Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered

Question

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court 
rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and 
all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, 
combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, 
damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the 
media rarely imagine. 
 
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the 
government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost 
completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that 
anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may 
appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government 
officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their 
minds. 
 
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy 
discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting 
the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward 
through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this 
problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to 
know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if 
foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats. 
 
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public 
that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this 
may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost 
lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same 
public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A 
series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have 
concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, 
and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press. 
 
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the 
grounds of the public‘s --right to know,| in reality they are part of the 
Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. 
The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be 
planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping 
himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is 
using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either 
instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is 
advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. 
Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they 
are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. 
The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every 
other significant institution in our society, and the media must be 
forced to earn the public‘s trust.

1. Based on the information in the passage, with which of the following 
statements would the author most likely agree? 
 A. Feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations. 
 B. The public has a right to know the real state of foreign affairs. 
 C. The fewer the number of people involved in policy discussions, the better. 
 D. Leaders give up their right to privacy when they are elected. 
 E. The media is not accountable to the public 
 A

please help me with the answer as i am not convinced with the explanation of the same

bob75 · Answer

I think the answer is clearly A. It can be inferred from the 2nd paragraph.

A. Feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations.  Correct 
B. The public has a right to know the real state of foreign affairs.  Public's rights are out of scope. 
C. The fewer the number of people involved in policy discussions, the better.  No connection to the passage. 
D. Leaders give up their right to privacy when they are elected.  Out of scope 
E. The media is not accountable to the public  The idea of the passage is clearly to suggest that the media should be made accountable for its actions.

shreya717 · Answer

I'm not convinved with the answer at all.

'The leak through which sensitive information flows from the
government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost
completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that
anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may
appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government
officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their
minds. '

The paragraph only seems to suggest the author does NOT warrant the negative effect media has on the local and forieng officials.

Where does it mention that the author approves of misinformation to the public?

shreya717 · Answer

Upon further thought I believe the reasoning is per below.

paragraph 2 :-  'The leak through which sensitive information flows from the 
government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost 
completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that 
anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may 
appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government 
officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their 
minds. '

The author here suggests that due to widespead 'leaks' the public officilas more often than not may mis represent the actual scenario. Hence, the author is against 'leaks' but feels that due to its widespread presence it is warranted that public officials may sometime misrepresent data.

Option B :- (to which I was originally inclined)- B. The public has a right to know the real state of foreign affairs.

The above is wrong because ' the public has a right' is out of scope as it is too strong a view. the author does not mention the rights of the public anywhere. he merely discusses the effect media can have on further policy making etc.

akrish1982 · Answer

the above is from 3rd paragraph. this is just restated in option B. This is what I thought.

what is the source of the question?

akrish1982 · Answer

https://www.pagalguy.com/forum/cat-and-r ... am-90.html this link as well seems to suggest that B is the answer.

akrish1982 · Answer

ok, my bad. public does not have a right to know. the leaders do.

santivilla · Answer

The answer is clearly A.
My method of attacking this type of question is the following:
When you are asked "which of the following statements would the author most likely agree"? This type of question falls into the category of general type of questions. These type of questions are mostly linked to the main idea of the passage. 
In parragraph number 1:

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court
rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and
all government secrets , the media‘s distrust of our government,
combined with their limited understanding of the world at large,
damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the
media rarely imagine.

This parragraph clearly states that the media damages the abiliy of governments to design and conduct good policy. This parragraph states the position held by the author. In other words, "feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations", is certainly in the line of reasoning of the author. Finally, the government will be able to design and conduct good policy without being damaged by the media by handing out misinformation to the public.

anilisanil · Answer

Unrelated to RC, but doesn't the above statement seem to have grammatical error? The pronoun "they" in the opening statement does not have a noun referring to it. Or am I missing anything!

thevenus · Answer

POE can suggest (A) but i am not fully convinced with the answer choice because if, 
A. Feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations. 
but the author has spoken that the feeding pubic misinformation should be warranted in "every" situation rather "certain" situation.
This was a difficult question though !

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.

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered

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