GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 15 Jul 2018, 16:17

### 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

# Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 400

### Show Tags

Updated on: 23 Sep 2017, 02:44
2
27
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

54% (01:28) correct 46% (01:42) wrong based on 1317 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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

Originally posted by jyotsnasarabu on 12 Nov 2006, 10:22.
Last edited by broall on 23 Sep 2017, 02:44, edited 3 times in total.
Reformatted question
Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 815

### Show Tags

Updated on: 24 May 2013, 10:54
4
8
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of peopleâ€™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.

Please give reasons for ur choice....

Originally posted by vineetgupta on 04 Dec 2006, 12:43.
Last edited by Zarrolou on 24 May 2013, 10:54, edited 1 time in total.
##### General Discussion
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 696
Location: Dallas, Texas

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2006, 11:14
So now CRs are coming with 4 options ?

C !
_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2005
Posts: 442

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2006, 11:34
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
So now CRs are coming with 4 options ?

C !

LOL! You are hilarious man
Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 77
Location: New York

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 12:55
1
C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

Since the advertisers withdrew even when they knew their product sales would increase if they stayed, they surely had moral reasons, supporting the argument. No?
Director
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 660

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 13:53
1
Yes it's C
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 409

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 14:14
1
sujayb wrote:
C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

Since the advertisers withdrew even when they knew their product sales would increase if they stayed, they surely had moral reasons, supporting the argument. No?

yes. C
VP
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 1330

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 18:18
1
Not getting what C is trying to say
Manager
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 64

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 18:27
1
sujayb wrote:
C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

Since the advertisers withdrew even when they knew their product sales would increase if they stayed, they surely had moral reasons, supporting the argument. No?

I picked A. But your explanation proves C provides a better reason than A.
C is a better choice
_________________

------------------------------------------------------
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams"

Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 238

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2006, 21:55
4
2
C

vineetgupta wrote:
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of peopleâ€™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?
does not necessarily mean they morally disapproved. Could be because they did not have the right audience with the new publication(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.
Since the advertisers sales will drop now since they withdrew the advertisements, they must have done so on moral grounds
(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence.
again shows that advertisers might have witrhdrawn to avoid loss. weakens the argument
(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group.
again could be related to profits rather than moral values.

Please give reasons for ur choice....
Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 516

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2007, 04:52
1
jyotsnasarabu wrote:
10. Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation of peopleâ€™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.

First we will have to find the Assumption. The assumption here is that Advertisers switched their ads. only on the basis of morality though it would impact their product sales.

Only option C seconds that..
VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1350
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2007, 04:58
uvs_mba wrote:
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
So now CRs are coming with 4 options ?

C !

LOL! You are hilarious man

))
Manager
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 69

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2007, 06:32
Here you have to be careful i understanding the argument. in the beginning it mentions that their motive is based on moral / profits.
So "C" hows the profit criteria.
Intern
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 5

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2010, 06:36
Can anyone tell me what is the conclusion for this argument? Just wanted to analyse what all things are required to strengthen the argument and whether the strengthen here is achieved by strengthening the argument?
Manager
Status: One last try =,=
Joined: 11 Jun 2010
Posts: 135

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2011, 19:12
I am too confused about the conclusion of this argument. I wonder whether the conclusion is: Some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication, and this must have been because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material. or There is evidence that some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations

Let me try a "therefore test":
A)
Therefore, some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations
B)
Some advertisers are motivated by moral as well as financial considerations
Therefore, some advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the publication because they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material.

A makes more sense to me.
_________________

There can be Miracles when you believe

Intern
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
Posts: 8

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2011, 21:53
sujayb wrote:
C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew.

Since the advertisers withdrew even when they knew their product sales would increase if they stayed, they surely had moral reasons, supporting the argument. No?

i went for a ..butnow i understand why c is correct.
Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 213
Schools: UNC Duke Kellogg

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2011, 11:26
C it is...

A and D are trap answers...
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 224

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2011, 11:49
(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements to other family newspapers. INCORRECT this statement does not give us any information about the reason for switching (neither financial nor moral)
(B) Some advertisers switched from family newspapers to advertise in the changed publication. INCORRECT unrelated - we are not concerned about other advertisers
(C) The advertisers expected their product sales to increase if they stayed with the changed publication, but to decrease if they withdrew. CORRECT if advertisers were not concerned financially then they must be morally motivated
(D) People who generally read family newspapers are not likely to buy newspapers that concentrate on sex and violence. - INCORRECT readers are irrelevant to the argument
(E) It was expected that the changed publication would appeal principally to those in a different income group. INCORRECT income groups is irrelevant information
Math Forum Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1900

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2011, 12:23
3
vineetgupta 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.

Please give reasons for ur choice....

A is caused only by B and C.
Conclusion: A was caused by B.
Assumption or strength: We know that C was not present OR C definitely didn't cause A this time.

Likewise:
Advertisers are motivated by MORAL and MONEY.
Conclusion: Advertisers withdrew from publication because they were morally motivated.

Attack: Why it can't be MONEY?
Answer to attack: Because, they would have most certainly earned more money had they chosen to advertise in the new publication. Yet, they didn't choose to advertise in new publication. Thus, the only remaining factor is moral that must have dictated their decision.

Ans: "C"
_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 261

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 06:48
Damn it! I picked A too but C is a better choice.
_________________

Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary

Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!

Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous   [#permalink] 20 Jul 2011, 06:48

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 48 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne 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®.