In a time when many publishers are concerned about declining readership, some stories published in the newspapers as true have turned out to be fraudulent. It appears that those who are assigned the task of verifying the authenticity of news stories are not working hard enough. This situation proves that publishers are more interested in selling newspapers than in providing the public with the truth.
The conclusion of this argument is based on the assumption thatThe argument moves from fraudulent stories and weak fact-checking to a conclusion about the priorities of publishers.
The missing link is that publishers are responsible for what gets printed, so the failure can be treated as evidence of
publishers’ priorities.
(A) Every piece of news printed in a newspaper must be verifiable.
This is too strong. The argument does not need to assume that every single piece of news must be verifiable.
(B) At least 50 percent of all fact checkers are not doing their jobs properly.
This is not required. The argument says fact checkers are not working hard enough, but it does not need any exact percentage.
(C) Fact checkers are always able to verify every piece of information in an article.
This is too strong. The argument does not need to assume that fact checkers can verify absolutely everything.
(D) When the economy is bad and families are forced to cut back in expenses, fewer people will buy newspapers.
This is irrelevant. The argument mentions declining readership, but it does not depend on why readership is declining.
(E) It is the responsibility of the publisher of a newspaper to decide what is printed in the paper.
This is correct. If publishers are responsible for deciding what is printed, then the publication of fraudulent stories can support a conclusion about publishers’ priorities. Without this assumption, the blame might fall only on fact checkers or others involved in the process.
Answer: (E)