Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 29 Aug 2014, 02:39

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 316
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 198 [0], given: 9

GMAT Tests User
Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 01:31
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

24% (02:48) correct 76% (01:44) wrong based on 93 sessions
Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so, since such advertisements encourage people to engage in an unhealthy practice. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal since advertisements for fatty foods are legal, even though those advertisements also encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict between Kendrick's statements?

(A) Any advertisement that encourages people to engage in an unhealthy practice should be made illegal, even though the legality of some such advertisements is currently uncontroversial

(B) The advertisement of fattening foods, unlike that of cigarettes, should not be prevented, because fattening foods, unlike cigarettes, are not addictive.

(C) Most advertisements should be legal, although advertisers are always morally responsible for ensuring that their advertisements do not encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

(D) Governments should try to prevent the advertisement of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition.

(E) Governments should place restrictions on cigarette advertisements so as to keep them from encouraging people to engage in unhealthy practices, but should not try to prevent such advertisements.

OA and OE will follow

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [1] , given: 3

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 10:05
1
This post received
KUDOS
I wrestled between C and D, but I think the answer is D.

Kendrick is saying that government is justified in preventing (cigarette) advertisements because it encourages unhealthy practices. However, because the same government allows fast food advertisements that also encourage unhealthy practices, they have no right to prevent cigarette advertisements. The voice of this passage is not really relating to advertisements and the legal right therein, but more about restricting the unhealthy practice of cigarettes.

---

A - Goes against his argument

B - This would work if Kendrick is arguing against allowing cigarette advertisements, but he's not.

C - Although it seems a little bit out of place, this answer "works" because it allows for Kendrick to resolve his conflict by postulating that all advertisements should be legal. The second part deflects responsibility from government, which also helps to "resolve the conflict". Yet, I feel that this answer does not hold true to the point of Kendrick's argument.

D - This is the other answer that is plausible. Although there is no mention of financial disincentives in the passage, it flows nicely with my interpretation of the theme. Governments will have no conflict between two advertisements that both encourage unhealthy practices - they will not legally halt advertising. However, they can through other methods carry on what Kendrick feels is a justifiable practice - inhibiting cigarette advertising.

E - I think restrictions and prevention can be argued to be similar - this doesn't resolve the conflict.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 62

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 12:08
mikeCoolBoy wrote:
Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so, since such advertisements encourage people to engage in an unhealthy practice. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal since advertisements for fatty foods are legal, even though those advertisements also encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict between Kendrick's statements?

(A) Any advertisement that encourages people to engage in an unhealthy practice should be made illegal, even though the legality of some such advertisements is currently uncontroversial

(B) The advertisement of fattening foods, unlike that of cigarettes, should not be prevented, because fattening foods, unlike cigarettes, are not addictive.

(C) Most advertisements should be legal, although advertisers are always morally responsible for ensuring that their advertisements do not encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

(D) Governments should try to prevent the advertisement of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition.

(E) Governments should place restrictions on cigarette advertisements so as to keep them from encouraging people to engage in unhealthy practices, but should not try to prevent such advertisements.

OA and OE will follow


I'll take a crack at it ...

My summary of the conflict: Governments are justified when they attempt to prevent the advertisement of cigs because smoking cigs is an unhealthy habit. However, cig ads should be legal because advertisements for fatty foods are legal although eating fatty foods is an unhealthy practice.

So what helps to resolve the conflict? I determined that it would be something that would justify the government's actions to prevent the unhealthy habit of cigarette smoking or in other words distinguish cigs from fatty foods.

A) This doesn't add anything to the resolution of the conflict.

B) I like this answer. The government is justified because smoking cigs is an unhealthy practice and is addictive which perpetuates the unhealthy practice. Eating fatty foods, while an unhealthy practice, isn't an addictive practice. This differentiation justifies the government preventative measures and resolves the conflict.

C) Totally irrelevant since it does not resolve the conflict.

D) Again irrelevant since it does not resolve the conflict.

E) This answer is interesting because the government can place restrictions on cig ads but allow those ads to remain legal. My question would be then what about restrictions on ads for fatty foods? The conflict hasn't been resolved in my opinion.

