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

It is currently 19 Sep 2018, 12:11

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 21
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 17 Sep 2017, 19:25
4
10
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

66% (01:39) correct 34% (01:46) wrong based on 887 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

Source: LSAT

_________________

If questions jerk in your mind, then give me a KUDOS


Originally posted by creativeminddu on 19 Nov 2013, 02:36.
Last edited by broall on 17 Sep 2017, 19:25, edited 1 time in total.
Reformatted question
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4667
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 May 2014, 13:44
5
2
creativeminddu wrote:
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false
(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products
(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey
(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are
(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

GmatDestroyer2013 wrote:
Hi,
Can some one please explain me above argument and why the option D is correct.
I marked E for the following reasons:
Cause (Danto Food being the Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival) and Effect (Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value)
Please explain the reasoning I am not able to make out any sense.

akash03 wrote:
Can you tell me why option E is wrong and option A is correct??

Dear GmatDestroyer2013 & akash03,
I'm happy to respond. :-) Apparently this is LSAT question, and these are typically a bit harder than than GMAT CR. This is a high quality question, and very tricky.

Let's focus on the exact conclusion. "Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious."
The consumer establishes that there would likely be some bias, but from there, makes the extraordinary leap that what the biased parties were saying is wrong, viz. Ocksenfrey’s meals are nutritious. That's a huge leap.

Let's look at (D):
(D) [argument] fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are
Technically, Danto Food's meals aren't discussed at all. Yes, of course, the folks at Danto Foods would also like to claim that their own meals are nutritious, but technically, the question here analyzes only whether Ocksenfrey’s meals are nutritious, and no explicit comparison to Danto Foods’ meals is made. That's why (D) is not correct.

Let's look at (E):
(E) [argument] presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products
Suppose it were absolutely and objectively true that Ocksenfrey’s meals contain no nutritional value. Well, then, the Connorly Report would be 100% accurate on its own, and Danto Foods’ public relations department would have absolutely no complaint with it. In other words, in order for this fact to be something that comes into play, we need to assume that the conclusion is true. If it really were the case that Ocksenfrey’s meals are highly nutritious, then conceivable that would be threatening to the folks at Danto Food's, and that PR department would block or alter the report. Yes, that would be important, IF Ocksenfrey’s meals really are nutritious, but if Ocksenfrey’s meals are not nutritious, then the Danto Food's PR department is irrelevant. That's why (E) is incorrect.

Choice (A) addresses the big leap made in the concluding line, the leap from the possible existence of bias to a sweeping judgment that the conclusion is wrong. That is too much. Sometimes biased people and biased corporate bodies happen to say things that are true. Obviously biased and obviously wrong don't necessarily go together.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8281
Location: Pune, India
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2018, 00:15
2
1
creativeminddu wrote:
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

Source: LSAT


Premises:
- Connorly report says that O's meals have no nutrition.
- Connorly reports are commissioned by D foods, O's rival.
- Early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to D Foods.
- There is an obvious bias of this report

Conclusion:
O's meals are nutritious.

The premises establish that there is bias in the report (because of the involvement of the rival). So what can we say? That the report's conclusions are biased so not to be trusted. It means we should ignore the report's conclusions. But can we establish the reverse from this? Can we establish that the meals are actually nutritious? No. We can say that the report should be ignored but not that it must be false and the reverse must be true.

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

Correct. The argument gives evidence of bias, not of establishing the report's claims as false. Saying that O's meals are actually nutritious is claiming the report's claim is false. This is a failure of the argument.

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

No information on sampled products.

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

Irrelevant. Whether O defames D too is not the subject of discussion.

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

Irrelevant. Comparative nutrition of the two is not the subject of discussion.

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

The argument presumes nothing about D foods products. What D foods public relations dep would do if faced with a report hostile to its products is not known and is irrelevant. Whether they played a role in case of O food products is also not known. All we know is that there is a bias, a conflict of interest in this case since O and D are rivals and hence the report may be biased.

Answer (A)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2013
Posts: 85
Premium Member
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2014, 04:54
Hi,

Can some one please explain me above argument and why the option D is correct.

