Marcus: For most ethical dilemmas the journalist is likely to face

Question

Marcus : For most ethical dilemmas the journalist is likely to face, traditional journalistic ethics is clear, adequate, and essentially correct. For example, when journalists have uncovered newsworthy information, they should go to press with it as soon as possible. No delay motivated by the journalists’ personal or professional interests is permissible.

Anita:  Well, Marcus, of course interesting and important information should be brought before the public—that is a journalist’s job. But in the typical case, where a journalist has some information but is in a quandary about whether it is yet important or “newsworthy,” this guidance is inadequate.

In order to conclude properly from Anita’s statements that Marcus’ general claim about traditional journalistic ethics is incorrect, it would have to be assumed that

(A) whether a piece of information is or is not newsworthy can raise ethical dilemmas for journalists

(B) there are circumstances in which it would be ethically wrong for a journalist to go to press with legitimately acquired, newsworthy information

(C) the most serious professional dilemmas that a journalist is likely to face are not ethical dilemmas

(D) there are no ethical dilemmas that a journalist is likely to face that would not be conclusively resolved by an adequate system of journalistic ethics

(E) For a system of journalistic ethics to be adequate it must be able to provide guidance in every case in which a journalist must make a professional decision.

Source: LSAT

HanoiGMATtutor · Accepted Answer

It is so clear that answer choice A is correct that you should not need to look at other answer choices. Let's simplify the arguments:

Marcus is talking about the guidance for ethical dilemmas, and quotes an example for when newsworthy information is covered.

Anita is questioning the adequacy of the guidance by stating that the guidance doesn't cover cases where the information is not clearly newsworthy.

Now remember Marcus is talking about the  guidance for ethical dilemmas . For Anita to call into question the adequacy of this guidance through an example, the case in the example has to pose an ethical dilemma. If the case does not present an ethical dilemma to journalists, her example is completely irrelevant to the matter in discussion.

Let me give you a somewhat parallel example:

A: the fire code is adequate because it covers all scenarios that may pose a fire hazard to a building
B: but the code clearly doesn't cover scenarios where a child is playing with a dog unsupervised

In what scenario could we conclude from B's statement that A's claim about the code is incorrect? Only when a child playing with a dog unsupervised poses a fire hazard, because we are talking specifically about the fire code. Otherwise, B's statement is irrelevant to the discussion.

Hope this helps.

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) Yes. Anita argues that traditional journalistic ethics is not sufficient for “ the typical case, where a journalist has some information but is in a quandary about whether it is yet important or “newsworthy”

Now, if deciding whether a piece of information is or is not newsworthy does not raise ethical dilemmas for journalists, then her argument is moot.

(B) No. She agrees with Marcus that “when journalists have uncovered newsworthy information, they should go to press with it as soon as possible.” This is seen from her opening line “Well, Marcus, of course interesting and important information should be brought before the public—that is a journalist’s job.”

(C) No. The discussion is limited to typical cases, not other types of professional dilemmas.

(D) No. Anita discusses only the traditional system of journalistic ethics. She does not mention whether a different, adequate system of journalistic ethics could
be designed.

(E) No. This is too strong. She is merely implying that a system of journalistic ethics should at least cover a typical case.

sananoor · Answer

its so easy, A is perfect
Anita is right what if the news is worthy enough to give in the press or not is important factor. The journalist could face ethical issues if the news wasnt worthy enough to be given in the newspaper.

Youraisemeup · Answer

I am, confused with OA...why not E?
I think E should be the one..

sananoor · Answer

E says "journalistic ethics to be adequate it must provide guidance" does anita says anything like that? she is simply saying that journalist job is to bring news that is worthy enough to publish in newspaper. it means that journalist shouldn't publish any news that is unethical. 
Marcus says: "when journalists have uncovered newsworthy information" newsworthy here means any news that if get publish must not be against ethics.

rsh12 · Answer

In short the stem asks us to find out what Anita is assuming- Let's look at what she says --- "Whether it is important or newsworthy - this(Marcus's claim) guidance is inadequate." Let us start with negating each options. a) Whether a piece of info is or is not newsworthy CANNOT raise ethical dilemmas for journalists. The guidance would then be adequate. Possible contender. b) ...... it would not be ethically wrong to go to press with legitimately acquired, newsworthy info. Doesn't affect whether the guidance was adequate or inadequate. Incorrect. c) irrelevant d) irrelevant again. e) For a system of journalist ethics to be adequate it must not/ (negation - need not) be able to provide guidance in every/ (negation - not all) case in which....... Now not all is not representative of a typical case and the conclusion is not hurt as much as A does. Thus A is correct. Please see reference- article-what-and-how-to-negate-6-exercise-questions-138510.html#p1119593 Hence A is the correct answer.