I believe B is the answer.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 341
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 15:59
I will go with B
_________________

Always tag your question

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 333
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 162 [0], given: 13

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 16:19
B?
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 62

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2009, 19:07
Okay reading this again I think I will change my answer to D.

Here's the reason: financial disincentives allow cig ads to remain legal but allows governments to try to prevent cig advertising by making it financially difficult. This resolves the conflict.
2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 316
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 198 [2] , given: 9

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 11 Sep 2009, 10:00
2
This post received
KUDOS
OA is D.

The key is to realize of the wording in the passage.

Fact1: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so
Fact2: cigarette advertisements should remain legal

Option D explains this apparently contradiction.

Lincfucious wrote:
D - This is the other answer that is plausible. Although there is no mention of financial disincentives in the passage


This is perfectly valid in paradox questions. Anyway, you solved the question nicely. Congratulations + 1
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Jul 2009
Posts: 193
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V35
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [1] , given: 25

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 27 Sep 2009, 10:10
1
This post received
KUDOS
I was inclined to choose either D or E. I dont see much difference between "restrictions" and "financial disincentives", cuz one can consider disincentives some kind of "restriction". Also prohibiting and restricting are not the same, as some argued here. So I think this question was controversial. Both D and E could've been considered correct at some extent.
_________________

Believe in yourself.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 136
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 47

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink] New post 30 Sep 2009, 05:28
i chose D should say im bit lucky with this
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Posts: 77
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 31

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 23 Apr 2012, 07:59
First thought E, later figured out that E is out of scope because it basically talks about restrictions whereas the question talks about prevention.

D is a better choice because it talks about prevention at the same time circumventing legality
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Bunuel's fan!
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 238
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 55

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 18 May 2012, 18:38
I eliminated down to C and E and picked C actually while the answer is D.

I was a bit wary of financial incentives in D. It is a tough question.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 196
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, International Business
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.6
WE: Project Management (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 7

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 19 May 2012, 01:46
right answer lies in the way one interpret the questions.

Whoever says Answer should be B, must be trying to resolve the conflict following statement :
Cigarette advertisements should remain legal since advertisements for fatty foods are legal, even though those advertisements also encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

However questions asks us to resolve conflict between following two statements
- Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so
- cigarette advertisements should remain legal

So essentially kendrick is trying to say that Government should to prevent the Cigarettes Ads by some other measures instead of banning them or making them illegal. Option D states this exactly.

For those who think option E is right answer may be mistaking that it contradicts the main statement by saying "Governments should not try to prevent such advertisements"
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-guide-to-the-official-guide-13-for-gmat-review-134210.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 271
GMAT 1: 750 Q V
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 6

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 25 Jun 2012, 05:23
The correct answer is D.

It adequately resolves the paradox by accounting for the co-existence restrictions and legality of cigarette ads.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 213
Location: New Delhi, India
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 12

GMAT Tests User
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 05 Jul 2012, 00:01
Why is Option B incorrect.
_________________

Best
Vaibhav

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 10
Location: Mexico
GPA: 3.5
WE: Business Development (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 21 Oct 2013, 16:49
it is D because the question focus on its meaning on the Legal issue so that D states something about legalilty. It is a little tricky as it that word showed up at the end of the answer
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jan 2013
Posts: 68
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 6

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink] New post 21 Oct 2013, 19:37
Previously, I also chose B, then realized my mistake.
I focused on the example of the fact rather than on the fact.
Key here is the facts:
1. Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so.
2. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal (Fatty food is the example of this fact)

Governments should try to prevent the advertisement(Justify fact 1) of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition(Justify fact 2).

So, the only choice that addressed both the facts is choice "D"

Learning: To resolve a paradox, focus on facts not on the examples of facts. :)
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from   [#permalink] 21 Oct 2013, 19:37
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Large corporations are prevented from conspiracy vani711 4 16 Sep 2013, 23:28
7 Experts publish their posts in the topic To prevent businesses from moving, local governments award gmatpunjabi 15 02 Jan 2012, 09:00
9 Experts publish their posts in the topic The death of Timothy Cole will not prevent the courts from feruz77 8 25 Oct 2010, 00:34
His dog,along with his cat and goldfish,prevent him from Beyond700 8 27 Oct 2007, 18:23
Sonya: The government of Copeland is raising the cigarette withme 7 17 Jun 2006, 19:27
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.