I marked E for the following reasons:
Cause (Danto Food being the Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival) and Effect (Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value)

Please explain the reasoning I am not able to make out any sense.
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 666
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2017, 19:17
in this flaw in the reasoning type of question. the flaw indicated is STRAW MAN type only A answers that type. So answer is A.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 405
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2017, 06:14

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

why E is wrong?

1> O Product nutritious => would not approve by DF PR
2> O Product NOT nutritious => Report approved by DF PR. (In this case O product are actually not nutritious.)


If O Product nutritious, in that case the report would not have been approved by DF PR in the 1st place. This is not the case the report has been approved so then O product has to be nutritious. that's what E says.
but here the situation is different:

O product NOT nutritious => report by DF PR and now we have to prove that O product is actually nutritious.

somebody approve my thinking, seems lost here
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 22 Apr 2015
Posts: 28
WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Reviews Badge
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2017, 07:23
i am stuck between A and C.

i went for C because both Danto's and Ocksenfrey's are rivals and even if the the reports are correct, Ocksenfrey's officials may try to prove the reports false citing Danto' s are their corporate rivals and they want to malign the image of ocksenfrey's products.
So this one weakens the conclusion as per me.

Please guide me if i am going wrong.

and i could not understand option A at all.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4667
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2017, 14:04
1
aamir89 wrote:
i am stuck between A and C.

i went for C because both Danto's and Ocksenfrey's are rivals and even if the the reports are correct, Ocksenfrey's officials may try to prove the reports false citing Danto' s are their corporate rivals and they want to malign the image of ocksenfrey's products.
So this one weakens the conclusion as per me.

Please guide me if i am going wrong.

and i could not understand option A at all.

Dear aamir89,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

I discuss why (A) is correct in my post of May 15, 2014. You say, "i could not understand option A at all" but you understood enough to gather that it was a possible answer. What do you understand about it and what don't you understand?

Here's choice (C):
(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey
This is irrelevant. It may be that, were Ocksenfrey to publish its own report, it would be the most biased and self-serving thing possible. Or, it may be that they are as fair and even-handed as possible. We don't know. But whether they would be fair or biased is irrelevant, since in fact, they have published nothing, at least so far as we know, and we are trying to evaluate only the worth of the Connorly Report reviwed by Danto.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 22 Apr 2015
Posts: 28
WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Reviews Badge
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2017, 20:53
mikemcgarry wrote:
aamir89 wrote:
i am stuck between A and C.

i went for C because both Danto's and Ocksenfrey's are rivals and even if the the reports are correct, Ocksenfrey's officials may try to prove the reports false citing Danto' s are their corporate rivals and they want to malign the image of ocksenfrey's products.
So this one weakens the conclusion as per me.

Please guide me if i am going wrong.

and i could not understand option A at all.

Dear aamir89,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

I discuss why (A) is correct in my post of May 15, 2014. You say, "i could not understand option A at all" but you understood enough to gather that it was a possible answer. What do you understand about it and what don't you understand?

Here's choice (C):
(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey
This is irrelevant. It may be that, were Ocksenfrey to publish its own report, it would be the most biased and self-serving thing possible. Or, it may be that they are as fair and even-handed as possible. We don't know. But whether they would be fair or biased is irrelevant, since in fact, they have published nothing, at least so far as we know, and we are trying to evaluate only the worth of the Connorly Report reviwed by Danto.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)



thank you so much Mike. i understood where i went wrong. We have only the report of Coonorly Report Review in hand and our thinking should follow the evidence.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Status: EAT SLEEP GMAT REPEAT!
Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 173
Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2018, 04:00
creativeminddu wrote:
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

Source: LSAT


Though I selected A, I am unable to eliminate E completely.

GMATNinja abhimahna

Can you please help me in giving out the reasons for eliminating E.
_________________

Regards,
Adi

Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3676
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2018, 10:48
1
Adi93 wrote:
Though I selected A, I am unable to eliminate E completely.

GMATNinja abhimahna

Can you please help me in giving out the reasons for eliminating E.


Hey Adi93 ,

The keyword to reject choice E is "Hostile"

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

How do you know it was hostile to Danto Foods’ products.

Remember - We need to find out a flaw in the reasoning. We need to criticize the conclusion. Having said that, if you say the reports were really what they never wanted, the conclusion is somewhat strengthened. But our aim is not that.

There could be a possibility that reports were already too bad that Danto Foods didn't do anything. Hence, E is out.

Does that make sense?
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.

New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!



Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free

Study Buddy Forum Moderator
User avatar
D
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1196
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Aug 2018, 21:24
generis GMATNinja GMATNinja2 KarishmaB nightblade354

I did not think on lines similar to reasoning presented by mikemcgarry and discarded (E) , one of most popular incorrect choice based on one word in (E): approve. Do I care whether or not the competitor approves the Connorly Report? No.

Quote:
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

Main conclusion: Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

Why: Let us say Pepsi and Coca-Cola are two die-hard competitors of one another and a report says Pepsi
drinks are not nutritious. But the drafts of the report are approved by a competitor - Coco Cola . the consumer
will always be biased with the results of reports since he is aware of underlined portion.

But the jump from saying that reports are not trustworthy since they are approved by a competitor is bit valid than saying Pepsi's products are nutritious. I see a huge scope shift here.

The results are already out and published, why would motive or approval matter?


Quote:
The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

Let's be on task to weaken the argument.

Quote:
(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

I am bit confused about occurrence of two many times evidence in this choice, but I was sure to eliminate others.

Quote:
(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

Out because of the irrelevance of underlined portion

Quote:
(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

As I explained earlier, the motive of competitor e.g. Coca-Cola in my eg is irrelevant to the argument.


Quote:
(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

Are not we discussing about the nutritional value of Ocksenfrey’s products and not Danto Foods' meals??
_________________

It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 365
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Reviews Badge
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2018, 06:54
adkikani,

Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.


Background is in blue
Counter premise is in pink
Premise is in light blue
Conclusion is in green

Let's diagram:

Company A publishes negative report about competitor B -- competitor B says it is wrong -- therefore it must be the complete opposite because of the bias between the companies -- the issue here is the complete reversal in the argument. X is wrong, so the opposite is correct. This is our error.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false -- This says word for word what we just diagramed. Winner!

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products -- We do not care about Danto foods' products. What if they published a good report? Can we assume it would damage their products because they published a positive report about the competitor? Nope. This is the issue.

-- Does this help?
_________________

D-Day: November 18th, 2017

Need a laugh and a break? Go here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/mental-break-funny-videos-270269.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Jun 2018
Posts: 30
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2018, 01:34
1
VeritasKarishma wrote:
creativeminddu wrote:
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.

The reasoning in the consumer’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

Source: LSAT


Premises:
- Connorly report says that O's meals have no nutrition.
- Connorly reports are commissioned by D foods, O's rival.
- Early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to D Foods.
- There is an obvious bias of this report

Conclusion:
O's meals are nutritious.

The premises establish that there is bias in the report (because of the involvement of the rival). So what can we say? That the report's conclusions are biased so not to be trusted. It means we should ignore the report's conclusions. But can we establish the reverse from this? Can we establish that the meals are actually nutritious? No. We can say that the report should be ignored but not that it must be false and the reverse must be true.

(A) treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false

Correct. The argument gives evidence of bias, not of establishing the report's claims as false. Saying that O's meals are actually nutritious is claiming the report's claim is false. This is a failure of the argument.

(B) draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products

No information on sampled products.

(C) fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey

Irrelevant. Whether O defames D too is not the subject of discussion.

(D) fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are

Irrelevant. Comparative nutrition of the two is not the subject of discussion.

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products

The argument presumes nothing about D foods products. What D foods public relations dep would do if faced with a report hostile to its products is not known and is irrelevant. Whether they played a role in case of O food products is also not known. All we know is that there is a bias, a conflict of interest in this case since O and D are rivals and hence the report may be biased.

Answer (A)


Hi,

Could option E be correct if it were 'presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was submitted by Ocksenfrey'.

I was inclined towards this option because it has the word 'presumes' and that is what the argument is doing.
Re: Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre &nbs [#permalink] 21 Aug 2018, 01:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfre

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


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

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®.