Diya52 · Answer

can someone explain why the answer should be A and not E?

mykrasovski · Answer

HanoiGMATtutor  thanks for your help with the question. I found the explanation helpful, especially the parallel example. However, I had hard time comprehending the original prompt even when I read it today (it appears that the question is hard for many people who attempted it).

HanoiGMATtutor · Answer

mykrasovski , would you mind giving my posts a kudos if you find them helpful? I can't post too many times a day if posters neglect to give me kudos (forum policy)...

If you find it difficult to comprehend the prompt, there are 3 things you should note:

1. This is an LSAT question, so the prompt is supposed to be a bit more complex than a typical GMAT prompt
2. Your tutor can probably help you understand the prompt
3. You will never encounter a prompt like this on your GMAT!

GMATNinja · Answer

HanoiGMATtutor  covered this nicely, but I'll add my two cents on choice (E), in case it helps anybody out there:

Pay close attention to Anita's words: "in the  typical  case... this   guidance is inadequate."

Anita does not say that the traditional guidance is inadequate because it fails "to provide guidance in  every  case in which a journalist must make a professional decision." Instead, Anita only says that the traditional guidance is inadequate in the case "where a journalist has some information but is in a quandary about whether it is yet important or 'newsworthy.'"

That might be a  typical  case, but that does not mean it is the  only  case in which a journalist must make a professional decision.

I hope that helps a bit!

Rickooreo · Answer

KarishmaB   GMATNinja

Analysing Anita's argument :

Premise 1: Well, Marcus, of course interesting and important information should be brought before the public—that is a journalist’s job. 
Premise 2 : But in the typical case, where a journalist has some information but is in a quandary about whether it is yet important or “newsworthy,” 
Conclusion : This guidance is inadequate.

Option A states : whether a piece of information is or is not newsworthy can raise ethical dilemmas for journalists
Isn't this option talking about premise 2, which is already stated, whereas for an option to be assumption, it has to strengthen (negation should weaken) conclusion. I eliminated A solely because it is talking about premise.

Option E : For a system of journalistic ethics to be adequate it must be able to provide guidance in  every  case in which a journalist must make a professional decision.

Negate this : For a system of journalistic ethics to be adequate it must be able to provide guidance in  some  case in which a journalist must make a professional decision.

Anita says if it provides guidance in some cases, it is inadequate whereas negation of E says it is adequate.

KarishmaB · Answer

Marcus: For most ethical dilemmas the journalist is likely to face, traditional journalistic ethics is clear, adequate, and essentially correct.
Anita: But where a journalist has some information but is unsure about whether it is yet important or “newsworthy,” this guidance is inadequate.

The question stem is interesting here:
In order to conclude properly from Anita’s statements that Marcus’ general claim about traditional journalistic ethics is incorrect, it would have to be assumed that

If we were to conclude from Anita's statement that Marcus' statement is incorrect, we would have to assume what?
Marcus says that for most ethical dilemmas, traditional journalistic ethics is adequate. Anita says that if a journalist is unsure whether some news is newsworthy, this guidance is inadequate.

Note the disconnect here - Marcus talks about 'ethical dilemma' case while Anita talks about 'whether something is newsworthy'
We will need to assume that the two are connected.

(A) whether a piece of information is or is not newsworthy can raise ethical dilemmas for journalists
Perfect.

(D) there are no ethical dilemmas that a journalist is likely to face that would not be conclusively resolved by an adequate system of journalistic ethics
Not correct. Marcus says 'for most ethical dilemmas.' He doesn't say 'all ethical dilemmas...'
So we don't have to assume that there is no ethical dilemma that cannot be resolved. So we don't need to evaluate it any further.

Answer (A)

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

Marcus: For most ethical dilemmas the journalist is likely to face

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Marcus: For most ethical dilemmas the journalist is likely to face

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards