It is currently 18 Jan 2018, 21:57

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4779

Kudos [?]: 18674 [0], given: 1994

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2015, 09:31
Expert's post
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.

(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.

(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 18674 [0], given: 1994

Manager
Joined: 03 Sep 2014
Posts: 75

Kudos [?]: 51 [1], given: 89

Concentration: Marketing, Healthcare

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2015, 11:11
1
KUDOS
souvik101990 wrote:
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.

(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.

(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.

Close call between A and C

For A, advertisers could have switched for better profits at other family newspapers

For C, they withdrew even though there was an expected profit

Kudos [?]: 51 [1], given: 89

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 529

Kudos [?]: 703 [1], given: 606

Concentration: Technology, Other

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2015, 22:20
1
KUDOS
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants.
There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations.
A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership.

Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

>> There can be other reasons to move out such as profit was less, new audiences were not receptive, etc.
(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.
>> Not relevant.
(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
>> Now that's a big sacrifice even though there was higher profit they opted to move out. Makes it better than A.
(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.
>>Opposite of what v r looking for.
(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.
>> Not relevant.
_________________

--------------------------------------------------------
Regards

Kudos [?]: 703 [1], given: 606

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2013
Posts: 299

Kudos [?]: 43 [1], given: 113

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2015, 04:26
1
KUDOS

The publishers withdrew at the cost of their own sales- even when they expected to increase the sales. Clearly this idea point that publishers do not mind sales, but mind about publishing salacious materials.

Nice wording. I fell for the wording in the option C.

souvik101990 wrote:
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.

(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.

(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.

_________________

Kudos to you, for helping me with some KUDOS.

Kudos [?]: 43 [1], given: 113

Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 559

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 80

Location: India
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2015, 10:43
Nice question
conclusion: Advertiser moved because they disapproved the content

advertiser stay ---> profit would have increased but now profit may decrease with different publication

supports the motive
_________________

Regards,

S

Consider +1 KUDOS if you find this post useful

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 80

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10263

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 May 2015, 10:07
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.

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2015
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 10

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 11:02
1
KUDOS
IMO the key confusing phrase was "moral as well as financial considerations". Here the financial considerations could be anything: profit or loss. Morality, however, is most likely to be interpreted as virtuous. It's difficult from the phrase above to conclude that financial loss would be overlooked for a higher moral benefit. This makes "C" a difficult choice, if not straight choice, and some eliminations need to be employed.

Had the phrase been" moral considerations, regardless of financial positions", "C" would have been the direct choice...

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 10

Current Student
Status: Eagles Become Vultures
Joined: 19 Jun 2014
Posts: 62

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 13

Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: LBS '18 (M)
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 4
WE: Corporate Finance (Energy and Utilities)

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 13:12
Clearly C

Since the withdrawal was argued as on the basis of moral considerations and both moral and financial considerations were argued as equally important, clearly the advertisers knowingly decided to forego the financial gain.

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 13

Intern
Joined: 30 Jun 2013
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2015, 01:48
Approch : if we need to strengthen
Quote:
" this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material"
, we should start finding option which proves there is no other reason because of which they withdrew advertisement in publication . Answer C implies that advertiser will be in loss if goes for changed publication. Thus, if profit is surely not the reason. that means salacious material is the reason.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10263

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2016, 20:57
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.

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10263

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2016, 06:35
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.

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10263

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2016, 05:21
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.

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Status: DONE!
Joined: 05 Sep 2016
Posts: 407

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 283

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2016, 19:19
C - because we need to prove that advertising company left family/now relations magazine due to moral obligations, not financial. This answer does that - it states that they basically gave up a fatter paycheck because they didn't want to compromise their ethics.

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 283

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 161 [0], given: 351

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2017, 08:14
Advertisers are often criticized for their
unscrupulous manipulation of people’s tastes and
wants. There is evidence, however, that some
advertisers are motivated by moral as well as
financial considerations. A particular publication
decided to change its image from being a family
newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus
and this must have been because they morally
disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most
strengthen the argument?

to other family newspapers.
(B) Some advertisers switched from family
newspapers to advertise in the changed
publication.
(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to
increase if they stayed with the changed
publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
(D) People who generally read family newspapers
are not likely to buy newspapers that
concentrate on sex and violence.
(E) It was expected that the changed publication
would appeal principally to those in a
different income group.
_________________

We Shall Overcome... One day...

Kudos [?]: 161 [0], given: 351

Intern
Joined: 23 Nov 2013
Posts: 21

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 94

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2017, 09:28
Please correct the OA. this question is already posted with correct OA.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 94

CR Forum Moderator
Status: The best is yet to come.....
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 513

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 201

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2017, 11:13
Need attention of moderator
_________________

Hasan Mahmud

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 201

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3278

Kudos [?]: 3794 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

04 Feb 2017, 07:13
Mahmud6 wrote:
Need attention of moderator

Topics merged - thank you for pointing out.

Kudos [?]: 3794 [0], given: 22

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Posts: 317

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 88

Location: India
Schools: IIMB
GMAT 1: 550 Q42 V28
GPA: 3.96
WE: Human Resources (Retail Banking)

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2017, 21:54
JarvisR wrote:
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants.
There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations.
A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership.

Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

>> There can be other reasons to move out such as profit was less, new audiences were not receptive, etc.
(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.
>> Not relevant.
(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
>> Now that's a big sacrifice even though there was higher profit they opted to move out. Makes it better than A.
(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.
>>Opposite of what v r looking for.
(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.
>> Not relevant.

hello sir ,
can you explain option D more , as how it is opposite of what we want ?

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 88

Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 1891

Kudos [?]: 1128 [0], given: 93

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2017, 02:48
jyotsnasarabu wrote:
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of people's tastes and wants. There is evidence, however, that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations. A particular publication decided to change its image from being a family newspaper to concentrating on sex and violence, thus appealing to a different readership. Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication.
(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.
(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.
(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.

Source: LSAT

"there is evidence ... some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations." They're trying to be nice, and tip you off to the possible alternative explanation for why the advertisers would switch publications. Answer choice (C) suggests that the advertisers ignored their financial considerations, thus supporting the explanation that the advertisers switched for moral considerations.

Let's look at the incorrect answer choices:

(A) doesn't explain why! Maybe their financial considerations would prompt them to advertise in a family newspaper. We just don't know why they would want to stay with a family newspaper.
(B) fails to explain why just like answer choice (A).
(D) undermines the argument by providing a financial consideration to be aware of.
(E) undermines the argument by providing a financial consideration to be aware of.
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Kudos [?]: 1128 [0], given: 93

Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous   [#permalink] 13 Dec 2017, 02:48

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 59 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by