MBA Spotlight Fair Join 40 AdComs at Virtual MBA + Masters Fair! Register to Reserve Your Spot | See Schedule | Win Prizes
close
It is currently 30 Nov 2021, 21:53
Register
GMAT Club Tests
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

MBA Spotlight – Top 40 MBA Fair
Nov 29 - Dec 1, 2021

Register Schedule
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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation
18 posts Go to First Unread Post
Print view
NEW TOPIC
POST REPLY
Downloads
My Bookmarks
Reviews
SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 

Show Tags
Hide Tags

avatar
jyotsnasarabu
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 253
Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  Updated on: 05 Jan 2019, 02:52
6
Kudos
57
Bookmarks
Quiz Dashboard Attempt only this question Same topic and source Same topic and difficulty Same source and difficulty Random Chronological Reverse chronological Learn more
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:57) correct 44% (02:10) wrong based on 1743 sessions

Hide Show 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?


(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.


Source: LSAT
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Originally posted by jyotsnasarabu on 12 Nov 2006, 09:22.
Last edited by Bunuel on 05 Jan 2019, 02:52, edited 4 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Quiz Dashboard Attempt only this question Same topic and source Same topic and difficulty Same source and difficulty Random Chronological Reverse chronological Learn more
request expert reply
Most Helpful Expert Reply
User avatar
V
Bunuel
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 82990
Premium Member CAT Tests Forum Quiz Mode Top Member of the Month
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  02 Mar 2021, 06:45
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
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?


(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.


Source: LSAT


Official Explanation



The suppressed premise in this argument is that by emphasizing moral considerations and withdrawing their advertisements the advertisers hurt themselves financially, or at least did not gain by it. To strengthen the argument, we need to show that this assumption is true. Choice (C) implies that this is the case by stating that the advertisers expected to lose sales if they withdrew their advertisements. Hence the answer is (C).
_________________
New to the GMAT CLUB Forum?

My Signature Questions' Collection:


What are GMAT Club Tests?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics
Signature Read More
Most Helpful Community Reply
avatar
mst
Manager
Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 149
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  04 Dec 2006, 20:55
7
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
C

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?
(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements to other family newspapers.
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.
irrelevant. we are talking about advertisers who were advertising in the current publication earlier
(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....
General Discussion
avatar
sujayb
Manager
Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 64
Location: New York
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  04 Dec 2006, 11:55
5
Kudos
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?
User avatar
joinforum
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 38
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  04 Dec 2006, 17:27
2
Kudos
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
User avatar
Amit05
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 338
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  09 Sep 2007, 03:52
1
Kudos
jyotsnasarabu wrote:
10. 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?
(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.


Yup the answer is C.
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..
avatar
bschool83
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 145
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  07 Jul 2011, 10:49
(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
avatar
fluke
Retired Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1310
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  07 Jul 2011, 11:23
4
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
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?
(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.

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"
User avatar
B
OldFritz
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 161
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  27 Jun 2012, 03:16
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Straight C. If the advertisers are switching despite knowing that they will lose though then it means that moral consideration plays a factor in the decision making of some advertisers.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
User avatar
ChrisLele
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 299
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  28 Jun 2012, 14:04
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
One possible objection to this argument is that the advertisers had some financial incentive to pull their ads from publication after it changed to sex and violence. Because we are looking to strengthen the argument, we would have to defuse this potential objection. Only, (C) shows that the advertisers were not motivated by money. By pulling out they had money to lose, compared to had they not retracted their advertisements. Therefore the answer is (C).
_________________
Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image
Signature Read More
avatar
B
dentobizz
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 410
GPA: 3.5
WE:Business Development (Health Care)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  04 Nov 2013, 01:57
1
Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Bumping for review and further discussion*.
New project from GMAT Club! Click here

User avatar
King407
Manager
Manager
Joined: 03 Sep 2014
Posts: 72
Concentration: Marketing, Healthcare
Schools: IIMA , IIMC , ISB '17, IIM-L '15, INSEAD Jan '17, NUS '18, Kellogg 1YR '17, Booth '16, Tepper '18, McCombs '18, IIMB
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  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?

(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.



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


Hence, Answer C
avatar
JarvisR
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 363
Concentration: Technology, Other
Schools: IIMA , Simon '17 (D), Carlson '18 (D), Katz '17 (A$), IIML'17 (A), UConn FT "18 (A$), IIMB
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  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?

(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements to other family newspapers.
>> 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.
avatar
shriramvelamuri
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2013
Posts: 174
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  18 Apr 2015, 04:26
1
Kudos
Agree with the Answer C.

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?

(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.
User avatar
bm729
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2015
Posts: 4
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  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...
User avatar
V
Skywalker18
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Status:Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Posts: 2285
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE:Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  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?

(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.

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
Signature Read More
User avatar
P
TheGraceful
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2018
Posts: 341
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Schools: Booth, Wharton, Kellogg, LBS '24, INSEAD
GMAT 1: 600 Q44 V28
GPA: 3.56
WE:Engineering (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge Forum Quiz Mode
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  24 Dec 2020, 03:06
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?


Most sensible explanation. Made me learn why 'A' is wrong and 'C' is correct. Taught to read the options to its correct interpretation.
Thanks and Kudos.
_________________

The Graceful
----------------------------------------------------------
Every EXPERT was a beginner once...
Don't look at the clock. Do what it does, keep going..
To achieve great things, two things are needed:a plan and not quite enough time - Leonard Bernstein.
Signature Read More
avatar
B
lehung978
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Nov 2020
Posts: 8
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink] New post  20 Nov 2021, 04:55
Bunuel wrote:
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?


(A) The advertisers switched their advertisements 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.


Source: LSAT


Official Explanation



The suppressed premise in this argument is that by emphasizing moral considerations and withdrawing their advertisements the advertisers hurt themselves financially, or at least did not gain by it. To strengthen the argument, we need to show that this assumption is true. Choice (C) implies that this is the case by stating that the advertisers expected to lose sales if they withdrew their advertisements. Hence the answer is (C).


I was stuck between C & E tho. Agreed with you that C makes the assumption stronger by stating that they are willing to sacrifice lose in sales just because it's not morally accepted by the advertisers. But also remember that they are also "motivated by [moral] as well as financial considerations". The last sentence mentions that they care morally. How about the "financial considerations"? C would literally says that they give zero care about financial, which omit the "financial considerations" part!
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Advertisers are often criticized for their unscrupulous manipulation [#permalink]
20 Nov 2021, 04:55
NEW TOPIC
POST REPLY
Downloads
My Bookmarks
Reviews
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
5065 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
241 posts
mira93
CR Forum Moderator
124 posts
nightblade354
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
1266 posts
carouselambra
CR Forum Moderator
620 posts

cron

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

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources

www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions