles, a political candidate who buys saturation radio advert

I've understood it a little differently. But maybe, we're talking about the same thing. Let me try:
What you want is maximum name recognition.
If you can get it with radio advertising - everything is fine. So why spend on other media channels?
If you get maximum name recognition via radio advertisments, there's no way to top that. You can't get more than the maximum. So each cent spent on other media channels is wasted.

Hi Jefferson,

You're absolutely right about why (D) is right. My post above was specifically covering why (C) was wrong, since it proved to be a tempting wrong answer choice for many students.

Radio Advertising -> Maximum Name and Recognition
Cause -> Effect

For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising.

For the effect to occur the cause alone is enough.

In Los Angeles, a political candidate who buys saturation radio advertising will get maximum name and recognition.

The statement above logically conveys which of the following?

A. Radio advertising is the most important factor in political campaigns in Los Angeles.
B. Maximum name recognition in Los Angeles will help a candidate to win a higher percentage of votes cast in the city.
C. Saturation radio advertising reaches every demographically distinct sector of the voting population of Los Angeles.
D. For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising.
E. A candidate's record of achievement in the Los Angeles area will do little to affect his or her name recognition there.

all parts in red are just new information not supported by the argument.
Only D remains.

[quote="pratikbais"]In Los Angeles, a political candidate who buys saturation radio advertising will get maximum name and recognition.

The statement above logically conveys which of the following?

A. Radio advertising is the most important factor in political campaigns in Los Angeles.
B. Maximum name recognition in Los Angeles will help a candidate to win a higher percentage of votes cast in the city.
C. Saturation radio advertising reaches every demographically distinct sector of the voting population of Los Angeles.
D. For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising.
E. A candidate's record of achievement in the Los Angeles area will do little to affect his or her name recognition there.[/quote
Can some one please explain why the answer is D and not B ???

The answer is not B because the question stem does not mention anything about votes. D is correct because if radio advertising gives maximum name and recognition then nothing else would hence it does not make logical sense to spend on other media channels.

Hope it helps. Please Kudos if you like the explanation .

E is wrong because E mentioned "little" rather than "comparatively little than effect of radio advertisement" right?

A mathematical approach here. In mathematical logic there is a rule for logical deduction.

If A implies B the NOT B always implies NOT A.

So, in this question, if an answer was presented that not getting maximum name and recognition implies the candidate did not buy the saturation radio advertising, that would have been the best answer. However, we don't have that here. Also, note that this is an inference question. In inference question, the correct answer choice MUST BE TRUE. And outside information is usually not appreciated in inference questions. With this understanding, let's move on to the answer choices.

A. Radio advertising is the most important factor in political campaigns in Los Angeles. Outside information presented. The question mentions nothing about the relative importance of diff. factors. Hence Out of Scope.
B. Maximum name recognition in Los Angeles will help a candidate to win a higher percentage of votes cast in the city. Though this is logical in our common world, the question doesn't introduce any such information. Hence for the context of the passage, it is an OUTSIDE INFO. Hence incorrect.
C. Saturation radio advertising reaches every demographically distinct sector of the voting population of Los Angeles. Reach is not described, outside info, so eliminate it
D. For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising. Yes, this need not be true. The passage only mention one of the possibilities, but it doesn't say it is the only possibility. Hence it is a MUST BE TRUE Choice. And indeed the correct one.
E. A candidate's record of achievement in the Los Angeles area will do little to affect his or her name recognition there. The contribution to name and recognition is not discussed, hence can't be inferred

Hope this helps.

Cheers!

the objective/main result: To get maximum name and recognition.

A. Radio advertising is the most important factor in political campaigns in Los Angeles. - the passage does not clarify/support any contention made on the ''most important'' factor for political campaigns.
B. Maximum name recognition in Los Angeles will help a candidate to win a higher percentage of votes cast in the city. - the passage is not concerned with ''winning votes''.
C. Saturation radio advertising reaches every demographically distinct sector of the voting population of Los Angeles. - the information provided in the passage does not support this contention.
D. For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising. - from the information provided to us in the passage, we do know that saturation radio advertising is capable of achieving maximum name and recognition. Hence, we can support (D) based on the information provided to us in the passage. Therefore, (D) is the right answer choice.
E. A candidate's record of achievement in the Los Angeles area will do little to affect his or her name recognition there. - All the passage is concerned about is the main result: To achieve maximum name and recognition, not whether certain factors may affect the recognition of a candidate.

A. Radio advertising is the most important factor in political campaigns in Los Angeles.
This may or may not be the case we cannot infer the same from the given set of information -Hence out

B. Maximum name recognition in Los Angeles will help a candidate to win a higher percentage of votes cast in the city.
This is a ovversimplification the direct relationship between vote share and name recognition is not stated in the passage -Hence out

C. Saturation radio advertising reaches every demographically distinct sector of the voting population of Los Angeles.
The passage only states maximum reach that doesn't help us any further may be a vast majority of them are concentrated in a single location therby not reaching a vast demographic loccations -Hence out

D. For maximum name recognition a candidate need not spend on media channels other than radio advertising.
This is a direct relationship that we can infer -Hence in

E. A candidate's record of achievement in the Los Angeles area will do little to affect his or her name recognition there
This is thoroughly out of context and i couldn't make much of any sense from the gien statement -Hence out

Therefore IMO D

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.