Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 24 Mar 2017, 01:29

### 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

Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 154
Location: India
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 10:51
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 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.

If you have any questions
New!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 448 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 11:04
C is best because it gives evidence that even with a sales decrease, the advertiser will still withdraw from the publication, thus confirming that moral reasons were the cause of the withdrawal
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 11:17
I will go with A on this one.

A clearly says that the advertizers switched to other family news papers. All other choices give a hint that there was some other motiviation behind the switching of new papers.
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 11:28
D brings in the possibility of reduction in number of people who see the advertisement, which is not beneficial to the advertisers.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 448 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 11:43
I see, C only says that they are NOT motivated by financial considerations but does not directly proves that moral considerations are the cause of the withdrawal of their ads from publications. On the other hand, A ascertains that they stuck to their moral values; advertise ONLY with family related publications or at least, with the ones which do not contain sex&violence content. Yes, A is best
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 293
Location: US
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 11:55
A.

If the advertisers switched to other family newspapers, it must be because the content had changed, and that they do not agree with the new focus (sex+violence) of the newspaper.
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 154
Location: India
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 12:55

C is the right answer. I am still not convinced why C is correct.

Maybe Paul can explain it better.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 448 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 14:36
This question is tricky. A can actually also be negated if I take another perspective at this problem. Let's say that the other family newspapers are profitable, then can we say that the reason why the advertisers switched to those other newpapers are based on moral values? In this case, A could or could not strengthen the argument depending on the profitability of the switch. I think C can be more directly infered according to my original explanation
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 14:55
Hmm

I was intending to choose C. But it was too obvious. I agree with Paul's explanation.

Anand.
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155
Location: New York
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2004, 21:54
anandnk wrote:
Hmm

I was intending to choose C. But it was too obvious. I agree with Paul's explanation.

Anand.

I also agree with C. We must prove that moral obligation is present. Only C clearly presents it. The company is willing to lose money. Why?
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 923
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Jun 2006, 14:22
Paul,

What I did not understand in this passage how can you assume that the advertisers they are speaking of in answer choices are the same as the ones in the question posed?

I went with A because of this reasoning..
Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 945
Location: France
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

11 Jun 2006, 16:25
C looks to be the obvious choice to me. They withdrew their ads because of moral reasons...
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

Manager
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 176
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 09:38
I'll go with C.
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 645
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2006, 19:14
Straight 'A' here...

The author justifies moral motivation to be one of the driving factors for the advertisers...

and the argument is they morally disapproved of publishing salacious material. Also some advertisers withdrew after the change is effected...

A - strengthens

B - weakens

C - is in subjunctive mood...forecast the sales based on the action taken. So out of context

D - a generic statement. out of context

E - irrelevant. an expectation on the appealing factor. But doesn't explain the change or the moral drive...
Director
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 575
Location: Munich,Germany
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2006, 19:48
aspire 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.

I agree with C.

A just says that the advertisers shifted to the family newspapers. This could be because the changed version of the magazine might appeal to a different class of consumers which these advertisers might not target. This does not give us an indication of their ethics and morals but of financial considerations. Its C which clearly states that despite the possibility of losing sales, the advertisers withdrew their advertisements from the mag , thus confirming their business ethics and morals.
Re: CR - 1   [#permalink] 13 Jun 2006, 19:48
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Advertisers are often criticized 0 03 Feb 2017, 12:13
4 *700* Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous 6 17 Apr 2015, 10:31
1 Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous 4 14 Aug 2011, 12:31
1 Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous 1 06 Jul 2011, 09:09
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous 1 13 May 2011, 00:22
Display posts from previous: Sort by